ADVERTISEMENT
Filtered By: Topstories
News

Integrated transport terminals questioned anew before Supreme Court


+
Add GMA on Google
Make this your preferred source to get more updates from this publisher on Google.
Another group has asked the Supreme Court to strike down as unconstitutional the Aquino administration's policy creating "integrated transport terminals" in Metro Manila.
 
In its petition, the Coalition of Filipino Consumers Against the Southwest Terminal asked the high court to issue a temporary restraining order against the implementation of the ITS.

The group claimed it has the backing of 100,000 commuters whose signatures they have gathered.
 
The controversial transport policy prevents provincial public utility buses from entering the National Capital Region.

Buses using the Coastal Road or Manila-Cavite Expressway are barred from entering beyond Parañaque City.
 
These buses are required to end their routes at the Southwest Interim Transport Terminal at the Uniwide Coastal Mall in Baclaran, Parañaque City. Commuters then have to transfer to city buses or other public utility vehicles operating within the city.
 
The group said commuters coming from the south had to "shell out extra money" to reach their destinations in Metro Manila. It said implementing the contested policy is similar to directly imposing taxes on commuters.

First petition

In September, two commuters from Cavite filed a joint petition to have the new transport system declared unconstitutional.
 
In their 38-page plea, petitioners Panita Ladera and Dolores Salanga, commuters from Cavite who travel daily to work in Manila, asked the high court to issue a temporary restraining order against three orders related to the newly-introduced transport policy, namely:
 
  • Executive Order No. 67, which establishes an Integrated Transport System (ITS) issued by President Benigno Aquino III
  • Administrative Order No. 40, which creates "Interim Transport Terminals" in preparation for the ITS, also issued by the President
  • Memorandum Circular No. 2013-004 which amends the route of provincial buses coming from provinces south of Metro Manila, issued by the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).
The petitioners said these three orders violate their rights to due process and equal protection guaranteed by the 1987 Philippine Constitution because these "clipped the franchise route of PUBs originating from south of Metro Manila without due notice and public hearing."
 
The petitioners also said AO 40 and MC 2013-004 violated Section 16 of Commonwealth Act No. 146, or the Public Service Law, for having been implemented without due notice and public hearing.
 
They also said the transport policies are "in conflict with the time-honored doctrine of public interest and convenience in the exercise of the LTFRB's authority to regulate public conveniences."
 
The petitioners also cited a separate bus ban already being implemented by the Manila City government, saying the policies will only affect bus-riding commuters since they do not cover jeepneys or Asian utility vehicles plying the same route.
 
The two petitioners, who filed the plea on behalf of all commuters of provincial buses from south of Metro Manila, claimed other commuters have already joined the call for the suspension and abolition of the transport system, and attached a manifesto with their signatures.
 
Named respondents in the September petition were Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa, the LTFRB, the Department of Transportation and Communication, the Department of Budget and Management, and the Metro Manila Development Authority. — JDS, GMA News