After the House Committee on Legislative Franchise (The “Committee”) overwhelmingly voted to deny ABS-CBN’s application for a renewal of its legislative franchise to operate a mass media TV station, some members of the legal profession have immediately come out with proposals that a direct People’s Initiative can be resorted to in order to involve the sentiments of the general public on the issue of whether or not ABS-CBN is deserving of another franchise grant. If successful, this method would have the force of the law, as if it was enacted directly by Congress.
At least three legal experts have proposed the aforesaid plan which has likewise gained traction in social media. In support, they cited a 1989 law—Republic Act No. 6735, otherwise known as “An Act Providing For a System of Initiative and Referendum.]” (“PI”)
The PI provides for the power of the People to, among others, “propose and enact legislations through an election called for the purpose.” This system, which is one among three types, is an initiative on statutes or law which refer to a petition proposing to enact a national legislation (Sec. 3, Art 1, RA No. 6735).
This system of PI, which is a new addition under the 1987 Constitution, has been put to the test in 2014 during the time of the Aquino Administration (2010-2016) at the height of the controversies surrounding the congressional Priority Development Assistance Fund (“PDAF”) and the equally infamous Development Assistance Program (“DAP”). The Aquino Government tried to undermine the PI, which eventually started to fizzle out while the people awaited the decision of the Supreme Court on the said PDAF and DAP cases. When the High Court finally decided that the latter practices were unconstitutional, the PI eventually lost its steam and died.
On this current attempt to use this system, the proposal to enact a law directly by the masses by a vote of 10% and 3% of the total number of registered voters throughout the country and by each legislative district, respectively, to grant ABS-CBN, a private business entity, a franchise would be quite interesting as it is a case of first impression to promote a private interest as opposed to the usual public purpose of every law.
The People’s Initiative Law has its roots under the 1987 Constitution. As I said, it was a new feature and was not present in both the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions.
Under Article XVII, Section 2 of the 1987, it states:
“Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered votes therein. No amendment under this section shall be authorized within five years following the ratification of this Constitution nor oftener than once every five years thereafter.
The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.”
Article VI, Section 32 is more specific, stating that “(t)he Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a system of initiative and referendum, and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body after the registration of a petition therefor signed by at least ten per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters thereof”
It is from the above constitutional provisions that the PI came into effect that is now being proposed as the people’s avenue to grant ABS-CBN its desired franchise. However, despite the idealism of such a proposal, I believe that the same will not pass legal muster.
First, Article 6, Section 24 of the Constitution expressly states that:
“All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public debt, bills of local application, and private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments.
In the Philippines, there is a dearth of legal literature on the definition or academic discussion on what a Private Bill is. Hence, we ought to take our bearing from the United States where the vast majority of our jurisprudence, especially in Constitutional law, was culled.
The Black’s Law legal dictionary defines a Private Bill as one which have for its objective more particular or private interest as distinguished from such are as for the benefit of the whole community, which are hence termed as “Public Bills” (Black Law, 2nd Ed., Page 134).
A private bill provides benefits to specified individuals (including corporate bodies). Individuals sometimes request relief through private legislation when administrative or legal remedies are exhausted. Many private bills deal with immigration–granting citizenship or permanent residency. Private bills may also be introduced for individuals who have claims against the government, veterans’ benefits claims, claims for military decorations, or taxation problems. The title of a private bill usually begins with the phrase, “For the relief of. . . .” if a private bill is passed in identical form by both houses of Congress and is signed by the president, it becomes a private law (Source: U.S Senate website; www.senate.gov)
In short, since the proposed People’s Initiative to enact and grant ABS-CBN a franchise to once again operate its TV Network ultimately redounds to ABS-CBN’s private gain, there is no doubt that such move would be tantamount to the passage of a Private Bill, which under Art. 6, Section 24 of the Constitution can only exclusively originate from the House of Representatives and therefore is beyond the ambit of the PI.
Second, the proposed People’s Initiative on ABS-CBN being in the nature of a Private Bill, the same likewise cannot prosper as it will entail expenses on taxpayers’ money as huge as a regular national election. A budget for such process will require appropriations. The next national budget process will be for the year 2021 and expenditures will have to be contained in the General Appropriations Act (GAA), which under the same Art. 6, Section 24, “[a]ll appropriation, revenue, or tariff bills [….] Shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives.”
The long and short of it, it would still be Congress through the House that shall give its go signal whether to fund the proposed measure to benefit ABS CBN; hence, the high impracticality of pursuing the measure of using people’s money to benefit a private enterprise.
While we lament and sympathize with the direct employees who have lost or will inevitably lose their jobs, it is given that ABS-CBN being a huge mass media conglomerate has surely provided for the appropriate retrenchment/retirement package for them.
The story of ABS-CBN may currently be at an impasse, but it certainly is not the end. As in every episode in a multi-plot TV program, it always ends with the phrase “To be Continued.”