Criminal charges have been filed before the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) against Transportation Secretary Jaime J. Bautista, other transport officials, and Solicitor General Menardo I. Guevarra in the revocation of individual franchises of passenger jeepneys “without due process” last Dec. 31 to implement the Public Utility Vehicles Modernization Program (PUVMP).

The complaints were filed by Manibela, the group known as the Samahang Manibela Mananakay at Nagkaisang Terminal ng Transportasyon (SMMITT), which claims membership of about 50,000 drivers and operators.

Aside from Bautista and Guevarra, also named in the complaints were Office of Transport Cooperatives (OTC) Chairman Ferdinand Ortega, Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) Chairman Teofilo Guadiz III, Engineer Liza Marie Paches, lawyers Mercy Jane Paras Leynes and Robert Peig.

The respondents in the complaints were charged with violations of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and Section 4 in relation to Section 11 of R.A. No. 6713, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Government Officials and Employees.

Manibela President Mario Valbuena Jr. also asked that OMB to charge the respondents with grave threats and grave coercion under Articles 282 and 286, respectively, of the Revised Penal Code.

The OMB complaints arose from Memorandum Circular No. 2023-051 dated Dec. 14, 2023, which was issued by Guadiz and members of the LTFRB board -- Paches, Leynes, and Peig.

Manibela alleged that the circular, which was issued with the consent and authorization of Secretary Bautista, mandated the revocation of the individual franchises of passenger jeepneys and their consolidation into cooperatives and corporations.

Valbuena said that under the circular, individual franchises are automatically revoked and passenger jeepneys will be arrested if they travel and pick up passengers.

He told the OMB that the Department of Transportation (DOTr) and LTFRB did not conduct any consultation among the affected sectors before issuing the circular, therefore violating their rights particularly Section 11 of Article II of the Constitution which states that "the State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights."

"Since there were no consultations or hearings among the most affected sectors, respondents must have consultations only among themselves and the owners of the supposed modern Chinese vehicles designed to replace the traditional tried and tested PUVs which have been operating in our streets throughout the country for the last several decades," he said in the complaints.

"The act of favoring alien suppliers of vehicles is unpatriotic, especially that there are able and tested vehicles manufacturers like Francisco and Sarao Motors, among many others," he said.

He accused those named in the complaints of behaving like "masters of the people" when they should have been "servants of the people." He also said they behaved with "utmost irresponsibility," "lack of integrity," and "disloyalty."

He explained that Solicitor General Guevarra was included in the complaints because he defended the other respondents.

At the same time, Valbuena pointed out that the violations committed by the respondents constitute grave and serious misconduct and, thus, they should be dismissed from public office and be barred from holding public office.

Earlier, President Marcos had approved the recommendation of Secretary Bautista to give until April 30, 2024 jeepney drivers and operators who have not consolidated their franchises into transport cooperatives and corporations.

"This extension is to give an opportunity to those who expressed intention to consolidate but did not make the previous cut-off," the announcement stated.

Last Dec. 20, the Supreme Court (SC) was asked stop the implementation the PUVMP.

The SC petition filed by Pagkakaisa ng mga Samahan ngTsuper at Opereytor Nationwide (PISTON), a representative of a commuters’ group, and several individuals asked the High Court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would stop the implementation of PUVMP.

The SC, however, did not issue a TRO.  Instead, the SC required DOTr and LTFRB to comment both on the petition and the plea for TRO.  The petition is still pending with the SC.