Sky Cable’s franchise application remains in limbo over supposed expiration

By JOHN CARLO M. CAHINHINAN

Just like its sister company ABS-CBN, the franchise application of Lopez-owned cable network Sky Cable remains in limbo in Congress amid its supposed expiration last March 30.

House Bill No. 3121 which seeks to grant Sky Cable Corporation a fresh 25-year franchise “to establish, construct, maintain and operate for commercial purposes cable/community antenna television systems in the Philippines,” has not been tackled yet by the House committee on legislative franchises amid its marathon hearings over the pending legislative franchise applications and possible violations of the Kapamilya network.

HB 3132, principally authored by North Cotabato Rep. Jose “Ping” Tejada was filed on August 5, 2019.

A similar measure was filed during the 17th Congress by the former House committee on ways and means and now Quirino Province Gov. Dakila Carlo Cua but was also snubbed by the franchise panel chaired by Palawan Rep. Franz “Chicoy” Alvarez.

Sky Cable became the center of attention of Deputy Speaker and 1-SAGIP Party-list Rep. Rodante Marcoleta during Monday’s House inquiry for supposedly continuously operating despite an expired franchise.

Sky Cable’s legislative franchise under Republic Act No. 7969 which was approved on March 30, 1995 has already expired on March 30, 2020.

Marcoleta called out the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) and asked them under what authority Sky Cable is allowed to operate, since aside from having an expired congressional franchise, it continues to broadcast shows and programs that originally air on ABS-CBN prior to its shutdown last May.

In response, NTC Commissioner Gamaliel Cordoba cited Section 1 of Executive Order No. 205 series of 1987 signed by former President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino on June 30, 1987, which states that “the operation of Cable Antenna Television (CATV) system in the Philippines shall be open to all citizens of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or associations wholly-owned and managed by such citizens under a Certificate of Authority granted by the National Telecommunications Commission, hereinafter referred to as the Commission.”

Cordoba stressed that Aquino’s EO 205 s.1987 has exempted cable companies from securing franchise from the legislative brace and has authorized the NTC to issue instead a certificate of authority for those cable companies who are planning to operate in the country.

Under Section 2 of EO 205 s.1987, “A Certificate of Authority to operate Cable Antenna Television (CATV) system shall be granted by the Commission on a non-exclusive basis and for a period not to exceed 15 years, renewable for another similar period.”

But Marcoleta reminded Cordoba that the said EO can’t be considered as statute since it was signed and approved by Mrs. Aquino more than four months after the 1987 Constitution was ratified and took in effect on February 2, 1987.

Marcoleta stressed that Mrs. Aquino has no more legislative powers guaranteed by the de facto “Freedom Constitution” when she signed the said EO and that period was already being governed by the 1987 Charter.

According to Marcoleta, the fact that Sky Cable did apply for legislative franchise to Congress in 1995, and its pending franchise application under HB 3132 are in fact recognition that the company has submitted itself to the rules and regulations provided under the Republic Act 7925 or the Public Telecommunications Policy Act of 1995.

Source: Latest Politics News Today (Politics.com.ph)