(INQUIRER FILE PHOTO / GRIG C. MONTEGRANDE)
MANILA, Philippines – A group of jeepney drivers and operators whose petition challenging the constitutionality of a provision in the controversial public utility vehicle modernization program was dismissed has asked the Supreme Court(SC) to reconsider its ruling.
In an 11-page motion for reconsideration, Bayyo Association Incorporated and its president, Anselmo Perweg, through their legal counsel Sonny Matula, said the SC “seem to overlook the practical realities faced by those on the ground.”
Their petition was dismissed for being procedurally infirm.
In dismissing their petition, the SC said the group did not have the requisite legal standing to file the petition.
The SC said petitioners failed to provide proof that it is a legitimate association of PUJ operators and drivers.
It added that the group merely submitted a certificate of registration from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) which proves that it is a registered organization but does not establish if its members are PUJ operators and drivers.
In their motion for reconsideration, the group maintained that they are legitimate jeepney drivers and operators operating in different parts of Metro Manila and recognized by the SEC who are directly impacted by the PUV modernization program even as they pleaded for the High Court to take a more “liberal approach” when it comes to deciding on the issue of legal standing.
“Petitioners invoke the application of a more liberal approach to legal standing, acknowledging the profound implications of the PUVMP on their livelihoods, economic stability, and ability to continue their operations under new regulatory requirements,” the motion stated.
The group added that: “The argument for liberal interpretation is further strengthened by the role of the judiciary in safeguarding the rights of individuals and entities against potentially unjust or discriminatory government actions. By allowing these petitioners to challenge the PUVMP, this Court will affirm its commitment to social justice, ensuring that those with less economic power and societal influence have a platform to voice their concerns and seek redress for grievances,” it added.
On Perweg’s position that he has the right to seek redress as a taxpayer, he said the justification would be “the billions of pesos of the national budget appropriated for the PUVMP,” which he said does not appear to be not being put to good use considering the “lackadaisical” implementation of the program and the corruption accusations on the implementing agencies.
Regarding the violation of the hierarchy of courts, they said they invoked the issue of transcendental importance in going directly to the High Court.
“When the Constitutional issues involved are of transcendental importance, the courts are not prevented by the paralysis of procedural niceties when they are clearly faced by the need for substantial protection for the people,” the petition stated.
“Direct resort to this Court is justified since what is at issue is the constitutionality of a department order which affects peoples’ constitutional right to due process and equal protection particularly the right to pursue a lawful calling and profession and the right to earn a living among other important issues prejudicial to the well-being of thousands of drivers and operators of traditional jeepneys and their families,” it added.
Another petition was filed before the SC by militant transport group PISTON and its allied organizations in December 2023 which also questioned the PUV consolidation and modernization program.
The SC has yet to rule on the petition.