The Supreme Court has deferred action on the petition of transport groups for the issuance of a temporary restraining order against the implementation of the controversial no-contact apprehension policy being implemented by several local government units in Metro Manila.
The petition was filed by four transport groups — Kilusan sa Pagbabago ng Industriya ng Transportasyon Inc., Pangkalahatang Sagguniang Manila, Suburbs Drivers Association Nationwide, Alliance of Transport Operators and Drivers Association of the Philippines, and Alliance of Concerned Transport Organization.
On Tuesday, SC spokesperson Brian Keith Hosaka confirmed that the magistrates held a regular en banc session and directed respondents to comment on the petition within a non-extendible period of 10 days.
The petitioners are questioning the legality of the NCAP, claiming that it has no basis either in the Republic Act 7924 that serves as the enabling charter of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority and the RA 4136 which created the Land Transportation Office.
Named respondents in the petition were the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, Land Transportation Office, and the cities of Manila, Quezon, Valenzuela, Parañaque and Muntinlupa.
The five LGU have started implementing the NCAP.
They argued that the MMDA has no legal authority to come up with a resolution adopting the implementation of NCAP.
The petitioners said at the time the resolution was passed, there was no valid law or ordinance adopted by local city councils allowing MMDA to expand traffic rules and regulations.
They added that the ordinances of the LGU allowing NCAP are invalid since there are no existing laws passed by Congress that allow the implementation of such regulation.
According to the petitioners, RA 4136 allows only face-to-face apprehension of traffic violators and that traffic violation is a liability of the erring drivers and not the registered owners.