A familiar scene by now on Edsa are vehicles barely moving. Groups express alarm at the prospect of 489 more buses adding to the chaos. —JAM STA. ROSA
An official of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) on Tuesday said the status of 489 bus franchises, which had been tagged as “Lazarus” by critics because they were being revived from the dead, was being consulted with the legal division of the Department of Transportation (DOTr) amid reports that the LTFRB had already approved their registration.
Aileen Lizada, LTFRB board member, said her office was coordinating with Transport Undersecretary Reneir Paul Yebra, of the DOTr’s legal division, to determine what action to take on the franchises.
But Martin Delgra III, LTFRB chair, said in a phone interview that he had already issued a compliance order last week allowing the registration of the 489 franchises.
SC TRO
Asked if the order did not conflict with a Supreme Court temporary restraining order, Delgra said “the conflict is relative to those who would be adversely affected.”
He said the compliance order that he issued was consistent with court rulings, including one that was issued by the Court of Appeals (CA) division headed by Justice Normandy Pizzaro, who had also issued the controversial ruling that set free former Palawan Gov. Joel Reyes. Reyes had been indicted for the murder of environmentalist Gerry Ortega.
The CA division ruled in favor of a group of former employees of the now defunct Pantranco bus company who laid claim to the 489 franchises left unused for years by the bus firm as a form of payment for back wages and other benefits.
Nontransferable
The CA decision overruled a decision made by the then Department of Transportation and Communication under the Aquino administration to declare the franchises dead already and nontransferable since franchises were privileges that expire when unused for long.
The workers’ claim was initially opposed by a bus operator which was now one of those that stood to benefit from the franchises.
The CA ruling was questioned at the Supreme Court and the high court’s First Division, headed by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, issued a temporary restraining order against enforcement of the CA decision.
Critics of the CA ruling said it would pave the way for aggravation of road gridlock in Metro Manila and comes amid efforts by the Duterte administration to find a solution to the traffic crisis. An estimate made by Japan International Cooperation Agency puts economic losses due to road congestion at P2.4 billion per day.
The House of Representatives is currently deliberating on a proposed Traffic Crisis Act that would give the President emergency powers to deal with the daily ordeal of congestion in Metro Manila’s roads. —Jovic Yee