“The NCAP is a trap that amounts to institutional extortion. It should be declared unconstitutional by the High Tribunal”
Is the plan of the Metro Manila Development Authority to appeal the Supreme Court decision suspending the No-Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP) valid?
The MMDA claims that from an average of 9,514 traffic violations, the figure rose to 22,736 in September last year and skyrocketed to 32,739 as of May this year.
Disregarding traffic signs made up a huge chunk of traffic infractions with over 24,000, followed by 5,500 violations of the number coding scheme, 2,088 for improper loading and unloading, 682 for road obstructions, 56 violations of the dress code for public utility vehicle drivers, and illegal parking.
At first glance, the MMDA plan to appeal the NCAP suspension is fundamentally sound.
After all, the NCAP was implemented precisely to instill discipline among motorists and reduce traffic violations to a minimum.
But the traffic management system using CCTV cameras and advanced technology to record and process road violations without human intervention has been heavily criticized for being too oppressive.
The cities that implemented the NCAP before the SC suspension were Manila, Quezon City, Parañaque, Valenzuela, Muntinlupa City, and Marikina.
We must raise questions on the MMDA methodology in data gathering.
How did they gather the data?
Is the three-fold increase in traffic violations monitored only from those covered by NCAP areas, or the entire Metro Manila area?
If the violations took place only in NCAP-covered areas, did the agency deploy traffic enforcers there or not?
They should have done so, to make motorists aware that they are being monitored.
What are the MMDA traffic enforcers doing in the meantime that the NCAP is suspended?
Have they been laid idle and not deployed in NCAP areas as they should?
Shouldn’t the MMDA have hired more traffic enforcers to keep traffic violations to a minimum?
The MMDA and LGUs claim the NCAP is beneficial as it compels motorists to strictly observe traffic rules.
Besides, since it eliminates direct contact between traffic enforcers and motorists, it can also prevent bribery.
While the NCAP has a grievance mechanism that allows
motorists to contest the mailed notice of traffic violation via an adjudication system, this involves the inconvenience of personally going to the Traffic Management Office of LGUs or the MMDA and waiting in line to be able to talk to them or to file a counter-affidavit.
But we’ve heard more than enough horror stories regarding NCAP implementation.
A taxi operator complained on TV news that she had been slapped with fines reaching P1 million for supposed traffic violations of her taxi drivers.
Another complained that he was slapped with a P2,000 fine after his car’s front wheels managed to touch the white painted lines of a pedestrian crossing in an intersection, after he stopped to give way to an emergency vehicle.
Four transport groups, the Kilusan sa Pagbabago ng Industriya ng Transportasyon Inc., Pasang Masda, Alliance of Concerted Transport Organizations, and Altodap, have filed a 47-page petition before the Supreme Court asking it to declare the NCAP as unconstitutional.
The transport groups argued that motorists were “under constant threat of being arbitrarily apprehended remotely and issued notices of violation for alleged traffic offenses committed without any contact whatsoever.”
The NCAP, insists a lawyer who had been told to pay thousands of pesos in fines and penalties because traffic authorities sent the notice of violation to a wrong address, violates a person’s right to due process.
Albay Rep. Joey Salceda has also weighed in on this issue and described the scheme as “oppressive.”
Even the Department of Transportation (DOTr) and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) asked the MMDA to suspend the NCAP for public utility vehicles (PUVs).
The two agencies said this would ensure that PUVs will be able to accommodate passengers amid the surge both in traffic volume and passengers in Metro Manila because of the resumption of face-to-face classes.
Many netizens are also up in arms against the traffic scheme and urging LGUs to install 21st century digital traffic lights with the minutes remaining for green lights to turn to amber and red instead of the old ones with no such numbers.
The old traffic lights, they said, stack the cards against motorists and allow the government to demand hefty fines from them without due process.
You can contest the violation but you have to go through a lot of inconvenience going to City Hall, lining up for hours so that you can explain yourself before traffic authorities.
Many, I think, simply cough up the fines imposed so they can avoid all the hassle.
It’s not surprising therefore that there is now a growing clamor from various quarters for NCAP’s suspension.
I’ve said this before and it bears repeating: The NCAP is a trap that amounts to institutional extortion.
It should be declared unconstitutional by the High Tribunal.
(Email: ernhil@yahoo.com)
