Published
February 4, 2018, 10:00 PM By Bernie C. Magkilat
The Philippine
Competition Commission (PCC) is in a bind in concluding an agreement with the
National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) and Energy Regulatory Commission
(ERC), two government agencies critical in the discharge of their function as
the country’s foremost anti-trust watchdog.
PCC Commissioner
Johannes Bernabe told reporters that unlike other government agencies, the
memorandum of agreement with NTC and ERC has been difficult to conclude.
All their MOAs with other
government agencies affirmed or acknowledged what is in the law, that PCC is
the primary and sole authority on competition issues and concerns in the
country.
“We are not able to
conclude MOAs with them as quickly as anticipated because of changes in composition,
which are getting in the way of concluding those MOAs,” he said.
For instance, there is
a pending case lodged by Smart and Globe questioning PCC’s jurisdiction
over the telco duopoly case on their acquisition of San Miguel Corp., the third
telco player in the country. The telco duopoly argued that NTC as the regulator
has jurisdiction over their case, not PCC.
The pending case has
made both PCC and NTC more careful in their moves, he said.
“We don’t want to put
them in an awkward situation because can you imagine if the entities they
regulate (and) actually the PCC has jurisdiction,” said Bernabe.
But Bernabe said they
can adjust the MOA to the effect that it will no longer insist on PCC’s sole
authority on competition over concerns that fall under NTC’s jurisdiction.
He hinted that a MOA
with NTC could be similar with the MOA it forged with the Office of the
Ombudsman which is more to facilitate capabilities to pursue investigation, for
instance on bid rigging since most of the government agencies are engaged in
procurement.
On the ERC case, it has
the EPIRA Law which has a very specific provision on competition, which was
partly repealed with the passage of the Philippine Competition Act. But there
are also some provisions under Section 43 that need clearer interpretation.
Even if this particular
issue is resolved, Bernabe said the ERC leadership has remained vacant with the
suspension of its top officials by MalacaƱang.
“Who will sign the MOA
in behalf of ERC,” he said.
The lack of MOA with
these two agencies has no implications yet on the work of PCC, but these
agreements should be able to facilitate sharing of information.
So far, the PCC has
MOAs with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, SEC, PSE, Insurance Commission,
Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines, Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, and Commission on Audit.
PCC has yet to sign an
agreement with the Department of Trade and Industry because although consumer
protection is not in their mandate, the focus of its policies is towards consumer
welfare.
The MOA with DTI is
more of ensuring that their decisions are clearly for the benefit of consumers
and therefore such messaging should be properly conveyed to consumers.
No comments:
Post a Comment