Philippine lawmakers rejected ABS-CBN’s franchise renewal after Duterte threats

On 10 July 2020, a committee in the Philippine House of Representatives rejected ABS-CBN's application for a new 25-year franchise, keeping one of the country's largest broadcasters (opens in a new tab) off free-to-air television after its previous franchise expired. The vote followed years of public hostility from President Rodrigo Duterte (opens in a new tab) toward the network over its reporting and its handling of political advertising.

What happened?

ABS-CBN had already stopped its main broadcast operations in May after the National Telecommunications Commission issued a cease-and-desist order when the old franchise expired. The July committee vote rejected the company's bid to return under a renewed legislative franchise. Reuters described the decision as a major setback for a broadcaster that had repeatedly angered Duterte.

Duterte had accused ABS-CBN of unfair treatment and had publicly threatened to block its franchise. The broadcaster said it had operated lawfully and denied accusations used against it during congressional hearings. Supporters of the denial argued that Congress was exercising its constitutional authority over broadcast franchises and that the network had to answer regulatory and corporate questions like any other applicant.

The effect was concrete: a national broadcaster lost its free-to-air platform, employees faced job losses, and a major independent source of news was removed from the broadcast market during Duterte's presidency.

Who is responsible?

The formal decision belonged to the lawmakers who voted in committee. Duterte did not cast those votes, so responsibility for the legal denial cannot be collapsed into a claim that he personally ordered the congressional result. His role is established through repeated public threats against ABS-CBN and his political conflict with the company before the franchise decision.

That distinction matters because presidential pressure and legislative responsibility can coexist. Amnesty International and other press-freedom groups treated the denial as part of a hostile environment for critical media; lawmakers who supported the rejection said the vote reflected legal and regulatory concerns rather than censorship.

What is established and what is not?

It is established that the committee rejected the franchise on 10 July 2020, that ABS-CBN remained off its principal free-to-air frequencies, and that Duterte had repeatedly threatened the network before the vote. It is also established that the vote was taken by legislators rather than by presidential decree.

The available evidence does not establish that Duterte secretly controlled every legislator's decision or that every objection raised in the hearings was fabricated. The accountability finding is therefore precise: presidential hostility formed an important political context, while Congress carried out the formal act that kept the broadcaster off the air.