The chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means on Monday urged local government units (LGU) to “rethink” whether the model of allowing no-contact apprehension policy (NCAP) to be the subject of private-public partnership (PPP) is actually allowed under the law.
Albay Rep. Joey Sarte Salceda issued the statement after six Metro Manila mayors issued a joint statement to continue the implementation of the NCAP.
“I wouldn’t say the LGUs have liabilities. [But] There appears to be inconsistencies with the rules of taxation, the local government code, PPP rules, and DILG [Department of the Interior and Local Government] guidelines,” he added.
Currently, Salceda said private companies through PPP schemes are carrying out NCAP.
He said the typical arrangement of revenue sharing is 70-30, in favor of the private operator.
“While PPPs are legal, the following questions are raised on PPPs on NCAP: Can law enforcement be the subject of a Public-Private Partnership? There appears to be no legal precedent for the exercise of the police power by a private enterprise on behalf of the State, and it would appear to contradict the established doctrine of the State’s monopoly of force,” he said.
“Were stakeholders properly consulted? Stakeholder engagement and extensive consultation under a Consultation Plan is required under PPP Governing Board Resolution No. 2016-06-02,” he added.
The no-contact apprehension policy is now being implemented in Manila, Parañaque, Valenzuela, Muntinlupa, Marikina, and Quezon City.
Under the NCAP, motorists will be fined P2,000 (first offense), P3,000 (second offense) and P4,000 (third offense) for the following violations: disobedience to traffic control signals and signs, obstruction of pedestrian lanes, driving on yellow box, overspeeding, non-wearing of helmet for motorcycle riders, and disregard to lane markings.
Meanwhile, a much heavier fine of P3,000 (first offense), P4,000 (second offense), and P5,000 (third offense) await violators who committed: counter-flowing reckless driving, and non-wearing of seatbelts.
Salceda also urged the DILG, the Metro Manila Development Authority and the PPP Center to review the NCAP implementation and their underlying PPP agreements.
“I would also suggest that, as always, there be extensive stakeholder consultations among LGUs that will consider implementing NCAP. As is, the rule will disproportionately punish transport workers, who cannot avoid being on the road,” he added.
Meanwhile, the Land Transportation Office (LTO) reiterated its position to temporarily suspend the NCAP currently being implemented in some cities in the National Capital Region.
Clear-cut guidelines should first be drafted, finalized and then tested in order for the NCAP to effectively work for the benefit of the motoring public, according to LTO Chief Atty. Teofilo Guadiz III.
He called on the mayors of the five cities currently implementing NCAP, namely, the City of Manila, Quezon City, Parañaque City, Valenzuela City and Muntinlupa City, to sit down with the Agency and the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) and together, come up with a uniform set of guidelines that will be favorable to the cities and agencies implementing the policy, and the motoring public.
Four transport groups filed a petition with the Supreme Court, asking the High Tribunal to suspend the implementation of the NCAP, citing the policy as unconstitutional and, thus, invalid. The LTO is also a respondent in the petition filed by the transport groups.