September 6, 2021
Dear Daniel Gerard Diaz,
Greetings!
Thank you for your request dated Sep 01, 2021 10:16:01 AM under Executive Order No. 2 (s. 2016) on Freedom of Information in the Executive Branch.
Your Request
You asked whether a (i) trunk line (direct link between telephones), (ii) Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) trunk and (iii) “text blasting” through Amber or SMSuite are considered as either Telecommunications or Internet Service Provider (ISP) in accordance with Republic Act No. 9184 and its IRR.
Response to Request
While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance this Office does not have all the information you have requested.
It must be noted that the attached Guidelines on the Procurement of Water, Electricity, Telecommunications and Internet Service Providers (Guidelines) issued through GPPB Resolution No. 011-2007 dated 31 May 2007 governs the procurement of the above-cited public services by government agencies as end-users. Title 1 of the same Guidelines, which provides for its scope and application, described Telecommunications as “landline and cellular phone(s)”, whereas ISPs as “initial infrastructure requirements (e.g. cabling) necessary in the provision of internet access.”
Following the above description, it is clear that a trunk line or the link between two telephone switchboards is considered telecommunications.
On the other hand, the same Guidelines did not classify, reference to, nor define Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Trunk and Text Blasting, either through Amber or SMSuite, as either telecommunications or ISP.
Thus, considering that the Guidelines is silent on whether SIP Trunk and Text Blasting may be considered telecommunications or ISP services, and inasmuch as this Office is without authority and technical expertise to determine the similarities, distinctions, and other factual considerations between the two, this Office shall defer to the definition of SIP trunk and text blasting and their classification as either telecommunications or ISP on relevant government agencies, such as but not limited to, the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) and the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) for further guidance on the matter. In view thereof, we recommend that you contact any of the following agencies thru their e-mail or FOI Portal:
1. DICT at
[email protected] or https://www.foi.gov.ph/requests?agency=DICT; or
2. NTC at
[email protected] or https://www.foi.gov.ph/requests?agency=NTC
For further assistance you may review the FAQ section of the eFOI site: https://www.foi.gov.ph/help.
Your right to request a review
If you are unhappy with this response to your FOI request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response by writing to Executive Director, Atty. Rowena Candice M. Ruiz, thru e-mail address at
[email protected]. Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made within 15 calendar days from the date when you received this letter. We will complete the review and tell you the result within 30 calendar days from the date when we receive your review request.
If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Office of the President under Administrative Order No. 22 (s. 2011).
Thank you.
Respectfully,
FOI Decision Maker, GPPB-TSO
