Associated Communications & Wireless Services v. NTC Associated Communications & Wireless Services v. NTC | Puno G.R. No. 144109 !e"ruar# 1$ %00 | 9$ SCRA '$4 Keywords: Channel 25, leislative !ranchise v. C"C or #ermit
Sec. . All !ranchises 1 1 1 to o#erate radio or television *roadcastin systems shall terminate on (ecem*er 3, 343. T(erea,ter T(erea,ter irresective o, an# ,ranc(ise 5 5 5 to oerate )ranted "# an# o,,ice a)enc# or erson no radio or television station s(all "e aut(ori;ed to oerate *it(out t(e aut(orit# o, t(e
N$T%
T(is di)est *as ad+usted to meet our needs ,or t(e -une 1 class. AT'$ (%C'(%N('
W(en t(ere is a la* re/uirin) a ,ranc(ise an administrative administrative a)enc# cannot allo* a u"lic utilit# to oerate *it(out it.
•
)ACTS •
•
•
n Novem"er 1911 Con)ress enacted Act No. 24 Sec. 1 o, *(ic( reads3 No erson ,irm coman# association or cororation s(all construct construct esta"lis( or oerate a radio transmittin) station or a radio receivin) station used ,or commercial uroses uroses or a radio "roadcastin) station station without havin !irst o*tained a !ranchise there!or !rom the Conress o! the "hili##ines 5 5 56 n 19' Con)ress )ranted 7arcos 8illaverde -r. and Win,red 8illaverde a ,ranc(ise to construct install maintain and oerate radio stations in t(e countr#. T(is ,ranc(ise was trans!erred to Associated Communications & Wireless Services+nited -roadcastin Networs /ACWS0 in 199. n 19$4 P.. No. '$:A *as issued Secs. 1 and o, *(ic( read resectivel#3 resectivel#3 Sec. 1. No radio station or television c(annel ma# o"tain a ,ranc(ise unless it (as su,,icient caital on t(e "asis o, e/uit# ,or its oeration ,or at least one #ear includin) urc(ase urc(ase o, e/uiment.
n 19$9 >.?. No. '4 *as issued. t inte)rated t(e
•
•
W(en ACWSE ,ranc(ise e5ired on ecem"er 1 1921 it continued oeratin) its radio stations under ermits )ranted "# t(e NTC. NTC. NTC sou)(t sou)(t to clari,# t(e issue o, *(et(er or not not it could could issue ermits to radio and television "roadcastin) stations lac=in) a le)islative ,ranc(ise. n 1991 t(e eartment o, -ustice @?- rendered ?inion No. 92 @1991 *(erein it made t(e ,ollo*in) conclusions3 @1 ".(. 59+A did not do away with the re;uirement o!
Pa)e 1 o, 4
Associated Communications & Wireless Services v. NTC o*tainin a leislative !ranchise @ see Sec. 1 Act 24D @% Act 24 (as t(ree re/uirements ,or t(ose desirin) to construct install or oerate a radio "roadcastin) station3 /a0 leislative !ranchise, /*0 #ermit to construct or install !rom the Secretary o! Commerce and 'ndustry, and /c0 #ermit to o#erate !rom the same D @ <# virtue o, Sec. o, P.. '$:A the #ower to issue the a*ove+mentioned #ermits were trans!erred to the -$C and the Secretary o! "u*lic Wors and Co mmunications D @4 <# virtue o, >.?. '4 the -$C and TC- were interated, ivin *irth to the NTC, which, accordin to Sec. 35/a0 and /c0 o! the same %.$., has the #ower to is sue C"C
•
n 1994 Con)ressE Committee on Fe)islative !ranc(ises t(e NTC and t(e aisanan n) m)a
•
•
•
•
a##roval, it was ranted a tem#orary #ermit allo*in) it to oerate ,rom -une 199' to -une 199$. (urin this time, it was allowed to increase the #ower out#ut o! its television station, Channel 25, and was authori>ed to #urchase additional e;ui#ment !or it. ACWS alied ,or t(e rene*al o, its temorar# ermit in 7a# 199$. Conress was not a*le to decide ACWS< a##lication !or a !ranchise *ecause o! the latter
T(rou)( a letter ,rom t(e NTC ACWS was warned that without a !ranchise, it will no loner *e allowed to o#erate its stations, and that its a##lication !or a tem#orary #ermit will *e held in a*eyance until it su*mits a new a##lication !or a leislative !ranchise. As mentioned in t(e recedin) "ullet oint ACWS did not re,ile its alication ,or a ,ranc(ise. (es#ite the a*sence o! a !ranchise however, the NTC in!ormed ACWS in ?anuary 344 that its @ay 39 a##lication !or a tem#orary #ermit was a##roved and t(at it *ill "e released uon a#ment o, a rescri"ed ,ee. 'nstead o! releasin the #ermit thouh when ACWS #aid the said amount, the NTC commenced an administrative case aainst it, threatenin to recall the !re;uency that was assined to it. NTC issued 7emorandum Circular No. 14:10:92.
