DICT slams proposed common tower policy as illegal, anti-competitive

The proposed common tower policy of Presidential Adviser for Economic Affairs and Information and Communications Technology Ramon Jacinto as illegal and anti-competitive, Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) Acting Secretary Eliseo Rio Jr. said Wednesday.

In a lengthy Facebook post, Rio emphasized that the draft policy “would surely be challenged by the telcos in court” as “it potentially violates the telcos’ legislative franchise, which gives them the right to build their own telecommunication infrastructure, including towers.”

“Outgoing Acting Secretary Rio should refrain from commenting on common tower sharing further as a courtesy to incoming Secretary Greg Honasan. Clearly, the President gave me written authority to take charge of the guidelines and I have told Rio I will take this up with Incoming Secretary Honasan upon his assumption of office,” Jacinto said in a separate statement.

Senator Gringo Honasan is taking over the helm of DICT to replace Rio, who assumed an acting secretary post after Rodolfo Salalima resigned in September 2017.

The proposed common tower policy allows telcos to build their own towers if independent tower companies reject their request in a certain location, or do not respond within 30 days.

“A telco’s franchise has the weight of a law and only another law, not a Department policy, a Memorandum Circular, nor an Executive Order can amend a law. This crucial matter has never been addressed by RJ in defending his draft policy,” Rio said.

Jacinto, however, said the telco’s franchises are subject to regulatory control for public good.

“In this case, the telcos themselves say they find it difficult to build towers. As a result, we Filipinos are suffering from poor connectivity (the 3rd slowest in the world) and highest prices of internet in Asia,” the Presidential adviser said.

“Besides, the guidelines provide that Globe and Smart can still build if the tower companies cannot build where they want to build. There is a 30-day period, when after receiving a written request from the telco. The tower company must say YES or NO within 30 days,” Jacinto said.

He emphasized that the proposed policy would not take away the telcos’ right to build their own tower, if the tower company would decline to accept the job.

“The government has every right to regulate tower sharing for the public good, because the consumer is suffering,” Jacinto said.

Rio emphasized note the policy of limiting the number of tower companies to two “is being questioned by the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC), the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), and the industry as a whole as anti-competitive, violative of several laws (e.g. RA 10667), and runs counter to the principle in our Constitution that prevents monopolies.”

“He also argues that this would make the selected two tower companies’ business viable and ... aid in securing cybersecurity issues,” Rio said.

The Duterte administration is pushing its common tower initiative to solve issues hounding telecommunications services.

“The guidelines do not violate their franchise. If an airline is given a congressional franchise, the government still regulates their right to fly and the routes they chose. The franchise does not in itself give you unregulated operations,” Jacinto said.

The Philippines lags behind neighboring countries in terms of the number of existing cell sites, having only 16,000 compared with Malaysia and Indonesia’s 25,000 and 90,000 towers, respectively, according to DICT.

In the end, Rio noted the tower companies will have to depend on market forces for their business, “and not for the government to dictate on what the market should do, for them to get support.” —VDS, GMA News