SC validates hefty fines on traffic law violators

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has come out with a resolution that validates the various fines imposed for traffic law violations which drivers, transport operators and groups challenged for allegedly being unfair and unconstitutional.

Consolidated petitions were filed by various operators, drivers and transport groups to challenge the constitutionality of Department Order 2008-39 and its amended version of Joint Administrative Order (JAO) 2014-01, as issued and implemented by the Department of Transportation (DOTr) and Land Transportation Office (LTO).

It covers fines for road safety violations and for operating “colorum” vehicles, which the petitioners asked the SC to resolve in their favor.

But in a 69-page decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Lopez, the high court said  the imposition of higher fines is necessary to promote public safety and welfare.

LTO DO 2008-39, which came into effect in March 2009, imposes a penalty of P5,000 on drunk drivers and P10,000 on drivers under the influence of drugs.

It also imposes fines of P1,500 for driving without a license, P400 for driving with an expired license, P2,000 for possessing a fake driver’s license, P3,000 for a conviction for a crime perpetrated with the use of a motor vehicle, and P6,000 for driving a public utility vehicle out of line.

The order also imposes a fine of P50,000 on public utility jeepneys plying the routes without a franchise, P6,000 for motorcycles, P120,000 for sedans, P200,000 for vans, and up to P1 million for buses.

In 2014, DO 2008-39 was superseded by JAO 2014-01, which imposes higher fines and stricter penalties on erring drivers and operators.

The SC affirmed the constitutionality of both orders and ruled against the petitioners who argued that the fines were arbitrary, unreasonable, excessive, confiscatory and oppressive considering that the income of PUV drivers and operators ranged from P100 to P500 per day only.

The Court decided against the petitioners’ insistence that the orders violated their constitutional right to due process and equal protection clause, and were in themselves unconstitutional for being an invalid exercise of police power and for being vague and overbroad.

The SC decision against the petitioners means that the operators’ certificate of public convenience (CPC) and registration will also be revoked, and their vehicles impounded for three months.

“At the risk of sounding repetitious, as drivers and operators do not possess any absolute or vested rights on their authority to operate, being a mere privilege accorded by the State, it is in no position to dictate that a substantial distinction be made between operators who hold one CPC covering only one unit or vehicle and operators with CPCs covering several units or vehicles,” stated the decision. –  Romina Cabrera