SC junks consolidated petitions vs NCAP

MANILA: The Supreme Court (SC) dismissed the consolidated petitions against the No Contact Apprehension Program (NCAP).

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Rodil Zalameda, the high court junked the petitions seeking to declare as unconstitutional the ordinances of Muntinlupa City, Parañaque City, Quezon City, Valenzuela City, and the City of Manila adopting Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Resolution 16-01.

The SC ruling stated that the issues raised have become moot because of the adoption of a new and uniform enforcement framework under the Metro Manila Traffic Code of 2023 (MMTC 2023).

Aside from being moot, the highest court in the land noted that the petitions lack legal standing, fail to exhaust administrative remedies, violate the hierarchy of courts, and constitute forum shopping.

The ruling also lifted the temporary restraining order issued on August 30, 2022, against the City of Manila, Quezon City, Valenzuela City, Parañaque City, Muntinlupa City, the Land Transportation Office, and all parties acting for and on their behalf.

However, the ruling stated that the dismissal does not bar future challenges if the revised NCAP system later gives rise to an actual controversy, adding that the dismissal of the petitions does not constitute a ruling that the challenged NCAP issuances are valid.

“Our dismissal of the Petitions is confined to the determination that petitioners failed to overcome threshold issues, and that the supervening adoption of a uniform regulatory framework has rendered the Petitions moot. There is no explicit determination regarding the prior issuances, nor a resolution of grievances based on specific facts.”

The SC emphasized important guidelines on how its power of judicial review should be properly invoked in future cases, particularly those challenging traffic enforcement policies and similar government regulations.

To recall, the petitioners argued that the NCAP is inconsistent with Republic Act No. 4136 (commonly known as the Land Transportation and Traffic Code), which contemplates direct, face-to-face apprehension of violators and places responsibility on the actual driver rather than the registered vehicle owner.

They also claimed that the NCAP violates due process because motorists may receive penalties without immediate notice or an opportunity to contest the violation when it occurs, which can result in fines accumulating before they are informed.

Also read:

MMDA: Socmed post about NCAP resumption is fake news

‘No-contact apprehension’ now implemented along Roman Superhighway in Bataan

MMDA’s No Contact Apprehension Effective From Today

Connect with us through our various social media pages:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ZigWheelsPhilippines

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zigwheelsph/

Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@zigwheels

Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@ZigWheelsPhilippines/