During the Senate hearing on Wednesday, Mislatel, dubbed as the country’s “third telco”, recalled that it went through National Telecommunications Commission’s (NTC) strict post-qualification screening, and prior to the Congressional hearings, NTC even confirmed with the House of Representatives the validity and existence of Republic Act No. 8627, entitled “An Act Granting the Mindanao Islamic Telephone Company Inc., a Franchise to Construct, Establish, Install, Maintain and Operate Wire and/or Wireless Telecommunications Systems in the Philippines.”
It was November 13, 2018 when the House of Representatives Committee on Legislative Franchises chairperson Franz “Chicoy” E. Alvarez confirmed the validity of the Mislatel’s franchise stating that, “to date, the Committee has not received any notice of a judgment from any judicial or quasi-judicial body revoking or cancelling the franchise granted to MISLATEL through R.A. 8627.”
“MISLATEL’s franchise remains valid and subsisting,” Alvarez wrote in the letter, contrary to Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon’s insistence that Mislatel’s franchise was “ipso facto revoked”.
Atty. Adel Tamano, Mislatel’s spokesperson, further cited that the issue was long settled before the Supreme Court (SC) in the 1990 case of Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT) v. NTC (G.R. No. 88404), where it was held that the “determination of the right to the exercise of a franchise, or whether the right to enjoy such privilege has been forfeited by non-user, is more properly the subject of the prerogative writ of quo warranto.”
The Office of the Solicitor General corroborated Tamano’s statement that a franchise could only be revoked through a quo warranto proceeding, relying on the SC’s reiteration of its PLDT v. NTC ruling in a more recent case of Divinagracia v. CBSI that the courts are the ones “entrusted with the adjudication of the legal status of persons, the final arbiter of their rights and obligations under law.”
In a prior Senate hearing, businessman Dennis Uy — whose Udenna Corporation and Chelsea Logistics Holdings Corporation partnered with state-owned China Telecommunications Corporation for the Mislatel consortium — likewise assured the panel that they did not evade the rules.
“Kami po ay dumaan sa butas ng karayom hanggang mapili po kami ng National Telecommunications Commission bilang New Major Player sa telecommunications sector (We went through the eye of the needle until we were chosen by the National Telecommunications Commission as the new major player in the telecommunications sector),” he said.
Drilon likewise argued that Mislatel’s failure to inform lawmakers about the change in its ownership could be grounds for the franchise revocation to which Department of Information Communications and Technology officer-in-charge Eliseo Rio refuted by citing cited PLDT’s acquisition of Digital Telecoms, Globe Telecom’s acquisition of Bayantel and Globe and Smart’s acquisition that were done without any intervention from Congress.
At the end of the hearing, Senator Grace Poe said that the Senate would decide on the fate of Mislatel in the plenary.
Poe also noted Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri’s recommendation that there is a need to revisit and to amend the provisions of the franchise law. –PPD
READ: Mislatel franchise in question