"We recognize that the SC is the final arbiter and interpreter of laws. We respect that," Zialcita said in a telephone interview.
But he said it would be "prejudicial" to the petitioners if they follow the high court’s advise to first file the petition before the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB).
"The TRB is a signatory, a party, to that contract. How will they decide against themselves?" he said, claiming that the petition he and lawyer Ceferino Padua filed was denied on a mere technicality.
In a decision penned by Justice Angelina Gutierrez, the court said the petitioners should not have filed a petition before the SC without going first to the TRB, which supervises the collection of toll and operation of toll facilities.
The high court said the TRB has the "necessary expertise, training, and skills to judiciously decide matters of this kind."
Last Dec. 21, the TRB allowed the Citra Metro Manila Tollways Corp. (CMMTC) to collect new and higher fees this year. The new rates are almost 100-percent higher than those of last year.
The CMMTC, which operates the South Luzon Tollway and the Skyway, is a joint venture between the Philippine National Construction Corp. and Indonesian company Citra.
The new toll rates have been implemented in two stages despite the protests from Zialcita, motorists, non-government organizations, and transport groups.
Zialcita said he would also suggest before Congress a review of the Build-Operate-Transfer Law which automatically allows fee increases wherein the consumers are the ones immediately affected.
Zialcita reiterated that those opposing the increase could not immediately lodge their complaint before the TRB because the approval was released days before Christmas, when virtually no one was at the offices anymore.
"That was one of the reasons why we filed our petition before the courts," he said.
On Monday, the Supreme Court rejected the petition, saying Padua and Zialcita used "unconventional" legal remedies which "unfortunately are procedurally impermissible."
"The TRB, as the agency assigned to supervise the collection of toll fees and the operation of toll facilities, has the necessary expertise, training and skills to judiciously decide matters of this kind," the court stated in its decision.
The high tribunal, nevertheless, commended Padua and Zialcita for "devoting their time and effort on a matter so imbued with public interest in this case."
"But we can do no better than to brush aside their chief objections to the provisional toll rate adjustments, for a different approach would lead this Court astray into the field of factual conflict where its pronouncements would not rest on solid grounds," the Supreme Court said.
The South Luzon Expressway is the major artery that links Metro Manila to provinces in the south.
Since July 1, motorists have been paying P20 (from the previous P15) from Alabang to Bicutan; P31 (from P24) from Alabang to Sucat; and P42 (from P33) from Alabang to Magallanes in Pasay City.
The High Court also said the operator of the tollway, Citra Metro Manila Tollways Corp., "sufficiently complied" with the law when it notified the public late last year that it would increase fees.
The justices, except for Justice Artemio Panganiban, ruled that the TRB can also impose toll increases to freeway operators even "without need of notice, publication or hearing," as allowed by law.
"We must stress that the TRB’s authority to grant provisional toll rate adjustments does not require the conduct of a hearing. Pertinent laws and jurisprudence support this conclusion," the high tribunal said.