THE Supreme Court has ‘partially lifted’ the temporary restraining order (TRO) it issued nearly 3 years ago on the implementation of the highly controversial ‘No Contact Apprehension Policy’ (NCAP) by limiting the authority to the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA).
In its en banc session last May 20, the highest court granted the ‘urgent motion’ filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), counsel for the MMDA, to have the ban lifted.
The OSG filed the motion in August 2024.
The SC issued the TRO against NCAP last August 30, 2022, based on two petitions filed by Philippine National Taxi Operators Association and Atty. Juman B. Paa (GR 261892) and the Kilusan sa Pagbabago ng Industriya ng Trasportasyon (KAPIT) and other major transport groups (GR 263752).
The petitions assailed the ordinances in support of NCAP issued by the local governments in Metro Manila, particularly in Manila, as “unconstitutional.”
The NCAP transferred the authority of the MMDA and local government units to issue traffic citation tickets and penalize traffic violators to a private company in exchange for ‘profit sharing’ or a share in the amount collected, thus commercializing the laws’ purpose of disciplining traffic violators.
Proponents of what turned out to be an abusive scheme and branded as a “scam” by some quarters, took advantage of the pandemic scare in 2020 and 2021 to push for the program.
The MMDA, for its part, said Metro Manila roads under its supervision are covered by the NCAP. They include:
CM Recto, Rizal Avenue, Delpan, Mendoza Street, Taft Avenue, Magsaysay Avenue, Aurora Boulevard and Quirino Avenue in Manila; Araneta Avenue, Quezon Avenue, Commonwealth Avenue, Katipunan Avenue in Quezon City; the length of EDSA, Roxas Boulevard, Macapagal Avenue and South Superhighway (Osmeña Highway);
Shaw Boulevard, Mandaluyong; Ortigas Avenue, Pasig City; A. Bonifacio, Caloocan; Marcos Highway, Marikina; McArthur Highway, Valenzuela; and, Carlos P Garcia Avenue (C5).
The MMDA added motorists covering their license plates to avoid being captured on camera would be penalized by an additional P5,000.
While partially lifting the TRO in favor of MMDA Resolution 16-01, the SC has not yet deliberated on the merits of the petitions.
Comments are closed.