July 14th, 2025
Joey Sarte Salceda, Chair of the Institute for Risk and Strategic Studies (Salceda Research), has raised red flags over the Konektadong Pinoy Bill, urging President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to withhold his signature and instead return the measure to Congress for further deliberation. “The objective of expanding internet access is well-intentioned,” Salceda said. “But the current form of the bill introduces structural risks to infrastructure policy, regulatory balance, public accountability, and even national emergency readiness. It may also accelerate the decline of our landline system, which remains essential in times of disaster.”
Risks to Infrastructure Investment According to Salceda Research, the bill weakens incentives for capital-intensive rural internet deployment. New entrants would be allowed to operate without building physical infrastructure. While fiber-to-the-home systems cost between seven hundred and fifteen hundred US dollars per urban user and up to six thousand US dollars per rural household, these new providers may offer services at a fraction of the cost by reselling bandwidth or using satellite, without contributing to national network build-out.
The bill also exempts these providers from the legislative franchise requirement, removing one of the few existing tools to impose universal service obligations, especially in Geographically Isolated and Disadvantaged Areas. Collapse of Voice Services and Threats to Emergency Response Salceda pointed out that fixed-line subscribers in the Philippines have already dropped from six point eight million in 2011 to below four point nine million in 2022. Teledensity has fallen to the lowest levels among ASEAN-5 countries.
The bill exempts only data providers from the franchise requirement, which may structurally encourage operators to discontinue voice services. “Unlike mobile and wireless systems, traditional landlines continue to function during power outages because they are powered directly by the telephone exchange, which maintains backup power systems,” Salceda explained. “They do not rely on cell towers or local electricity supply, making them the most reliable means of communication during typhoons, earthquakes, and other large-scale emergencies.”
Regulatory and Market Imbalance The bill introduces a dual-track regulatory regime. New data-only providers would be allowed to operate with mere administrative registration with the Department of Information and Communications Technology. Meanwhile, incumbent operators would continue to be subject to legislative franchising, service quality reporting, spectrum coordination, universal service requirements, and emergency response obligations. Salceda warned that this arrangement creates a fundamental imbalance. New entrants would be free of the obligations borne by legacy players, while still benefiting from backbone infrastructure and interconnection built and maintained by traditional telecommunications companies.
Gaps in Ownership Transparency and Market Accountability Salceda also raised concerns about the lack of public ownership requirements for new providers. The bill does not require stock listing, minimum public float, or shareholding disclosures. In contrast, major telcos such as PLDT and Globe are publicly listed and are subject to audit, regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and shareholder scrutiny. He also pointed out that while the bill prohibits foreign state-owned enterprises from entering the market, it fails to impose a domestic equity floor.
This omission leaves the market vulnerable to excessive control by private foreign actors without public oversight. Recommendations for Executive Action Salceda urged the President to exercise his power under the Constitution to return the bill to Congress with recommendations for cure. He suggested that a revised legislative framework should include the following provisions: A clear legal and technical definition of data-only providers, excluding any form of voice communication including emergency services Minimum infrastructure investment obligations for all providers regardless of franchise status Proportional coverage requirements in geographically disadvantaged areas Public float or stock listing requirements for providers exceeding certain revenue or subscriber thresholds Protection and preservation of legacy landline infrastructure until reliable alternatives are operational on a national scale .
“This bill can still be crafted to promote digital inclusion while protecting long-term infrastructure resilience, service equity, and public accountability,” Salceda emphasized. “We respectfully urge the President to return the measure to Congress for improvement.”