SC voids Metro Manila LGUs' issuance of traffic violation tickets

SC voids Metro Manila LGUs’ issuance of traffic violation tickets

/ 04:12 PM March 05, 2024

SC voids Metro Manila LGUs' issuance of traffic violation tickets

The Supreme Court (SC) invalidates the clause in 14 ordinances of Metro Manila’s local government units that authorize the issuance of traffic violation receipts. SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES / STOCK

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) invalidated the clause in 14 ordinances of Metro Manila’s local government units (LGUs) that authorize the issuance of traffic violation receipts.

In a ruling, the SC stressed that the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) has the exclusive power to come up with policies on road traffic.

Article continues after this advertisement

The SC’s ruling covers the traffic ticketing provision in the ordinances of Makati, Taguig, Parañaque, Pasay, Quezon City, San Juan, Navotas, Las Piñas, Pasig, Muntinlupa, Mandaluyong, Valenzuela, Caloocan, Manila, and the municipality of Pateros.

FEATURED STORIES

“Traffic management and enforcement of traffic rules are explicitly within the domain of the MMDA’s powers as laid down in the MMDA law,” the high court states in a 41-page decision released to the public on Tuesday. The decision was penned by Associate Justice Benjamin Caguioa.

The SC granted the petition for review filed by various transport groups, which sought to reverse the Court of Appeals’ ruling that affirmed the legality of the ticketing provision in the ordinances of the 15 LGUs in Metro Manila.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: MMDA to fully roll out single ticketing system in Metro Manila by Q3

Article continues after this advertisement

According to the SC, Section 5 of Republic Act 7924 or the MMDA Law mandates the body to “install and administer a single ticketing system…and confiscate and suspend or revoke driver’s licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and regulations…”

Article continues after this advertisement

“All told, the Court thus declares as invalid the common provision in the said traffic codes or ordinances of the LGUs in Metro Manila empowering each of them to issue OVRs to erring drivers and motorists. The other provisions of the traffic codes or ordinances remain valid and unaffected by this decision,” the high court stressed.

MMDA deputies

The SC further said that “LGUs in Metro Manila may participate in [enforcement of traffic laws, rules and regulations] only when their traffic enforcers are deputized by the MMDA.”

Article continues after this advertisement

Aside from issuing tickets, the SC prohibited the cities of Makati, Taguig, Parañaque, Pasay, Quezon City, San Juan, Navotas, Las Piñas, Pasig, Mandaluyong, Muntinlupa, Valenzuela, Caloocan, and Manila; and the municipality of Pateros from confiscating licenses by their respective traffic enforcers unless the MMDA deputizes them.

READ: MMDA questions tag on PH capital as worst in traffic

The high court then directed all Metro Manila LGUs to comply with the Joint Metro Traffic Circular No. 12-01 issued in 2012 by the MMDA. The memo sets the guidelines for implementing the Uniform Ticketing System in Metro Manila.

Under the Joint Circular, the Uniform Ticketing System shall be implemented within the 14 cities and one municipality in Metro Manila.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

As of 2021, the LGUs that have complied with the circular and been implementing the single ticketing system are Mandaluyong, San Juan, Manila, Taguig, Pasig, and Parañaque cities.

TAGS:

No tags found for this post.
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.