A LAWYER on Friday denounced an alleged attempt by ABS-CBN Corporation to revive its franchise.

Atty. Ferdinand Topacio, chief legal counsel of the Volunteer Against Crime and Corruption, appealed to the leadership of both houses of Congress to defer from taking further plenary actions on the controversial Senate Bill 1530 authored by opposition Senator Franklin Drilon and House Bill 7923 filed by Rep. Joy Tambunting and instead remand the two legislative measures to the appropriate committees for further hearings with the participation of the affected stakeholders in the media industry.

Topacio made the statement as the Senate is expected to tackle next week Drilon’s SB 1530, which seeks to amend Section 18, Book VII, Chapter 3 of Executive Order 292, and provides that “the franchise or license that needs a congressional grant will not expire as long as the franchise or license holder makes “timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a license or franchise xxx until the application shall have been finally determined by the xxx branch of government that grants or renews such xxx franchise.”

Drilon filed SB 1530 on May 13, 2020.

Topacio noted that on the same day, May 13, 2020, HB 7923 was filed by Rep. Joy Tambunting of Paranaque.

Topacio, who is also national chairman of Citizens Crime Watch, alleged that
“the proposed legislation is aimed at reinstating or reviving the franchise of ABS-CBN and Amcara Broadcasting Network, whose franchises have expired and which have been the subject of cease-and-desist order from the National Telecommunications Commission.”

During the congressional hearings for the renewal of ABS-CBN’s franchise, Topacio said that lawmakers who support the station repeatedly argued that the operations of ABS-CBN should be allowed to continue, while the issue of its renewal was being tackled, even if the same went past its expiration as stated in the law.

“By allowing a franchise holder whose franchise has expired to continue to operate as if it still held a valid franchise, by the simple expedient of the said franchise holder merely applying for an extension and having Congress deliberate upon it (without granting or denying the same), would in effect GRANT it an extension of its franchise beyond the lifetime thereof as stated in the law previously granting the same.”

According to Topacio, this would require a positive act of Congress of passing a law.

Topacio warned that making it automatic, by operation of law, for a franchise to be extended through inaction by Congress “promotes procrastination on the part of both the members of Congress  who do not have to do anything in the meantime in order for an entity to continue operating – and the franchise holder itself – which only has to file an application for renewal, without having to prove itself worthy thereof in the meantime. It places a premium on inaction and results in uncertainty.”

Topacio noted that the situation is akin to having an expired passport. One cannot file an application for a new passport before the old one has expired, and after the same had expired, argue that he should be allowed to travel on his expired passport because he had already applied for a new one.

AUTHOR PROFILE

Hector Lawas