In Manila, every journey eventually becomes a walk.

The office worker leaving the MRT, the student crossing Taft, the vendor moving through Divisoria, the nurse coming off a night shift, the parent carrying groceries through flooded streets, the elderly person climbing a footbridge step by painful step — all of them are pedestrians. Even the motorist becomes one the moment they park.

That is the irony of Manila. The pedestrian is the largest and most universal road user, yet often the least protected.

Walking in Manila is rarely treated as a right. It is treated as something people must endure. Pedestrians are told to adjust: walk faster, cross farther away, use the footbridge, squeeze past parked vehicles, step into the gutter, wait under the sun, wait in the rain, and stay alert while vehicles dominate the road. If a sidewalk is blocked by a post, stall, motorcycle, construction barrier, or broken pavement, the pedestrian is expected to find a way around it.

This is not simply inconvenience. It is daily disrespect.

Metro Manila is a city of commuters, students, workers, vendors, churchgoers, patients, and families. Millions rely on walking either for entire trips or to reach jeepneys, buses, trains, tricycles, motorcycle taxis, offices, schools, markets, and homes. Public transport itself depends on walking. A commuter who rides the LRT still walks to the station. A jeepney passenger still walks to the stop.

A bus rider still has to cross the street.

So why is walking treated as an afterthought?

Too much of Manila’s street design gives priority to vehicles and leaves pedestrians with whatever space remains. Roads are widened while sidewalks disappear. Footbridges are built where safe ground-level crossings should be. Railings are installed not to protect people, but to keep them out of the way of traffic. Traffic lights are timed for vehicle flow, not for the elderly, children, persons with disabilities, or parents carrying bags and babies.

A city cannot call this order. A road where a wheelchair user cannot pass is not orderly. A crossing that forces a senior citizen to hurry is not efficient. A sidewalk used as parking is not public space. A footbridge that punishes the weak is not pedestrian infrastructure; it is evidence that the street below has been surrendered to speed.

Respecting pedestrians does not mean declaring war on drivers. It means restoring fairness. The person inside a vehicle is protected by metal, speed, and power. The person walking has only their body. The more harm a mode of transport can cause, the greater responsibility it should carry.

This principle should guide Manila’s streets. Crossings should be placed where people actually need to cross: near schools, markets, hospitals, churches, terminals, and residential areas. Sidewalks should be continuous, shaded, well-lit, and free from obstruction. At-grade crossings should be safer and more common. Speed limits should be lower where people live and walk. Sidewalk parking and reckless turning should be enforced against seriously. Accessibility should be treated not as charity, but as a basic measure of citizenship.

Most of all, Manila must change how it defines progress. Progress is not just faster cars, wider roads, and bigger flyovers. A humane city is measured by whether a child can walk to school safely, whether an elderly person can reach a clinic, whether a commuter can get home without fear, and whether a person with a disability can move without being treated as a problem.

The pedestrian is not a nuisance in the city. The pedestrian is the city.

Until Manila respects those on foot, it cannot honestly claim to respect the public.