Supreme Court says vehicle clamping ‘lawful’

CEBU, Philippines - The Supreme Court has ruled that the controversial Cebu City ordinance allowing traffic enforcers to clamp illegally-parked vehicles is constitutional.

It ruled against petition for review and certiorari filed by former Cebu assemblyman Valentino Legaspi and lawyer Bienvenido Jaban, paving the way for the City Traffic Operations Management to again intensify its campaign against violators.

Traffic enforcers had clamped the vehicles of Legaspi and of Jaban in separate occasions in 1997 after they allegedly parked their cars.

Legaspi never claimed his white sedan that was placed at the city’s impounding area by the traffic enforcers at Block 27 in North Reclamation Area when he questioned the city ordinance.

Jaban and Legaspi, both lawyers, brought the matter before the court by filing a case against CITOM and the City of Cebu, during the stint of then Mayor Alvin Garcia.

In two occasions, Jaban’s car was clamped on June 23, 1997 and on November 20, 1997 for illegal parking and was released only after the owner paid the corresponding fines.

Legaspi claimed that he parked his vehicle in front of his house for just a few minutes when it was clamped by traffic enforcers.

The Regional Trial Court early this year ruled that CO 1664 is a null and void, citing that “the traffic law enforcer who, as the ordinance in question mandates, is the arresting officer, prosecutor, judge and collector” of fines.

Unsatisfied with the ruling, City Hall lawyers elevated the case before the Court of Appeals, claiming that the traffic enforcers were just doing their task to improve the traffic situation of the city.

“Despite the restrictions and prohibitions of parking on certain streets of Cebu City, violations continued unabated,” the city’s lawyers stressed.

The Appellate Court then reversed the ruling of the RTC, saying “it has become necessary to resort to these measures because of the traffic congestion caused by illegal parking and the inability of existing penalties to curb it. The ordinance is designed to improve traffic conditions in the City of Cebu and thus shows to be reasonable.”

The High Court said “Legaspi’s attack against the probations of Ordinance 1664 for being vague and ambiguous cannot stand scrutiny. There could be no confusion on the meaning and coverage of the ordinance.”

“To reiterate, the clamping of the illegally parked vehicles was a fair and reasonable way to enforce the ordinance against its transgressors, otherwise, the transgressors would evade liability by simply driving away,” it added.—(FREEMAN)