The Philippine Competition Commission (PCC), the country’s anti-trust watchdog, has set up a task force that will look into the issue of abuse of dominance involving Internet exclusivity deal in condominiums and subdivisions as complaints rise.
PCC Chairman Arsenio M. Balisacan revealed this during the “Webinar for Reporters: An Introduction to Abuse of Dominance in the
“Due to the number of such complaints we have received and cognizant of the importance of internet services amid the pandemic, we set up a task force that will look into similar cases,” said Balisacan.
Balisacan noted that its first abuse of dominance case involved a condo-internet exclusivity deal that limited condominium residents’ choice of an internet service provider.
More than a year after PCC had resolved the case, Balisacan said the agency has started receiving various complaints and queries about similar cases.
“After reviewing the reports, we filed similar charges against another condo developer last February and are currently investigating a subdivision owner,” he said.
In involving the press in its campaign, Balisacan cited the press for its indispensable and critical role in society, especially in terms of setting the agenda, framing public issues, and amplifying advocacies for the good of the public.
“From our perspective, protecting market competition and advancing consumer welfare rank high in the list of advocacies that the press should champion,” he said.
The PCC, being a relatively new government agency, is still unknown to many Filipinos. Yet, he said, the principles of fairness that we at the PCC strive to uphold are not unfamiliar to the public.
Even before the passage of the Philippine Competition Act or PCA, Balisacan said that many of its stakeholders already understand the concept of abuse of dominance as manifested in the most basic ways.
Examples include when dominant companies charge exploitative or unreasonably discriminatory prices to consumers and competitors, or set unfair trading conditions to suppliers and distributors.
However, he said, the problem lies in the gap between what the public feels or thinks is unfair and what they know is actually punishable under the PCA.
“Many abusive practices go unchecked and unpunished, remaining as hearsays or open secrets mostly because of this lack of knowledge. On the other hand, knowing well what is lawful and not can bolster the confidence of consumers and firms to report abusive acts to the PCC. As the trite expression goes, ‘knowledge is power’,” he added.
According to Balisacan, this experience though simple is a powerful testament to how the media and competition authorities can work together to protect consumer welfare.
“As I have said before in countless discussions, the PCC can do little unless we mainstream competition principles. Effective competition enforcement and advocacy require support from all stakeholders, including the media. Given your unrivaled access to consumers and the general public, you have a huge potential in helping us bridge the gaps in public awareness of the PCA and encourage more consumers to reach out to the PCC. Moreover, as competition champions in the press, you can spotlight in various platforms potential competition issues and other competition advocacies.”
“We have always asserted that competition is an important lever that the government should exploit in its pursuit of inclusive development. Fair competition pushes businesses to come up with innovative and better-quality products and services at competitive prices. It therefore benefits the public, especially the poor.”