Following the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision declaring as unconstitutional Manila’s curfew ordinance for minors, Manila Mayor Joseph E. Estrada said it is time to explore other options. Estrada added the city government will no longer file any appeal and would simply comply with the orders.
“The Supreme Court is the highest court of the land so we have… to just follow whatever is their decision,” the Manila mayor told reporters at the sidelines of the blessing ceremonies for the new City Hall-funded covered quadrangle of Bacood Elementary School in Santa Mesa on Monday afternoon.
“There’s nothing we can do. It’s the highest court of the land. We have to follow. Nobody is above the law, not even the president,” Estrada added.
Responding to a question by a reporter, he said he is not dismayed at all by the SC ruling and that the city government will not file any appeal. “Anyway, there are other remedies available.”
One of these remedies, Estrada added, is to “revisit” the provisions of the curfew law, City Ordinance 8046, and introduce amendments that will not go against the High Tribunal’s ruling. “We can pass another ordinance, or we’ll just amend it. It depends upon the city council,” he pointed out.
Majority floor leader Sixth District Councilor Casimiro Sison, who was with Estrada during the inauguration ceremonies, confirmed the city council is working on a new curfew ordinance.
“We are going to revisit the ordinance. Most probably what we can do is to punish the parents instead,” he explained, citing a provision in the old curfew ordinance that allows authorities to fine and imprison minors caught for curfew violation, which the SC finds illegal.
The old curfew ordinance, according to Sison, was approved in 2002 during the incumbency of then-Mayor Lito Atienza. Since last year, he said, Estrada has stopped its implementation.
In a recent deliberation, the SC has allowed curfew for minors in Quezon City but nullified those in Manila and Navotas, which it found to be unconstitutional.
The high court agreed with the argument of the petitioner, the Samahan ng Progresibong Kabataan, that City Ordinance 8046 of Manila and Pambansang Ordinansa 2002-2013 issued by Navotas violated the provisions of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act.