MANILA, Philippines — A group has asked a local court to temporarily stop the implementation of point-to-point service for UV express units.
In a petition filed Thursday, the Samahan ng mga Tsuper at Operator Pilipinas Genuine Organization (Stop & Go) coalition asked the Quezon City Regional Trial Court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) against memorandum circular (MC) 2019-025.
Under the said circular, UV Express units can “only pick up and drop off passengers at their designated terminals and are prohibited from picking up and dropping off passengers anywhere in between the two terminals.”
READ: UV Express operations to become P2P too
In its petition, Stop & Go argued that MC 2019-025 violates due process, saying no public consultation with stakeholders were conducted prior to the issuance of the circular.
It also argued that the MC is “oppressive and authoritarian” as it abolishes privileges and benefits to commuters and patrons of UV Express units.
“By the stroke of the respondent’s pen, it despotically abolishes the privileges and benefits MC 2009-019 is giving to commuters and patrons of UV Express Service — that is the privilege of disembarking on their desired destination within two kilometers radius,” the petition read.
“The MC 2019-025 took away from the UV Express service the privilege to offer to the public this kind of unique and distinct service,” it added.
Stop & Go also argued that the MC 2019-025 was only based on “conjectures, illicit presumptions, and personal biases” of the current leadership at the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).
“The rationale for the issuance of MC No. 2019-025 is not based on actual and existing conditions. It is devoid of any actual research and practical considerations,” the petition read.
The coalition also claimed the LTFRB “grossly overlooked” the effect of the circular to commuters, including the possible additional cost of travel and additional travel time.
“In sum, Memorandum Circular No. 2019-025 issued by the respondent is inimical, prejudicial, and damaging to the rights of petitioners in particular and the public in general. Thus, implementation of the said memorandum circular must be stopped and restrained,” Stop & Go said. (Editor: Eden Estopace)