Another petition was filed by several lawmakers and labor groups before the Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday seeking to stop the implementation of the fare increase at the Metro Rail Transit (MRT) Line 3 and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Lines 1 and 2.
LRT 1 runs from Baclaran, Parañaque City, to Roosevelt, Quezon City, MRT Line 2 travels from Recto, Manila, to Santolan, Pasig City, while MRT 3 traverses from North Avenue, Quezon City, to Edsa Taft Avenue, Pasay City.
The petitioners are Parañaque City Second District Rep. Gustavo Tambunting; Ang Nars Party-list Rep. Leah Paquiz; Buhay Party-list Reps. Lito Atienza, Irwin Tieng and Mariano Michael Velarde; former Cavite (Third District) Rep. Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla; Allan Tanjusay of the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines; Allan Montano of the Federation of Free Workers; Leody de Guzman of the Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino; Rene Magtubo of the Partido Manggagawa; Annie Geron of Public Services Labor Independent Confederation; and Sen. Joseph Victor “JV” G. Ejercito.
Named respondents are the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB), the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), Light Rail Transit Authority, Metro Rail Transit Corp. and Light Rail Management Corp.
In a petition for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for issuance of temporary restraining order, the petitioners argued that the DOTC failed to coordinate and/or direct the LTFRB to comply with the publication, notice and hearing requirements for the fare hike.
Invoking Executive Order (EO) 202, the petitioners said the LTFRB has the “adjudicatory power to determine, prescribe, approve, and periodically review and adjust, reasonable fares, rates and other related charges, relative to the operation of public land-transportation services provided by government vehicles.”
They added that such function of LTFRB is also in relation to the 2011 LTFRB Rules of Procedure.
The petitioners also argued that instead, the DOTC unilaterally proposed, approved and implemented the fare adjustments.
“Hence, DOTC has no authority to issue the assailed department order [DO]. It is, therefore, null and void,” they said.
They further argued that Transportation Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya issued on December 18 last year the assailed DO 2014-014 which provides for an adjusted fare scheme that substantially increased its base fare from P10 to P11 effective January 4, 2015, despite the fact that it violates several provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution such as the following:
- Section 1 of Article III on due process for lack of notice and hearing;
- Article XIII on Social Justice;
- Section 28 of Article II on Policy on Full Public Disclosure;
- Section 7, Article III on People’s Right to Public Information; and
- Section 18 of Article II, which states that, “The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.”
The petitioners, likewise, argued that public respondents LTFRB Chairman Winston Ginez and Abaya committed “grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction” in respectively approving and issuing the assailed DO 2014-014 despite the fact that it violates the mandate of EO 202 and 215-A, Commonwealth Act 146 or the “Public Service law,” and the 2011 Rules on Practice and Procedures of the LTFRB.
EO 125-A gives the DOTC the authority to direct the supervision and control over its regional offices, and to formulate, develop and implement its policies, plans and programs.