THE Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to defer its resolution on the motion filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) for the issuance of a gag order against television giant ABS-CBN Corporation and its subsidiary ABS-CBN Convergence in connection with the quo warranto petition it filed to seeking the cancellation of the legislative franchises.
SC spokesman Brian Keith Hosaka said the 15-man High Tribunal reset its discussion and possible resolution on the motion on March 10.
Hosaka said the justices decided to defer a resolution on the matter to be able to study further the pleadings submitted by the parties on the gag-order plea.
“The case will be taken up again by the en banc on March 10, 2020. This is to give the justices time to go over the pleadings submitted by the parties including the comments recently filed by the respondents,” Hosaka said.
ABS-CBN said the issuance of a gag order will not only violate press freedom, but will also deprive the public of vital information relating to its franchise issue.
Solicitor General Jose Calida is seeking the cancelation of ABS-CBN and its subsidiary’s legislative franchise due to their “highly abusive” practices.
Calida accused the company of being engaged in broadcasting for a fee, which is beyond the scope of its legislative franchise.
Calida added that the television network has been allowing foreign investors to take part in the ownership of a Philippine mass media entity, in gross violation of the foreign interest restriction of mass media provided under Section 11, Article XVI of the Constitution.
Calida said the network’s management also violated its franchise when it launched and operated a pay-per-view channel in ABS-CBN TV Plus, the KBO Channel, without prior approval or permit from the National Telecommunications Commission.
With regard to its subsidiary, ABS-CBN Convergence Inc. (formerly Multi-Media Telepony Inc.), the OSG accused the latter of resorting to corporate layering scheme in order to transfer its franchise without the necessary congressional approval.
Calida said a gag order is necessary as he accused the respondents of engaging in propaganda “to elicit public sympathy, sway public opinion, and, ultimately, to influence the resolution” of the quo warranto case that the OSG filed against the companies.
He cited several news, commentaries, interviews and statements that came out from the network which tend to influence the outcome of the resolution of the petition.
However, the network said the OSG should trust the SC justices would be able to decide on the merit of the case and would not be swayed by public discussions on the issues.