The second hearing of ABS-CBN Franchise in Congress received mixed reactions from Kapamilya stars watching their boss presenting ABS-CBN’s side of truth and the Congressmen airing sentiments on why or why not their franchise will be renewed.
After the second hearing on ABS-CBN’s franchise renewal in Congress, Kapamilya supporters had mixed reactions.
Pwede nyong pahirapan na renew ang franchise nang aming network but you can never stop our hearts praying, caring, loving and helping our madlang people! Whatever your dark agenda is… our God is faithful po. #IbalikAngABSCBN
— zndɹoƆ ʎppǝ⊥ (@teddspotting) June 1, 2020
Maraming maraming salamat sa inyo na mga mamababatas na buo ang loob at may paninindigan para sa tama. Alam ko na Marami pa ang katulad ninyo! Pagpalain po kayo!#labankapamilya✊✊✊ #ibalikangabscbn https://t.co/djA0ri2oC5
— karla estrada (@Estrada21Karla) June 1, 2020
Solgen Jose Calida’s accusations did not hold any weight and he was blasted for it.
Your allegations Solgen Calida are without merit. ABSCBN complies with all pertinent laws governing its franchise and has secured all necessary government and regulatory approvals for its business operations. #IbalikAngABSCBN pic.twitter.com/3fZowS4aEN
— Nikki Valdez Garcia (@nikkivaldez_) June 1, 2020
Juan Miguel Severo just wants the network back on the air.
There's no gentler way to put it and you don't deserve it if there was.
Bobo ka, Marcoleta. #IbalikAngABSCBN
— Juan Miguel Severo (@TheRainBro) May 26, 2020
DJ Jhaiho feels the same.
— DJ Jhaiho (@mor1019jhaiho) June 1, 2020
Ruffa Gutierrez showed her gratitude to those who want ABS-CBN back on air.
Kathryn Bernardo’s mom showed her support as well.
— min bernardo (@min_bernardo) May 31, 2020
Earlier during the hearing, ABS-CBN president and CEO Carlo Katigbak made it clear that the 50-year franchise limitation pertains to a single franchise only, citing Article 12, Section 11 in the Constitution which states that no franchise shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines nor shall such franchise be for a longer period than 50 years.
“Malinaw po ang kahulugan nito. Na bawat prangkisang ibinibigay ng Kongreso ay hindi pwedeng lumampas ng 50 years. Pero wala naman pong sinasabi na ang buhay ng isang kumpanya ay may limitasyon na 50 years. Pwede naman pong bigyan ng panibagong prangkisa. (It is clearly stated that every franchise granted by Congress cannot exceed 50 years. But nothing in the provision states that a life span of a company is limited to 50 years. Its franchise can get renewed),” he said.
Katigbak also had to point out again that chairman emeritus Eugenio “Gabby” Lopez III is not a foreigner but is a Filipino citizen by birth which makes him eligible to own a media company in the country.
“Si Mr. Lopez po ay ipinanganak noong 1952 kaya sakop po siya ng 1935 Constitution. Ang tatay at nanay niya ay parehong Pilipino. Kaya from birth, automatic na siya ay isang Pilipino din (Mr. Lopez was born in 1952 and was covered by the 1935 Constitution. His father and mother are both Filipino. So he is automatically a Filipino from birth).”
The Lopezes also never lost ownership of the company, even during the time of the Martial Law.
“Ang pagbabalik ng ABS-CBN sa pamilyang Lopez ay ayon sa batas, at may basbas ng tatlong ahensya ng goberyno: ang PCGG, ang Office of the President, at ang Korte Suprema (The return of ABS-CBN to the Lopez family was legal and was approved by the government agencies: the PCGG, the Office of the President, and the Supreme Court).”
“Ang PCGG mismo ang umaksyon na ibalik sa mga may-ari ang Channel 2 noong June 1986. Noong January 1987, nagkaroon ng agreement ang gobyerno at ABS-CBN na isaayos ang pagbalik ng mga iba pang facilities ng ABS-CBN na patuloy pang ginagamit ng goberyno. Itong agreement ay may basbas ng Korte Suprema noong 1989 (First of all, the PCGG decided to return Channel 2 to the owners in June 1986. In January 1987, there was an agreement between the government and ABS-CBN on the orderly return of ABS-CBN facilities that the government was still using. The Supreme Court affirmed the agreement in 1989),” Katigbak emphasized.
Katigbak added that ABS-CBN was able to receive its other facilities given by PTV4, six years after the EDSA Revolution.
“Ang PDR po ay hindi katumbas ng pag-aari sa ABS-CBN (A PDR is not equivalent to a share in ABS-CBN.),” he stated addressing the alleged issue of an unconstitutional issuance of PDRs (Philippine Depositary Receipt) to foreigners while citing that PDR holders do not have voting rights.
The Securities and Exchange Commission approved the PDRs, added Katigbak.
“Ang pag-benta po ng PDR sa publiko ay inaprubahan ng SEC noong October 4, 1999. Paano ito magiging labag sa batas kung ang ahensya mismo ng gobyerno ang nagbigay ng permit para ibenta ang mga PDR na ito (The public offering of PDR was approved by the SEC last October 4, 1999. How could it have violated the law when the government agency gave the permit to offer the PDR to the public)?”
PDRs were also issued by another media company and they were not a problem when it came to their franchise renewal.
The House of Representatives’ started its deliberations on ABS-CBN’s application for a 25-year franchise after it withdrew House Bill No. 6732, which would have granted ABS-CBN a provisional franchise to operate until October 31.