SECOND DIVISION[G.R. No. 143964. July 26, 2004.]GLOBE TELECOM, INC.GLOBE TELECOM, INC.,petitioner, vsvs. THE NATIONALTELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH A.TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH A.SANTIAGO, DEPUTY COMMISSIONERS AURELIO M. UMALI andSANTIAGO, DEPUTY COMMISSIONERS AURELIO M. UMALI andNESTOR DACANAY, and SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC.NESTOR DACANAY, and SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,respondents.D E C I S I O ND E C I S I O NTINGATINGA,J p:Telecommunications services are affected by a high degree of public interest. 1Telephone companies have historically been regulated as common carriers, 2and indeed,the 1936 Public Service Act has classi6ed wire or wireless communications systems as a"public service," along with other common carriers. 3Yet with the advent of rapid technological changes affecting thetelecommunications industry, there has been a marked reevaluation of the traditionalparadigm governing state regulation over telecommunications. For example, the UnitedStates Federal Communications Commission has chosen not to impose strict commonregulations on incumbent cellular providers, choosing instead to let go of the reins and relyon market forces to govern pricing and service terms. 4In the Philippines, a similar paradigm shift can be discerned with the passage of thePublic Telecommunications Act of 1995 ("PTA"). As noted by one of the law's principalauthors, Sen. John Osmeña, under prior laws, the government regulated the entry of pricingand operation of all public telecommunications entities. The new law proposed todismantle gradually the barriers to entry, replace government control on price and incomewith market instruments, and shift the focus of government's intervention towardsensuring service standards and protection of customers. 5Towards this goal, Article II,Section 8 of the PTA sets forth the regulatory logic, mandating that "a healthy competitiveenvironment shall be fostered, one in which telecommunications carriers are free to makebusiness decisions and to interact with one another in providing telecommunicationsservices, with the end in view of encouraging their 6nancial viability while maintainingaffordable rates." 6The statute itself de6nes the role of the government to "promote a fair,eBcient and responsive market to stimulate growth and development of thetelecommunications facilities and services." 7The present petition dramatizes to a degree the clash of philosophies betweentraditional notions of regulation and the au coranttrend to deregulation. Appropriately, itinvolves the most ubiquitous feature of the mobile phone, Short Messaging Service("SMS") 8or "text messaging," which has been transformed from a mere technological fadinto a vital means of communication. And propitiously, the case allows the Court toevaluate the role of the National Telecommunications Commission ("NTC") in this day andage.