The Supreme Court (SC) has nullified the provisions in ordinances issued by 15 Metro Manila local government units (LGUs) which ordered the issuance of Ordinance Violation Receipts (OVRs) and confiscation of the licenses of drivers who violate traffic rules and regulations.
In a full court decision written by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, the SC reversed the 2012 ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA) which declared the ordinances issued between 2003 and 2005 legal and constitutional.
Declared null and void are:
1. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 2003-89 series of 2003 of Makati City titled "AN ORDINANCE ENACTING THE MAKATI CITY TRAFFIC CODE SUBJECT TO ALL LAWS AND EXISTING LEGAL RULES AND REGULATIONS."
2. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 103 series of2003 of Taguig titled "AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF TAGUIG."
3. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 05-04 series of 2004 of Paranaque City titled "AN ORDINANCE ENACTING THE PARANAQUE CITY TRAFFIC CODE SUBJECT TO EXISITING LAWS AND APPLICABLE RULES AND REGULATIONS."
4. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 2916 series of 2004 of Pasay City titled "AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF PASAY CITY."
5. Section 124 of Ordinance No. SP-1444 series of 2004 of Quezon City titled "AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF QUEZON CITY."
6. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 37 series of2004 of San Juan titled "MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE KNOWN AND CITED AS THE MANAGEMENT CODE OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF SAN JUAN, METRO MANILA."
7. Section 123 of Ordinance No. 2004-14 series of 2004 of Navotas titled "TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NAVOTAS, METRO MANILA·"
8. Section 120 of Ordinance No. 652-04 series of 2004 of Las Pinas titled "LAS PINAS TRAFFIC CODE."
9. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 01 series of 2004 of Pasig City titled "AN ORDINANCE ENACTING THE 2004 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF PASIG·"
10. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 04-022 series of 2005 of Muntinlupa City titled "AN ORDINANCE ENACTING THE MUNTINLUP A CITY TRAFFIC CODE, SUBJECT TO ALL LAWS AND EXISTING LEGAL RULES AND REGULATIONS."
11. Section 145 of Ordinance No. 358 series of 2005 of Mandaluyong City titled "THE MANAGEMENT CODE OF THE MANDALUYONG·''
12. Section 138 of Ordinance No. 019 series of 2005 of Valenzuela titled "AN ORDINANCE ENACTING THE LAND TRANSPORTATION CODE OF THE CITY OF VALENZUELA.”
13. Section 129 of Ordinance No. 0391 series of 2005 of Caloocan City titled "AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF CALOOCAN CITY;"
14. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 8092 series of 2005 of the City of Manila titled "ORDINANCE REVISING THE TRAFFIC CODE OF THE CITY OF MANILA BY AMENDING CHAPTER 121 OF THE COMPILATION OF THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF MANILA AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES."
15. Section 124 of Ordinance No. 2005-19 series of 2005 of Pateros titled "ORDINANCE APPROVING THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CODE OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF PATEROS, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATORS AND FOR OTHER LEGAL PURPOSES."
The SC’s decision made public on March 4, 2024, permanently barred the Metro Manila LGUs from further issuing OVRs and confiscating drivers’ licenses unless their agents are deputized by the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA).
It granted the petition filed by various transport groups, led by the Federation of Jeepney Operators and Drivers Association of the Philippines (FEJODAP), which asked the SC to compel Metro Manila LGUs to comply with MMDA’s single ticketing system.
In its decision, the SC ruled that the provisions in the ordinances violate the mandate of the MMDA under Republic Act No. 7624 which gives the agency the exclusive power to come up with policies concerning traffic in the metropolis and to coordinate and regulate the implementation of all programs and projects concerning traffic.
The SC pointed out that Section 5 of RA 7624 mandates the MMDA to “install and administer single ticketing system… and confiscate and suspend or revoke driver’s licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and regulations….”
“All told, the Court thus declares as invalid the common provision in the said traffic codes or ordinances of the LGUs in Metro Manila empowering each of them to issue OVRs to erring drivers and motorists. The other provisions of the traffic codes or ordinances remain valid and unaffected by this decision,” the SC declared.
It directed the Metro Manila LGUs to comply with the Joint Metro Traffic Circular No. 12-01 issued in 2012 by the MMDA which sets the guidelines for the implementation of the Uniform Ticketing System in Metro Manila.
Under the Joint Circular, the Uniform Ticketing System shall be implemented within the 16 cities and one municipality in Metro Manila.
Through the Uniform Ticketing System, traffic violators shall be issued a UOVR (Unified Ordinance Violation Receipt) which will be recognized by the MMDA, the Land Transportation Office and all LGU traffic operatives as a valid traffic citation receipt and temporary driver's license
As of 2021, the cities of Mandaluyong, San Juan, Manila, Taguig, Pasig, and Paranaque have complied with the circular on single ticketing system.
But the cities of San Juan, Pasig, Paranaque and Taguig noted that while they have been implementing the single ticketing system, the fines penalties and surcharges continuously differ because the LGUs are still implementing their local ordinances in the exercise of their local autonomy.
Caloocan City manifested that it still follows its own traffic ordinance and that it issues its own OVR to persons or entities found to have violated any provision of the Ordinance.
The SC pointed out: “As a necessary consequence of the foregoing discussion on the MMDA possessing the necessary powers to implement the single ticketing system as provided for by the MMDA Law, the Court so holds that the Joint Circular is valid and must thus be implemented with full force and effect so as to accomplish the intent of the legislature in enacting the MMDA Law.”
It assured that the autonomy of the LGUs will not be undermined by the Court ruling “as their interest are amply protected by the very structure of the MMDA as established by the MMDA Law.”
At the same time, the SC said the adoption by the Metro Manila Council of MMDA Resolution No. 23-02, or the Metro Manila Traffic Code (MMTC) of 2023 did not rendered the case moot.
The MMTC reiterates the implementation of the single ticketing system through the use of the UOVRs and provides for the interoperability of citation tickets issued within Metro Manila, it said.