Group 9

 
The constitutional restriction to
ownership and management
applies to mass media company.

The Philippine Constitution guarantees that interests of domestic companies are protected and that
Philippine nationals thrive in their own economy under Sec. 11, Art. XVI of the 1987 Constitution:
“Section 11. (1) The ownership and management of mass media shall
be limited to citizens of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or
associations, wholly owned and managed by such citizens, xxx”
This provision was further emphasized under Section 8(a) of Republic Act 7042 as amended by
Republic Act 8179 or the Foreign Investments Act of 1991which states that there shall be a list to
enumerate of the areas of activities reserved to Philippine Nationals.
The law provided as well a Negative List that emphasizes what companies are allowed and their
maximum stock holding wherein mass media falls under List A1
Application of the Constitutional
Prohibition on Foreign Ownership
and Management of Mass Media

Moreover, in the case of Gamboa vs. Teves2the Supreme Court stated the rationale behind this
Constitutional mandate is to protect and reserve the right of economic activities to Philippine
Nationals.
The term mass media was further defined under Ministry of Justice Opinion No. 243 which refers
to any medium of communication in its plain meaning.
In a decision promulgated on January 11, 2018 by the Securities and Exchange Commission En
Banc involving Rappler, Inc., a mass media company who was deemed to be owned and manage
by a foreign entity, it held that:
“The Constitutional and Statutory prohibition with regard to foreign
control of Mass Media is absolute. It means to isolate the Filipino
masses from all foreign influence (even apparently “harmless” ones)
sent via “any medium of communication.” The harm is implicit in the
grant of control to a foreigner, xxx”(emphasis)

                                                                                                                       
1
 Promulgating the Eleventh Regular Foreign Investment Negative List, E.O. No. 65, List A (2018)
2
 Gamboa vs Teves, 652 SCRA 690, 797 (2011), p. 730-732  
3
 Ministry of Justice Opinion No. 24, Series of 1986