The Philippine Chamber of Telecommunications Operators (PCTO) said Monday several provisions of the proposed Konektadong Pinoy bill could harm the telecommunications industry.
Konektadong Pinoy bill is a priority measure of the government that aims to expand internet access in the country and ease the entry of new players in the data transmission industry.
The PCTO said that while it is one with the government in efforts to provide equitable connectivity, the proposal, in its current form, would prove detrimental to the telecom business as it undermines Constitutional provisions on the grant of a congressional franchise and the protection of national security and interest, and violates principles on fair competition.
“We believe in fostering a competitive environment that encourages innovation and makes connectivity more accessible and affordable to Filipinos. Unfortunately, despite its good intentions, the Konektadong Pinoy bill disregards Constitutional provisions, undermines fair competition, and could stifle investment in the telecommunications sector. We hope to work with lawmakers towards reworking the bill into a version that will be a win-win for all,” said PCTO.
The PCTO said the bill is “unnecessary and superfluous,” as the existing Amended Public Service Act (RA 11659) already provides a clear framework for new players to enter the telecommunications market, including data transmission providers.
It said the Konektadong Pinoy bill’s provisions are redundant and could create confusion and regulatory overlap.
One of PCTO’s strongest objections is the inclusion of spectrum management provisions in a bill ostensibly focused on data transmission.
“The Constitution’s ‘one bill, one subject’ rule requires that every legislative measure be limited to a single subject matter, which must be clearly expressed in its title. By incorporating broad spectrum allocation policies—extending beyond data transmission to include broadcast frequencies—the bill introduces a rider provision that is unrelated to its core objective, rendering it unconstitutional,” PCTO said.
“The spectrum management provisions are too broad and unrelated to the main focus of the bill, as they encompass frequencies beyond data transmission, including broadcast frequencies. Many stakeholders in the telecom and broadcast industries were either unaware of or not involved in consultations regarding this issue,” it said.
PCTO also opposed the bill’s exemption of data transmission providers from securing a congressional franchise and a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) as it creates an unequal regulatory environment, violating the principle of fair competition.
“This disparity could discourage investment from existing players, ultimately achieving the contrary effect to what the bill intends and might hinder the growth of the telecommunications sector,” it said.
“Further, the removal of the franchise and CPCN requirements eliminates crucial safeguards that protect public interest by ensuring that telecommunications providers meet specific standards and obligations in order to provide quality and reliable services. It may also compromise national security by granting access to critical infrastructure to potentially unregulated entities, both foreign and domestic,” PCTO said.
It also said the removal of the congressional franchise requirement and the reduction of the NTC’s powers could lead to the unchecked exploitation of the country’s finite spectrum resources, a vital part of the national patrimony.
PCTO said the relaxation of regulatory scrutiny of data transmission participants could potentially lead to the explanation of cybersecurity incidents that threaten national security.
Given the growing use of over-the-top services or chat apps, which have led to the decline of voice and SMS, it said the bill could further stifle the growth of local telecommunications companies and reduce their ability to compete effectively.
“The bill also seems to discriminate against existing telecommunications service providers who have invested heavily in building critical infrastructure under the existing regulatory framework. This could lead to legal challenges and uncertainty in the market. Telecommunications is a critical industry and losing oversight is a threat to national security,” it said.