By Atty. JULIUS GREGORY B. DELGADO
A LEGAL TELESERYE: THE ABS-CBN SAGA CONTINUES
First of Two Parts
The “madlang people”, a colloquial for televiewers used by the popular noontime show of the beleaguered network, thought that the battle would shift to the courts. This is after ABS-CBN lodged a petition before the Supreme Court questioning the Cease and Desist Order issued by the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) which ordered the network to shutdown its operations immediately after its franchise expired. The network contends, among others, that it was denied its constitutional right to due process after it was directed to stop operating immediately without a hearing. The lawyers of the network argue that a Cease and Desist Order is akin to a Temporary Restraining Order or a Writ of Preliminary Injunction which should be issued only after the benefit of a hearing.
Those who are against the shutdown hit the leadership of the House of Representatives, particularly Speaker Allan Peter Cayetano, for its dillydallying and dribbling of the numerous bills filed seeking for the renewal of ABS-CBN’s franchise. Speaker Cayetano retorted against the NTC and Solicitor General Jose Calida stating that there will be a day of reckoning soon. To salvage his image from those who are blaming him of the network’s untimely demise, Speaker Cayetano himself sponsored a measure giving ABS-CBN a provisional franchise last Wednesday, 13 May 2020. After delivering an impassioned sponsorship speech, which is the first reading of the measure, House Bill No. 6732, which seeks to give ABS-CBN a provisional franchise until 31 October 2020, was referred to the Committee of the Whole and passed second reading on the same day.
It is expected that House Bill No. 6732 will be considered for third reading and voted by the plenary in the next session. Then, it will be transmitted to the Senate where a measure granting legislative franchise to the network, albeit fora full period of twenty-five (25) years, was already filed signed by most ofits members. However, even if will be signed into law by the President or be allowed to lapse into law, it is expected that the manner of its passage will be questioned for violating the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Section 26 (2), Article VI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that “no bill passed by either House become a law unless it has passed three readings on separate days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its Members three days before its passage, except when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency.”
Unlike the Bayanihan We Heal as One Act, which was certified as urgent by the President to address the current COVID-19 pandemic, the application for franchise by ABS-CBN was not certified as urgent by the President. Will the President sign the enrolled bill once it will reach his table for his signature? Most probably, the President will not and will just allow it to lapse into law. It was reported that he flew to Davao late this week on a private jet. This is probably calculated to be consistent with his previous statement through Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque that he is neutral in this issue. If the President will sign, he will offend his supporters who are against the renewal of the network’s franchise. If he will veto the same, critics, including his supporters who want the network back on air, will assail his flipflopping. Most likely, the President will play safe and allow the measure to lapse into law. Section 27 (1), Article VI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that “the President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it.” As to what will happen to the cases pending before the Supreme Court, we will discuss in the second part of this series.