The local government units (LGUs) that enforced the controversial no-contact apprehension policy (NCAP) ought to return the fines that they collected from the supposed violators.
Thus, said 1-Pacman Party-list Rep. Mikee Romero, who like his colleagues welcomed the Supreme Court (SC) order to halt NCAP.
“Now that the (SC) has issued a TRO (temporary restraining order) against this policy, the concerned agencies and LGUs should reimburse the alleged violators the fines collected from them,” he said.
Romero said the concerned agencies and LGUs are the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Land Transportation Office (LTO), and the cities of Manila, Quezon, San Juan, Valenzuela, Parañaque, and Muntinlupa.
The former deputy speaker added that these government offices must have collected tens of millions from supposed NCAP offenders.
He noted that lawyer Juman Paa, one of the complainants in the two cases against NCAP pending in the SC, had complained of being sent notices for four violations, for which he was asked to pay more than P20,000 in fines.
Paa, a Manila resident, also raised that the personal data of supposed violators are reflected on the Manila City government website, which is accessible to anyone who could simply type in the plate number of the vehicle involved in the alleged violation.
Romero said some Quezon City residents were notified of multiple NCAP violations of the 60-kilometer-per-hour speed limit along Commonwealth Avenue.
“The notices show that the alleged violations were just one to two minutes apart. The video footage showing the alleged offenses must have been taken by just one camera. This is proof that this scheme is open to abuse,” he said.
He said the violators in this case have no protection against abuse “because they cannot argue with the footage and the camera that took it".
What's worse according to Romero is that the LTO revealed to the MMDA and the five NCAP-implementing cities the names and home addresses of the alleged violators. He added that the MMDA and the five cities used the information in sending notices for NCAP violations.
“The LTO might have violated the Data Privacy Act by disclosing this personal information, which it is bound under the law to protect. I hope the data does not fall into the hands of criminally-inclined persons who could use it for extortion activities,” he stressed.