Drilon insists SC will question validity of Mislatel's franchise

enablePagination: false
maxItemsPerPage: 10
totalITemsFound:
maxPaginationLinks: 10
maxPossiblePages:
startIndex:
endIndex:

Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon has since disagreed with granting Mislatel the transfer due to alleged violations of its franchise provisions.

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, February 7) — One of the senators who dissented from the vote to approve the transfer of Mindanao Islamic Telephone Company (Mislatel)'s franchise to a consortium said on Thursday that the Supreme Court will question the validity of the congressional body's ruling.

"Ang implikasyon nito ay ipagpatuloy ang pagbigay ng third telco sa grupo ni Dennis Uy, ngunit itong mga bagay na ito ay aabot sa Korte Suprema. Kukwestiyunin ang correctness ng pag-award at ng validity ng Mislatel franchise," Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon said.

[Translation: The implication is the third telco will be awarded to Dennis Uy's group, but this will reach the Supreme Court and they will question the correctness of the award and the validity of the Mislatel franchise.]

Drilon, along with Senators Risa Hontiveros and Panfilo Lacson, voted against the Senate's concurrence with House Concurrent Resolution 23, which formalized the sale of the controlling interest of Mindanao Islamic Telephone Company (Mislatel) to the consortium which will be the new major player. The consortium is composed of Uy's Udenna Corp. and Chelsea Holdings Corp. and the state-run China Telecommunications Corp.

Drilon said there will still be a bicameral conference to iron out conflicting provisions, but he said the House will likely just follow the Senate's decision.

"Pagbalik namin sa Mayo, sigurado gaganapin namin ang bicam. Hindi ako pwedeng kasali doon, kasi ayaw ko 'yung ginawa nila," he said.

[Translation: When we return in May, we will do the bicam. I cannot join them because I don't like what they did.]

The minority leader has since disagreed with granting Mislatel the transfer due to alleged violations of its franchise provisions: that Mislatel failed to inform Congress on its transfer of 75 percent of its shares to new owners, that it failed to operate within a year after it received its franchise in 1998, and that it failed to make a public offering equivalent to 30 percent of its outstanding capital stock within five years from the commencement of operation.