SC junks petition to nullify PUVMP

MANILA: The Supreme Court (SC) rejected a petition that challenges the constitutionality of the public utility modernization program (PUVMP).

The high court — through a decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh — junked the petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by petitioners Bayyo Association Incorporated and its president Anselmo Perweg due to the petitioners’ “lack of legal standing and violation of the principle of hierarchy of courts.”

The court noted that the group, which invokes its standing as a legitimate association of jeepney operators and drivers in Metro Manila, failed to support its claim of being a legitimate association.

“While Bayyo attached a Certificate of Registration issued by the SEC, the same merely proves its registration as an association, but does not establish that its members are indeed PUJ operators and drivers. Accordingly, due to the absence of Bayyo’s Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws or any other competent proof, the Court cannot ascertain its legal standing as an association of PUJ operators and drivers,” the highest court in the land explained.

The SC noted that the group also failed to establish its members and if the petition was authorized by the members.

Additionally, the decision stated that the petition did not follow the principle of hierarchy of courts, saying that the petition should have been filed before the lowest court with jurisdiction and then appealed until it reaches the SC.

 “This doctrine is not mere policy, rather, it is a constitutional filtering mechanism designed to enable the Court to focus on the more fundamental and essential tasks assigned to it by the highest law of the land,” the Court stressed.

Although there are some exceptions, the SC noted that the petitioners failed to defend deviation from the doctrine as the issues they raised are not purely legal.

“It is well to remember that the Court is not a trier of facts. Whether in its original or appellate jurisdiction, this Court is not equipped to receive and weigh evidence in the first instance. When litigants bypass the hierarchy of courts, the facts they claim before the Court are incomplete and disputed. Bypassing the judicial hierarchy requires more than just raising issues of transcendental importance. Without first resolving the factual disputes, it will remain unclear if there was a direct injury, or if there was factual concreteness and adversariness to enable this Court to determine the parties' rights and obligations. Transcendental importance is no excuse for not meeting the demands of justiciability,” the decision indicated.

“In view of the petitioners' lack of legal standing and their disregard of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts, the Court will not delve into the merits of the substantive arguments raised.”

Meanwhile, the leadership of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) welcomed the SC’s decision, claiming that the importance of the PUVMP to modernize public transport was recognized.

LTFRB Chair Teofilo Guadiz III also expressed optimism that the similar cases against PUVMP would be junked as well.

However, Guadiz said that LTFRB respects the transport group's next move to appeal the high court’s ruling, adding that the ultimate remedy for the group is to refile the case back to the trial courts.

Relatedly, the Guadiz disclosed that the consolidation of PUVs nationwide is at 80 percent. In Metro Manila, 96 percent of the active jeepneys have applied for consolidation while in the provinces, around 80-90 percent.

Photos from Fuso Philippines, Isuzu Philippines Corporation,  Hyundai Trucks and Buses Philippines, Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board

Also read:

DOTr clarifies PUVMP guidelines

LTFRB reminds PUV owners, operators of industry consolidation deadline

LTFRB: No jeepney phaseout after franchise consolidation deadline