High Court asked to junk MMDA bus ban


TWO commuters from Bacoor, Cavite begged the Supreme Court (SC) to stop the implementation of the controversial Integrated Transport System, which paved way for the establishment of an integrated terminal in Parañaque City.

The opening of the Southwest Interim Transport Terminal (SITT) in Uniwide Coastal Mall on August 6 has been met with disgust from affected commuters as provincial buses from southern Luzon have to stop there and are no longer allowed to proceed beyond the “Gates of Hell.”

In a 38-page petition for certiorari and prohibition, commuters Paniga Ladera and Dolores Salanga particularly asked the high tribunal to immediately issue a temporary restraining order against the implementation of the following:

A. Executive Order 67, “Providing For the Establishment of the Integrated Transport System issued by President Benigno Aquino 3rd;

B. Administrative Order 40, “Providing For the Establishment of Interim Transport Terminals in Preparation for the Integrated Transport System” also issued by President Aquino; and

C. Memorandum Circular 2013-004 issued by Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) which amends routes of provincial buses coming from southern Luzon.

They fear that if said orders will not be immediately restrained, it will cause them grave and irreparable injury.

Petitioners also asked the court to declare the assailed orders and memorandum as unconstitutional and violation of existing laws.

They questioned the legality of Section 5 of Administrative Order 40 as it allegedly violates their rights to due process and equal protection clauses guaranteed by the Constitution.

”They [government]arbitrarily clipped the franchise route of the provincial public utility buses [PPUBs] originating from south of Metro Manila without due notice and public hearing,” the petition said.

Petitioners also argued that the said provision of Administrative Order 40 violates Section 16 of Commonwealth Act 146 or the Public Service Law “for having been implemented without due notice and public hearing.”

They also believed that it is “in conflict with the time honored doctrine of public interest and convenience in the exercise of the LTFRB’s authority to regulate public conveniences.”

They also complained of suffering extended travel hours, increased fare expenses and inadequate public utility vehicles that will transport them to their destination from the SIIT.

Named respondents in the petition are Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa, Transportation and Communications Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya, Budget and Management Secretary Florencio Abad, LTFRB Chairman Winston Ginez and Metropolitan Manila Development Authority Chairman Francis Tolentino.


Please follow our commenting guidelines.

Comments are closed.