G.R. No. 144109 February 17, 2003 ASSOCIATED COMMUNICATIONS !IRE"ESS SER#ICES $ UNITED %ROADCASTING NET!OR&S, NET!OR &S, 'e()()o*er 'e()() o*er,, +. NATIONA" NATIONA" TE"ECOMMUNICA TE"ECOMMUNICATIONS TIONS COMMISSION, re'o*-e*(. (The question that has taken a long life is whether the operation of a radio or television station requires a congressional franchise.) Fa(/ On November 11, 1!1, "ct No. !#$%, entitled &"n "ct 'roviding for the egulation of adio tations and adio *ommunications in the 'hilippines and for Other 'urposes,& 'urposes,& was enacted. ec. 1 of the law reads, vi+ &ec. &ec. 1. No person person,, -rm, -rm, compa compan, n, assoc associa iatio tion, n, or corpor corporati ation on shall shall constr construc uct, t, insta install, ll, establis establish, h, or operate operate a radio radio transmitt transmitting ing station, station, or a radio radio receivin receiving g station station used for commer commercia ciall purpos purposes, es, or a radio radio broad broadcas castin ting g statio station, n, withou withoutt having having -rst -rst obtai obtained ned a franchise therefor from the *ongress of the 'hilippines...& 'ursuant to the above provision, *ongress enacted in 1%/ .". No. $//1, entitled &"n "ct 0ranting arcos 2. 3illaverde, 2r. and 4infred 5. 3illaverde a 6ranchise to *onstruct, 7nstall, aintain and Operate 'ublic adiotelephone and adiotelegraph *oastal tations, and 'ublic 6i8ed i8ed and and 'ubli 'ublic c 9ased 9ased and :and :and obile obile tatio tations ns withi within n the 'hili 'hilippi ppines nes; ; 7t gave gave the grantees a /<=ear franchise. 7n 1%, the franchise was transferred to petitioner "ssociated *ommunications > 4ireless 4ireless ervices ? @nited 9roadcasting Network, 7nc. ("*4 for brevit) through through *ongressA *ongressA *oncurr *oncurrent ent esolution esolution No. /#. 'etitio 'etitioner ner "*4 "*4 then engaged in the installation and operation of several radio stations around the countr. 7n 1B$, '.C. No. /B%=", &egulating the Ownership and Operation of adio and Television tations tations and for other 'urposes& 'urposes& was issued, issued, with the following following pertinen pertinentt provisio provisions ns on franchise of radio and television broadcasting sstems ec. 1. No radio station or television channel ma obtain a franchise unless it has suDcient capital capital on the basis of equit equit for its operation operation for at least one ear, ear, including including purchas purchase e of equipment. ec. %. "ll franchises, grants, licenses, permits, certi-cates or other forms of authorit to operate radio or television broadcasting sstems shall terminate on Cecember !1, 1#1. Thereafter, Thereafter, irrespective irrespective of an franchise, grant, license, permit, certi-cate or other forms of authorit to operate granted b an oDce, agenc or person, no radio or television station shall be authori+ed to operate without the authorit of the 9oard of *ommunications and the ecretar of 'ublic 4orks and *ommunications or their successors who have the right and authorit to assign to quali-ed parties frequencies, channels or other means of identifing broadcasting sstem.
" few ears later or in 1B, 5.O. No. /$%$ was issued. 7t integrated the 9oard of *ommunications and the Telecommunications *ontrol 9ureau under the 7ntegrated eorgani+ation 'lan of 1BE into the NT*. "mong the powers vested in the NT* under ec. 1/ of 5.O. No. /$% are the following a. 7ssue *erti-cate of 'ublic *onvenience for the operation of communication utilities and services; mc. 0rant permits for the use of radio frequencies for wireless telephone and telegraph sstems and radio communication sstems; @pon termination of petitionerAs franchise on Cecember !1, 1#1 pursuant to '.C. No. /B%=", it continued operating its radio stations under permits granted b the NT*. Iue/ Fas 5.O. No /$% modi-ed the franchising and licensing arrangement for radio and television broadcasting sstems under "ct No. !#$% and '.C. No. /B%="G consequentl, the requirement of obtaining a congressionalHlegislative franchise can alread be dispensed withI Ru)*/ 5.O. No. /$% integrated the 9oard of *ommunications and the Telecommunications 9ureau into a single entit known as the NT*, and vested the new bod with broad powers, among them, the power to issue *erti-cates of 'ublic *onvenience for the operation of communications utilities, including radio and televisions broadcasting sstems and the power to grant permits for the use of radio frequencies. "dditionall, NT* was vested with broad rule making authorit Jto encourage a larger and more eKective use of communications, radio and television broadcasting facilities, and to maintain eKective competition among private entities in these activities whenever the *ommission -nds it reasonabl feasible. 7n the recent case of "lbano vs. ees (1B/ *" E%$), the upreme *ourt held that Jfranchises issued b *ongress are not required before each and ever public utilit ma operate.A "dministrative agencies ma be empowered b law Jto grant licenses for or to authori+e the operation of certain public utilities.A The upreme *ourt stated that the provision in the *onstitution ("rt. L77, ec. 11) Jthat the issuance of a franchise, certi-cate or other form of authori+ation for the operation of a public utilit shall be subMect to amendment, alteration or repeal b *ongress, does not necessaril impl . . . that onl *ongress has the power to grant such authori+ation. Our statute books are replete with laws granting speci-ed agencies in the 58ecutive 9ranch the power to issue such authori+ation for certain classes of public utilities.A 4e believe that 5.O. No. /$% is one law which authori+es an administrative agenc, the NT*, to issue authori+ations for the operation of radio and television broadcasting sstems without need of a prior franchise issued b *ongress.
