Christmas traffic!

AS A MATTER OF FACT By Sara Soliven De Guzman (The Philippine Star) Updated December 20, 2010

Traffic in the metropolis as Christmas day nears is a nightmare to daily commuters. EDSA has totally become a seat of chaos and a glaring example of how messed up we are when it comes to traffic and transportation system.

I have written several columns in the past about the dilemma of the agencies involved in this issue. Recently, it seems that the reaction of readers is such that no less than MMDA Chairman Francis Tolentino himself has picked up on a proposal for the MMDA to have a hand in the franchising of PUVs. As a matter of fact, he had the Metro Manila Council pass a Resolution to this effect.

The resolution recently unanimously approved by the Metro Manila Council, the policy-making body of the MMDA, asking the LTFRB to involve the MMDA and the LGUs of Metro Manila in the issuance of Certificates of Public Convenience for the operation of public utility vehicles in the Metropolis – is nothing new. In November 2007 the Metro Manila Council approved MMDA Resolution No. 07 -25 Series of 2007 requesting the LTFRB “to require owners of PUJs/PUVs to secure a clearance from the MMDA and permit from the concerned LGUs of Metro Manila before applying for a franchise to operate.”

According to an MMDA source, the clearance requirement pursuant to MMDA Resolution No. 07-25 was earlier preceded by a Memorandum of Agreement approved by DOTC Secretary Jesus B. Garcia dated April 10 1995, stipulation No.6 of which states: “Prior to franchising of land common carriers operating in Metro Manila, LTFRB shall require the applicant to secure MMDA clearance to ensure compliance with Metropolitan Manila Traffic and Transport Plans. The MMDA Chairman or his authorized representative shall sit as ex-officio member of the LTFRB.” Thus, MMDA Resolution No.07-25 is merely a reiteration of the MOA earlier approved and signed by DOTC Secretary Jesus B. Garcia.

When the same request to allow the MMDA to get involved in the franchising of public utility vehicles in Metro Manila was reiterated to the LTFRB in 2008, then LTFRB Chairman Alberto H. Suansing (now allegedly a DOTC Consultant) rejected the request, He wrote the MMDA that the request cannot be granted because the request: “would result in the sharing of LTFRB power with the other agency of the government, would limit the discretion of the Board and be subjective to the action of the MMDA and LGUs concerned, and would create additional requirements other than those prescribed by the Public Service Law as amended by Executive Order 202.” What nonsense!

The result of this refusal is the proliferation of too many Metro and provincial buses entering Metro Manila concentrated along EDSA due to the franchises merrily issued by the LTFRB like an overheated factory churning out its products. Actually, according to transport industry sources, what Suansing did not want to share by allowing the MMDA to get involved in the exercise by the LTFRB of its franchising authority is not the Board’s authority to franchise public utility vehicles but a – PIECE OF THE ACTION.

Although by law the DOTC is “the primary policy, planning, programming, coordinating, implementing, regulating and administrative entity of the Executive Branch of the government in the promotion, development and regulation of dependable and COORDINATED networks of transportation” and the LTFRB, also by law is empowered “to prescribe and regulate routes of service, economically viable capacities and zones or areas of operations of public transportation provided by motorized vehicles” – under its Charter the MMDA’s jurisdiction includes “transport and traffic management.” The function of the MMDA pertaining to transport and traffic management includes the “formulation, coordination and monitoring of policies, standards, programs, and projects to rationalize existing transport operations, infrastructure requirements, the use of thoroughfare, and the promotion of safe and convenient movement of persons and goods.” Thus, the LTFRB cannot shut out the MMDA from involvement in the franchising of public utility vehicles in Metro Manila. In fact, the law empowering the LTFRB to franchise PUVs prescribed the condition that the exercise of this authority should be “in accordance with the public land transportation development plans and programs approved by the Department of Transportation and Communications.” The LTFRB never complied with this prescribed requirement.

The key, therefore, to an effective and rational public transportation policy-making, planning, regulation and supervision is, COORDINATION AND SYNCHRONIZATION among the government agencies tasked to oversee the country’s transport system. In whatever form, manner or shape this interaction will be up to DOTC Secretary Jose P. De Jesus, MMDA Chairman Francis Tolentino and LTFRB Chairman Nelson Laluces. What is important is that the DOTC, MMDA and the LTFRB get their acts together. Let us just hope that if the MMDA is involved in the franchising of PUVS, graft and corruption does not spread.

* * *

The item on the Judicial and Bar Council in this column on December 6 drew reactions from several readers – all saying that the “culprit” for the deplorable state of the judiciary due to the presence of too many “hoodlums in robes” is the JBC. One comment asserts that it is lobbying with JBC members that clinches nomination for the judiciary. Another comment attributes the pervasive corruption in the Court of Appeals to the JBC for knowingly nominating notorious applicants to the Court” stressing that at no other time in the Court’s 74-year history has it had among its ranks more “hoodlums in robes” than it has now.

But though it is the JBC that nominates applicants for the judiciary, it is actually the president who appoints members of the Bench.

Because P-Noy is not a lawyer and the judiciary was not in his sphere of interest and concern as a legislator, several Bench and Bar members agitated over the nomination for the Court of Appeals of disreputable applicants want P-Noy to have members of his “Search Committee” for judicial appointments rigidly screen the JBC’s nominees with emphasis on their integrity, public reputation and track records.

Malacañang sources say the Search Committee members for judicial appointments are: Executive Secretary Ochoa, DOJ Sec. De Lima, Solicitor General Cadiz, Senior Deputy Exec. Sec. Amorado and Presidential Chief Legal Counsel De Mesa. It is on these search Committee members that P-Noy will rely for his appointments to the judiciary and it should be the same people he should blame and hold responsible if he ends up appointing unacceptable JBC nominees.

If there is continuing public interest in the JBC, it could be because after the council submitted more than two weeks ago, thirteen nominees for three vacancies in the Court of Appeals, this week it will be submitting thirteen names for four more CA vacancies. P-Noy will, therefore, be appointing within the next three months seven new magistrates to the second highest judicial tribunal in the country. “There are already several crooked justices in the Court of Appeals. Pres. Aquino should not increase their tribe,” an IBP Metro Manila chapter president said.

We don’t need more men in our Courts who will give us injustice. As Samuel Johnson, a poet in critique in the 1700s put it, “The law is the last result of human wisdom acting upon human experience for the benefit of the public.” Therefore, we must protect it.

* * *

As Christmas day draws near, let us not be consumed with the numerous problems in government and the manner of how these are being resolved. In the true spirit of Christmas, let us put all these aside for a moment and reflect on the gift of life God gave to the world. Merry Christmas!