Pa)e % o, 4
Associated Communications & Wireless Services v. NTC
•
ACWS *as ,iled "e,ore t(e deadline. 7ean*(ile as re)ards t(e administrative case a)ainst ACWS the NTC decided to recall the !re;uency assined to it
re;uirement. As a matter o, ,act its Sec. 1 reads3 No radio or television c(annel may o*tain a !ranchise unless 5 5 56 Sec. o! the same also reveals that there is no intention to re#eal Sec. 3 o! Act =. Alt(ou)( t(e ,irst sentence seems to oint to a reeal t(e second one reveals t(at t(e re/uirement *as not scraed to *it3 5 5 5 T(erea,ter irres#ective o! any !ranchise 5 5 5 )ranted "# an# o,,ice a)enc# or erson no radio or television station s(all "e aut(ori;ed to oerate *it(out t(e aut(orit# o, t(e
'SS%S & A8@%NTS
WHN a le)islative ,ranc(ise is re/uired in t(is case • ACWS ar)ues t(at Sec. 1 o, Act 24 only a##lies to radio, not television stations. @See t(e ,irst "ullet oint under !ACTS. 7oreover it adds t(at ".(. 59+A dis#enses with the leislative !ranchise re;uirement. 't also contends that the ($? $#inion is *indin *ecause • it was the NTC itsel! that ased !or it !rom the overnment.?. '4 and Albano v. Reyes t(e NTC ma# issue ermits to "roadcastin) stations *it(out a ,ranc(ise. B%( & AT'$NA% D%S a le)islative ,ranc(ise is still re/uired. •
•
ACWS ar)ues t(at Act 24 onl# alies to radio stations. Act = should *e read in conEunction with ".(. 59+A. %ven i! the !ormer only re!ers to radio stations, since the latter is a directly related law which covers *oth radio and television stations /see the *ullet #oint *elow0, it can *e said that the re;uirement under Act = also a##lies to television stations. ".(. 59+A did not do away with the leislative !ranchise
•
(is#ensin with the re;uirement is not in line with the declared #ur#oses o! ".(. 59+A *(ic( is to revent monoolies and to re)ulate t(e allocation o, limited ,re/uencies. (oin away with the re;uirement de!eats #u*lic interest, the determination o! which is a !unction o! the leislature.
•
The ($? $#inion is not *indinF it is merely #ersuasive. ts conclusion t(at t(e NTC ma# issue ermits to stations *it(out a ,ranc(ise is erroneous. ◦
!irst t(ere is a di,,erence "et*een a ,ranc(ise and a CPCHermit. A G!ranchiseH involves the e1ercise o! the leislature o! an e1clusive reulatory #ower resultin in a rant under authority o! overnment, con!errin a s#ecial riht to do an act or series o! acts o! #u*lic concernF on the other hand, a GC"CI#ermitH involves a s#eciali>ed aency
Pa)e o, 4
Associated Communications & Wireless Services v. NTC reulatory #owers, which deals with #rocedures and technicalities. ◦
◦
Ne5t under >.?. '4 the NTC only has the #ower to issue C"C.?. '4. When there is a law re;uirin a !ranchise, an administrative aency cannot allow a #u*lic utility to o#erate without it.
)A$
Petition (%N'%(. T(e NTC and t(e CA are A))'@%(.
Pa)e 4 o, 4