Fowever, on a !, 1$, the NT*, the *ommittee on :egislative 6ranchises of *ongress, and the apisanan ng mga 9rodkaster sa 'ilipinas of which petitioner is a member of good standing, entered into a emorandum of @nderstanding (O@) that requires a congressional franchise to operate radio and television stations. The O@ states in part JThe NT* shall continue to issue and grant permits or authori+ations to operate radio and television broadcast stations within their mandate under ection 1/ of 58ecutive Order No. /$%, provided that such temporar permits or authori+ation to operate shall be valid for two (E) ears within which the permittee shall be required to -le an application for legislative franchise with *ongress not later than Cecember !1, 1$G provided -nall, that if the permittee of the temporar permit or authori+ation to operate fails to secure the legislative franchise with *ongress within this period, the NT* shall not e8tend or renew its permit or authori+ation to operate an further.A 'etitioner stresses that "ct. No. !#$% covers onl the operation of radio and not television stations. the *ourt of "ppeals held that a congressional franchise is required for the operation of radio and television broadcasting stations as this requirement under "ct No. !#$% was not e8pressl repealed b '.C. No. /B%=" nor 5.O. No. /$%. The appellate court correctl ruled that a congressional franchise is necessar for petitioner to operate television *hannel. 5ven assuming that "ct No. !#$% applies onl to radio stations and not to television stations as petitioner adamantl insists, the subsequent '.C. No. /B%=" clearl shows in ection 1 that a franchise is required to operate radio as well as television stations. There is nothing in '.C. No. /B%=" which reveals an intention to do awa with the requirement of a franchise for the operation of radio and television stations. ection % of '.C. No. /B%=" merel identi-es the regulator agencies from whom authori+ations, in addition to the required congressional franchise, must be secured after Cecember !1, 1#1. Thus, while it is correct to sa that speci-ed agencies in the 58ecutive 9ranch have the power to issue authori+ation for certain classes of public utilities, this does not mean that the authori+ation or *'* issued b the NT* dispenses with the requirement of a franchise as this is clearl required under '.C. No. /B%=". The petitioner however insists that the *onstitution provides in "rt. L77, ec. 11 that the issuance of a franchise, certi-cate or other form of authori+ation for the operation of a public utilit shall be subMect to amendment, alteration or repeal b *ongress does not necessaril impl, as petitioner posits, that onl *ongress has the power to grant such authori+ation. Our statute books are replete with laws granting speci-ed agencies in the 58ecutive 9ranch the power to issue such authori+ation for certain classes of public utilities. 4here there is a law such as '.C. No. /B%=" which requires a franchise for the operation of radio and television stations, that law must be followed until subsequentl repealed. There is nothing in the subsequent 5.O. No. /$% which evinces an intent to dispense with the franchise requirement. Thus, while it is correct to sa that speci-ed agencies in the 58ecutive 9ranch have the power to issue authori+ation for certain classes of public utilities,
this does not mean that the authori+ation or *'* issued b the NT* dispenses with the requirement of a franchise as this is clearl required under '.C. No. /B%=". "nd whether or not the bene-ts of the emorandum *ircular e8tend to petitioner, the fact is, as correctl pointed out b the appellate court, petitioner failed to secure a legislative franchise b Cecember !1, 1. Therefore, as long as the law remains unchanged, the requirement of a franchise to operate a television station must be upheld. The call to dispense with the requisite legislative franchise must, however, be addressed to *ongress as the lawmaker of the land for the *ourtAs function is to interpret and not to rewrite the law. o ordered.