THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE
“Every Filipino shall have the right:
To freely express his ideas and opinions through speech or in writing, through the use of the printing press or other similar method, without being subject to censorship.”
-Apolinario Mabini, The Constitutional Program of the Philippine Republic (c., 1898)
With this truth in mind, the question Filipinos should be asking now is this-
Should television and radio fall under the ambit of public utilities that need a legislative franchise to operate under Article XII, Section 11?
This is the provision verbatim-
“SECTION 11. No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens, nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years. Neither shall any such franchise or right be granted except under the condition that it shall be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by the Congress when the common good so requires. The State shall encourage equity participation in public utilities by the general public. The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of any public utility enterprise shall be limited to their proportionate share in its capital, and all the executive and managing officers of such corporation or association must be citizens of the Philippines.”
Clearly, the provision does not specifically state that television and radio are public utilities covered by the prescription to secure a legislative franchise to operate.
In stark contrast, two provisions in the 1987 Constitution are very explicit in the state’s duty to uphold freedom of speech and of the press:
“Article III, Section 4.
NO LAW SHALL BE PASSED ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OF EXPRESSION, OR OF THE PRESS, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”
“Article XVI, Section 10.
The State shall provide the policy environment for the full development of Filipino capability and the emergence of communication structures suitable to the needs and aspirations of the nation and the balanced flow of information into, out of, and across the country, IN ACCORDANCE WITH A POLICY THAT RESPECTS THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS.”
Hence, for Filipinos the task at hand is to strike a balance between an unequivocal constitutional prescription to uphold free speech and press freedom on one side and an ambivalent constitutional directive on the other side.
One resolution here is not to classify television and radio as a public utility that requires a legislative franchise to operate under Article XII, Section 11. The 1987 Constitution very clearly puts a huge premium on upholding freedom of speech and of the press. Any scenario that permits undermining or compromising these constitutional rights cannot be countenanced.
But still, each Filipino must reflect on this fundamental constitutional question. Thorough and civil public discussions at the community level would be extremely helpful.
Photo credit: news.abs-cbn.com