The Court of Appeals (CA) has given the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and the Land Transportation Office (LTO) the go signal to proceed with the Road Transportation Information Technology project, which is intended to improve the agencies’ capability to track stolen vehicles.
In an 18-page ruling penned by Associate Justice Ma. Luisa Quijano-Padilla, the CA’s Special Thirteenth Division reversed and set aside the writ of preliminary injunction earlier issued by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Mandaluyong City enjoining its implementation.
The appellate court also ordered the Mandaluyong RTC to dismiss the complaint for injunction filed by lawyer Salvador Belaro.
“On a final note, the DOTC project subject of this petition is undeniably an essential government undertaking to help ease or improve the current sorry state of our nation’s road sector. While there are taxpayers who, like private respondent Belaro, wanted to enjoin the bidding and derail the implementation of the project on the slightest suspicion that there is inappropriate spending of public funds—still, there are many others who wanted to see concrete proof that the government is doing its work using the taxes being paid,” the CA said.
“The DOTC project is one such proof and courts should do its part and ensure that it would have no part in further delaying government projects that are intended to benefit and regain trust of the public, who are the primary stakeholders of the state,” it added.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Normandie Pizarro and Carmelita Salandanan Manahan.
In an order issued on July 31, 2014, the Mandaluyong RTC granted the complaint for injunction filed by Belaro.
In particular, Belaro sought to enjoin the bidding process for the LTO Infrastructure and Information System (LTO-IIS) phase of the project for being illegal due to the agency’s failure to obtain approval from the National Economic and Development Authority (Neda) and the Department of Budget and Management Multi-Year Obligational Authority (DBM-MYOA) necessary for the project.
Belaro added that as a taxpayer, he may sue government officials who breached their duty to spend public funds in accordance with the purposes and in the manner authorized by law.
He said he will suffer “direct injury” because the project will be financed out of public funds and fees will eventually be levied on motorists who will be applying for driver’s license or registering their motor vehicles in order to defray the cost of procurement, such that, he, as a taxpayer, will be injured twice over.
But, the CA said Belaro’s apprehension that new fees will be imposed on motorists because of the project is still premature, considering that the project is still in the initial stage.
“There are no exorbitant fees or charges to speak of because the project is still in the bidding stage,” the CA said.
“With the evidence at hand, this court is left with no option but to rule that public respondent Belaro’s prayer for the issuance of a preliminary injunction for failure to adduce competent, material and relevant evidence in support of an actual existing right that must be protected by the relief sought,” it declared.
The CA added that the Mandaluyong RTC should have also rendered Belaro’s complaint moot as the Neda Board already issued a resolution renewing its approval of the LTO-IIS.
“This recent Neda approval undoubtedly cures whatever defect the previous bidding had. This document also serves to satisfy the required NEDA approval for any future bidding that may be scheduled for said LTO-IIS project. It therefore renders the controversy mot, considering that there are no other reliefs, that is damages, prayed for in the complaint,” the CA said.