EVEN a Supreme Court magistrate has a beef against the controversial No Contact Traffic Apprehension policy being imposed by several government units in Metro Manila.
Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan yesterday complained of the “excessive” fines being imposed by the Paranaque local government for traffic infractions under the city’s NCAP.
Gaerlan aired this concern when he queried Pancho Vasquez, the lawyer representing Paranaque City in the resumption of oral arguments on the consolidated petitions seeking to declare as unconstitutional the NCAP being implemented by the cities of Paranaque, Manila, Muntinlupa, Quezon City and Valenzuela.
The oral arguments were based on the petitions filed by four transport groups — Kilusan sa Pagbabago ng Industriya ng Transportasyon Inc., Pasang Masda, Alliance of Concerned Transport Operators and Altodap — last year asking the SC to declare the NCAP as unconstitutional. The Land Transportation Office has also been included as a respondent.
In seeking the High Court’s intervention, the transport groups argued the NCAP is “unconstitutional,” saying motorists are not being given due process.
A similar petition was also filed before the SC by lawyer Juman Paa, who said he was fined P20,000 for alleged traffic violations based on Manila’s NCAP passed in 2020 by the Manila City Council.
Gaerlan started his questioning by narrating that his driver had been apprehended in Paranaque through the NCAP several times for “beating the red light” even though traffic lights in the area, he added, have no digital numbers feature.
Gaerlan said that as the owner of the vehicle, he had to prove that “I did not commit any violation.”
Vasquez told Gaerlan the offenses can be appealed before the Paranaque LGU but the magistrate said “it’s easier said than done.”
Gaerlan said he personally went to the concerned office to appeal the fine but was told to pay the fine first.
“I don’t know why the penalties are so stiff,” he said.
Associate Justice Mario Lopez also asked the basis of the violations being upheld by the NCAP, specifically in Quezon City.
Lawyer Carlo Lopez Austria, representing Quezon City, said they base the penalties from their city’s traffic code.
Vasquez said Paranaque also bases its penalties on their traffic code.
Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra, who is representing the MMDA and the LTO in the oral arguments, said there is no constitutional violation committed if the LGUs have different applications of the law as long as the requisites of an ordinance are met.
Guevarra also said the penalties imposed under the NCAP are not penal in nature, but are civil and or administrative despite the fine imposed.
Associate Justice Rodil Zalameda recalled that the petitioners argued that the penalties under the NCAP are quasi-criminal in nature.
Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier asked Guevarra to explain the rationale between the “pay now, complain later” in relation to the NCAP’s enforcement.
The Manila City government represented by lawyer Veronica Lladoc said the city does not have such a policy.
Lladoc said only offenses that are undisputed are required to immediately pay the fine under the NCAP.
Gaerlan said the fines may not pose a problem to people like him who are earning somewhat well, but it may pose a problem to ordinary drivers or workers.
He also questioned the legal basis of the fines or penalties being enforced by the NCAP and if the LGUs have a uniform enforcement of fines.
“What is the legal basis of your fines? Where did the ordinance emanate? Why do the fines differ?” he asked Vasquez.
Gaerlan also questioned why the NCAP flags the operator or owner of the offending vehicle, and not the driver. He also asked why NCAP cameras cannot take photos of the drivers.
He said several drivers even told him it would be better to return to the previous policy where they can “settle” the penalty with traffic enforcers.
Vasquez said only the city council can answer Gaerlan’s queries.
Gaerlan also asked Vasquez about Parañaque’s NCAP ordinance on pedestrian lanes, saying there are only a few pedestrian lanes in Metro Manila roads.
The NCAP utilizes CCTV and digital cameras to identify and apprehend traffic violators through videos and images captured of their violation.
Once a violation is detected, the LGU concerned issues traffic citation tickets and mail them directly to the vehicle’s registered owners.
Non-payment of fines within seven days means their vehicles will not be accommodated for re-registration.
