Rider-turned-congressman retired Col. Bonifacio Bosita is proving to be a real ally of hundreds of thousands of motorcycle riders when he filed his first bill (HB 3666) or An Act of Enforcing Fair Traffic Apprehension.
Before his election, Bosita was more popular for his social media vlog, defending wrongly accused riders and drivers.
His bill calls for providing compensation for motorists wrongly charged with traffic violations and the erring traffic enforcer with an administrative case.
In his explanatory note, Bosita said “being apprehended by a traffic enforcement personnel can sometimes be a daunting experience especially if the apprehension was improperly made. Improper traffic apprehension may be attributed to the existing ticketing quota system, the percentage on fines and penalties being given by some of the Local Government Units to its traffic enforcers and deputized enforcers, or simply the lack of necessary knowledge by some enforcers in the implementation of traffic laws, rules and regulations, or by intent for personal gains.
This proposed bill applies to enforcement by actual personnel, but traffic management has now evolved digitally. This should also apply to the No Contact Apprehension Policy currently being implemented by most LGUs, especially in Metro Manila.
Installed CCTV cameras monitor traffic violations in major intersections and the most influential person, in this case, is the designated operator, who monitors and evaluates possible violations, captures the acts of violation digitally, and have them sent to the system.
He/she can decide like a god on what vehicles and kind of a person should be meted penalties—usually stiff fines that most found to be too oppressive, especially for the poor public utility drivers or riders.
What if the violator is a government vehicle, owned by a councilor or the mayor? He can turn a blind eye and keep his job or play hero and risk his future.
What other details should be included in Bosita’s bill if it has to include NCAP?
Since there will be no traffic enforcer involved, who will take the brunt of the administrative case?
The operator on duty at the time of the apprehension? Or the LGU? What kind of penalty should be given to the LGU?
One thing is clear, the NCAP should be included in Bosita’s proposed bill that this early is gaining tons of support from riders.
This comes when the Land Transportation Office is appealing to LGUs implementing the no contact apprehension policy to suspend and consider reviewing such traffic policy.
LTO chief and Department of Transportation Assistant Secretary Teofilo Guadiz III had actually met with the LGUs to iron out guidelines and other concerns in the NCAP implementation like exorbitant fines and penalties, inadequate infrastructure, and ownership of second-hand vehicles.
It’s very clear that some LGUs are making the NCAP as a money-making venture while implementing traffic discipline.
But it should not be done seamlessly to protect innocent motorists who become victims of unwanted circumstances.
One driver was fined for changing lanes at the intersection because he avoided a pothole.
A taxicab driver faced heavy fines for two violations in one night because his car’s front wheel touched the solid line ahead of the pedestrian lane.
It happened because the car in front of him suddenly made a stop.
Finally, some people in government like Bosita and Guadiz, are making sense. Laws should be implemented correctly and fairly