Is the NTC’s Renewed Scrutiny of Telcos a Sign That Another Player Is Coming?

• Tech Watch PH

THE INTERFACE

Is the National Telecommunications Commission’s (NTC) renewed scrutiny of the country’s three major telecommunications operators simply part of its regulatory mandate, or could it be an early indication that another major player is coming into the Philippine telecommunications market? 

Long before the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) was established, the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) was already making headlines whenever Filipinos complained about slow internet, dropped calls, and poor mobile signals.

Back then, the NTC was often at the center of telecommunications discussions. Consumers demanded better services, operators faced criticism, and regulators were expected to act.

That landscape began changing in 2016, when Republic Act No. 10844 created the DICT and placed the NTC among its attached agencies.

Since then, the NTC has appeared less prominently in some major public discussions surrounding telecommunications and connectivity, even as it continued exercising its regulatory mandate.

Over the following years, fiber networks expanded, infrastructure sharing gained momentum, and 5G technology reached Filipino consumers.

By 2021, DITO Telecommunity had commercially launched its services, joining Globe Telecom and Smart Communications as the country’s third major mobile operator.

The NTC returned to the spotlight in 2022 with the implementation of the SIM Registration Act, overseeing registration requirements and the eventual deactivation of unregistered SIM cards.

But away from the headlines, the commission continued another important responsibility: monitoring telecommunications service quality.

Quality-of-service assessments were nothing new. The NTC had long been conducting mobile broadband validation, identifying weak-signal areas, and directing operators to address network deficiencies.

Meanwhile, the country’s telecommunications policy was entering another chapter.

In July 2025, debates surrounding the proposed Konektadong Pinoy Act raised concerns about whether opening the connectivity market to more providers could expose the country to additional cybersecurity risks.

The DICT defended the legislation, maintaining that security requirements and regulatory oversight would remain in place.

On August 24, 2025, Republic Act No. 12234, or the Konektadong Pinoy Act, lapsed into law, establishing a framework intended to encourage competition and lower barriers to entry in the country’s data transmission industry.

Then came 2026.

The NTC continued its mobile broadband validation activities during the first and second quarters. But by September, its regulatory actions were drawing renewed public attention.

The commission was involved in implementing the temporary restriction on Discord on September 23 over online safety concerns.

Around the same period, the NTC issued show-cause orders against Globe, Smart, and DITO over mobile broadband deficiencies identified in selected areas of Metro Manila, with daily penalties of P100,000 attached to the orders.

The telecommunications industry questioned the testing methodology and basis of the orders, while the commission maintained its regulatory enforcement efforts.

Then came the October figures.

Of the 142 mobile broadband test campaigns conducted across the three operators, 113 recorded download speeds exceeding 50 Mbps, while 29 fell below that benchmark.

That means approximately 79.6 percent of the campaigns exceeded the threshold.

However, these were selected tests in Metro Manila, not a nationwide assessment. The findings also revealed uneven performance in text messaging and call reliability.

The 29 deficiencies deserve regulatory attention, but the 113 campaigns that exceeded the download speed benchmark are equally part of the results.

Neither figure alone provides a complete picture of Philippine connectivity.

And this is where the recent developments become interesting.

The NTC has been checking network quality for years. Its recent enforcement actions are therefore not evidence of a newly established regulatory responsibility.

So why is the regulator now attracting renewed public attention, particularly through enforcement actions against the country’s three major telecommunications operators?

Perhaps the commission is simply doing its job, ensuring that operators meet service standards and remain accountable to consumers.

There is nothing wrong with that. Regulatory enforcement is necessary, especially when service deficiencies remain unresolved.

But the timing also coincides with the government’s broader push to encourage more competition in the connectivity market.

On October 19, newly appointed DICT Secretary Robert Joseph Montes De Claro pledged cheaper, faster, and more reliable internet while prioritizing simpler licensing procedures for internet service providers.

With the Konektadong Pinoy Act already in place, the country has established a legal framework intended to encourage more participants in the data transmission market.

There is nothing wrong with welcoming additional players. More competition could encourage innovation, expand consumer choices, and improve services.

But could the NTC’s renewed public scrutiny of existing operators also be strengthening the argument for introducing another major telecommunications player?

There is no established evidence connecting the commission’s enforcement actions to preparations for a fourth nationwide mobile operator. The Konektadong Pinoy Act itself does not establish that another major mobile operator is coming.

Still, the timing invites a closer look at how regulatory enforcement and the government’s competition agenda are unfolding alongside each other.

The issue is not whether the NTC should penalize operators that fail to meet service standards. That is part of its mandate.

Rather, it is whether the public is being given a complete picture of the industry’s performance, including the deficiencies identified, the standards met, and the improvements still needed.

The country has already experienced the transition from two major mobile operators to three. Any discussion about introducing another should consider whether remaining connectivity challenges stem from insufficient competition, infrastructure limitations, or gaps in regulatory enforcement.

The NTC has every reason to hold telecommunications companies accountable. The DICT, meanwhile, has a responsibility to encourage investment and expand connectivity.

But with the Konektadong Pinoy Act already opening opportunities for additional connectivity providers, the case for greater competition should stand on its own merits.

If the NTC’s renewed prominence happens to coincide with efforts to encourage another major player, why should the discussion focus primarily on the shortcomings of existing operators rather than a comprehensive assessment of the market?

The country deserves to know whether another major player would address gaps that existing operators have yet to resolve, and whether greater competition would translate into meaningful improvements for consumer