CA upholds traffic ordinances of Metro Manila LGUs

The Court of Appeals has upheld the legality of several traffic ordinances of the local government units of Metro Manila.

 

In a 16-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Edwin Sorongon, the CA's Sixth Division denied a petition filed by several transport groups questioning the different ordinances enacted by Metro Manila's 14 cities and one municipality between 2003 and 2005.

 

Under the LGUs' Ordinance Violation Receipt (OVR) system, the driver's license of a motorist caught violating the Traffic Management Code of the respective cities and municipality would be confiscated by a duly deputized traffic enforcement officer. 

 

In turn, the issued traffic receipt shall serve as the driver's temporary license for five days from the date of its issuance.

 

The transport groups noted that the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) and the Land Transportation Office (LTO) already have their own ticketing system, on top of the LGUs traffic ordinances. The MMDA has the "Traffic Violation Receipt" system, while the LTO has its Temporary Operators Permit (TOP).

 

"Thus, whenever a driver whose license has been confiscated by the LGU traffic enforcer, was again apprehended by the enforcer of the MMDA or LTO, said driver cannot invoke as a defense that his license had already been previously confiscated by the LGU traffic officer thereby subjecting him to another violation i.e. 'driving without license', which is a more serious offense with oppressive penalty," the CA ruling said in underscoring the petitioners' argument.

 

The petitioners said the LGUs OVR system was in violation Section 29 and 62 of Republic Act 4136 - which created the LTO and authorizes the agency to confiscate license of traffic violators -and Section 5 of Republic Act 7924, which created the MMDA, on the agency's function to enforce traffic laws.

 

The CA, however, ruled that the LGU ordinances did not violate the two laws.

 

"On the issue of the legality and constitutionality of the assailed Ordinances, we are of the considered view that the same are not contrary to RA 7294 and RA 4136. Neither are these Ordinances unconstitutional," the CA said.

 

The court said that the LGU ordinances were backed up by Republic Act 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991, which the court said "provided the legal framework thereof enough to give strength to withstand legal and constitutional tests against their validity."

 

The court said that even with the creation of the MMDA in 1995, "the police power granted to the LGUs by the Local Government Code of 1991 was never taken away from them."

 

The court also denied - for insufficient basis - the petitioners' request for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to require the MMDA to enforce a "single ticketing system."

 

"Perusing the records of the case, the petitioners failed to come up with a strong evidence of neglect on the part of the MMDA in the enforcement of its duty to draw up a single ticketing system."

 

The respondents in the case were the local governments of Quezon Citym Manila, Makati, Navotas, Las Pinas, Taguig, Pasig, Pasay, Valenzuela, San Juan, Paranaque, Caloocan, Muntinlupa, Mandaluyong, and Pateros.

 

Among the petitioners were the Federation of Jeepney Operators and Drivers Association of the Philippines, Alliance of Concerned Transport Operations, Alliance of Transport Operators and Drivers Association of the Philippines, and Pangkalahatang Sangguniang Manila and Suburbs Drivers Association, among others. — Mark Merueñas/RSJ, GMA News