As the Supreme Court here in the Philippines has yet to make a final decision about the legality of the No-Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP), the local government units (LGUs) of Metro Manila cannot implement the said policy yet when it comes to traffic violations, the Manila Bulletin reported. Take note that the SC issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against NCAP in August 2022.
To put things in perspective, posted below is the excerpt from the Manila Bulletin news report. Some parts in boldface…
Local government units (LGUs) in Metro Manila cannot implement the no-contact apprehension policy (NCA) for traffic violations while the two petitions challenging the policy’s alleged unconstitutionality are still pending with the Supreme Court (SC).
The SC issued on Aug. 30, 2022 a temporary restraining order (TRO) against NCAP and the order is enforceable until further orders from the High Court.
The SC wrapped up early tonight, Jan. 24, the legal debates on the two petitions. The first oral arguments were held last Dec. 6.
After the oral arguments, the parties to the cases were given a non-extendible period of 30 days from Jan. 24 to file their respective memorandum in amplification the issues tackled during the debates.
Given the complexities of the issues involved in the NCAP – modes of implementation like systems and mechanics, alleged exorbitant penalties for traffic violations, alleged violations of due process like pay first before complaining, and issues on privacy rights, among other things – the SC – legal quarters said – is not expected to resolve the petitions immediately after the 30-day period to file memoranda.
There were two petitions against the alleged unconstitutionality of NCAP which utilizes closed-circuit television and digital cameras to identify and apprehend traffic violators through videos and images of their violations.
Once a violation is detected and the plate number of the vehicle is recorded, the local government unit issues traffic citation tickets and mail them directly to the vehicle’s registered owner. Data on ownership of the vehicle is obtained from the Land Transportation Office (LTO).
Non-payment of fines within seven days would mean the subject vehicle cannot be re-registered by the owner.
NCAP in Metro Manila is operated by a private firm, QPAX Traffic Systems, Inc., which gets a share ranging from 60 to 70 percent of the total amount of fines collected by the LGUs for traffic violations.
In one LGU in Metro Manila alone, the SC was told that the city government had collected close to P200 million in traffic violation penalties before the enforcement of NCAP was stopped. Of the amount 65 percent had been remitted to QPAX which was reported to have invested only about P50 million for NCAP devices and equipment in that city.
The first petition was filed by the Kilusan sa Pagbabago ng Industriya ng Transportasyon, Inc. (KAPIT), Pangkalahatang Saggunian Manila and Suburbs Drivers Association Nationwide (Pasang-Masda), Alliance of Transport Operators and Drivers Association of the Philippines (ALTODAP), and Alliance of Concerned Transport Organization (ACTO).
They told the SC the implementation of NCAP is unconstitutional and thus invalid.
At the time the first petition was filed, the NCAP was being implemented in Metro Manila by the local governments of Quezon City, Manila, Valenzuela City, Muntinlupa City, and Parañaque City through their ordinances based on the 2016 resolution of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) which ordered the re-implementation of NCAP.
The second petition was filed by lawyer Juman B. Paa who also pleaded for the issuance of a TRO against the NCAP being implemented in the City of Manila.
In his petition, Paa asked the SC to declare unconstitutional Manila City Ordinance No. 8676, series of 2020, on NCAP.
He said the Manila Traffic and Parking Bureau (MTPB) has access to the database of the LTO relative to the details of the vehicle, including the name of the owner and address.
Paa said that “if a private company is performing the function of the MTPB, their access to the close circuit television (CCTV) footage might be used for other purposes like surveillance of a particular person thus exposing citizens to risks against safety and privacy.”
Solicitor General Menardo I. Guevarra said that “while NCAP cameras capture vehicle images that violate traffic rules and regulations, they are neither designed to capture, nor are these cameras capable of obtaining, facial recognition images of the drivers.”
“This fact attenuates and weakens petitioners’ claim of violation of their right to privacy,” Guevarra said.
“More importantly, the sharing by the Land Transportation Office of vehicle registration data with the local governments involves information necessary to carry out functions of public authorities,” he said.
“It is therefore a sharing of personal information which is expressly excluded from the coverage of the Data Privacy Act under Republic Act No. 10173,” he stressed.
Let me end this piece by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this new development? Do you believe that the NCAP is very prone to abuse by the LGUs? Do you believe that the LGUs want to use NCAP to easily raise funds? Do you believe that NCAP actually helps solve traffic problems and helps discipline motorists? Do you think Parañaque City is a good example of a city that implemented the NCAP? Do you believe that NCAP violates a motorist’s privacy in relation to the collection of personal and vehicular data? Did you pay close attention on how your city mayor reacted whenever the NCAP gets challenged?
You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.
Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below and also please consider sharing this article to others. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. If you want to support my website, please consider making a donation. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco/.
For more South Metro Manila community news and developments, come back here soon. Also say NO to fake news, NO to irresponsible journalism, NO to misinformation, NO to plagiarists, NO to reckless publishers and NO to sinister propaganda when it comes to news and developments. For South Metro Manila community developments, member engagements, commerce and other relevant updates, join the growing South Metro Manila Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/342183059992673