“Will the no-contact apprehension scheme also help bring about better traffic flow in the metropolis, especially during the morning and evening rush hours, and really keep motorists disciplined?”
The Metro Manila Development Authority and the local governments in Manila and Quezon City are now implementing a novel traffic scheme supposedly aimed at making motorists strictly comply with traffic rules by imposing hefty fines for violations.
The no-contact apprehension scheme utilizes high-definition CCTV cameras in certain intersections to catch those violating traffic rules and regulations without having to be accosted by traffic enforcers.
Instead, erring motorists receive an official letter from the MMDA or local government informing them of the date and time of such violation complete with photos and a link to an actual video that can be accessed online.
The idea behind it is to minimize human contact between motorists and traffic enforcers and therefore avoid under-the-table deals between them, such as bribery and extortion.
Besides, it could instill discipline among motorists who tend to violate traffic rules with impunity, or when no one is looking.
That’s all well and good.
For LGUs, it’s one more fund-raising scheme to beef up their coffers, with the extra funds going to help the needy.
For another, it targets everyone, both rich and poor, and does not discriminate against the latter. It’s, we must concede, democratic.
The fines imposed on common traffic violations such as beating the red light, disregarding traffic signs and road markings, ignoring speed limits, and so on, start at P2,000 and I suppose, can go higher.
For motorists, the fines constitute an amount that can be spent on other basic needs in these difficult times.
But does the cost of putting up a dedicated 24-hr., high-end, and no doubt expensive CCTV system in selected intersections offset the cost of the monthly salaries of one or two traffic enforcers deployed in the same intersections?
The MMDA and LGUs also have to hire additional personnel to monitor the CCTVs on a daily basis.
Will the no-contact apprehension scheme also help bring about better traffic flow in the metropolis, especially during the morning and evening rush hours, and really keep motorists disciplined? That we would like to know.
I experienced the no-contact apprehension scheme first-hand in the city of Manila last April when I received a Notice of Violation from the Manila Traffic and Parking Bureau telling me that I had to pay P2,000 for disregarding lane markings and proceeding to cross Taft Avenue to the left from Pedro Gil St. (formerly Herran St.)
I decided to contest the Notice of Violation because the video clearly showed that the leftmost lane of Pedro Gil St. going to Taft Avenue was occupied by four tricycles and a passenger jeepney that were obviously waiting for passengers at the time.
Here’s what I told them in a formal letter:
“What was the proper thing to do since the street corner was occupied by five other vehicles that clearly did not intend to turn left to Taft Avenue?
“It is clear that these four tricycles and the jeepney were illegally occupying that portion of the street corner while the traffic signal had yet to turn to green.
“What I did was to occupy the middle lane while waiting for the traffic light to turn green and to proceed to turn left when it turned green.“My point is this: the MTPB should have a traffic enforcer assigned at that particular location to ensure that public utility vehicles waiting for passengers should not be allowed to stay there at all since that is exclusively for the use of left-turning vehicles, according to the lane markings.
“In short, the MTPB appears to have been too selective in enforcing traffic rules. As the video itself would show, the five public utility vehicles were not going to turn left but were simply waiting for passengers to pick up before going straight to the other side of Pedro Gil St.
“My question is this: Did the MTPB also issue notices of violation to the 5 other vehicles waiting for passengers at that time based on your CCTV footage?
“If not, then the agency should bear in mind that first, rules should apply to everyone, and second, that the concrete context should be considered. In this particular case, I would have had to wait perhaps for a very long time for the five other PUVs to pick up passengers in a street corner that they have no business occupying in the first place since that lane is exclusively for left-turning vehicles.
“My other point is this: the law is the law, and rules are rules, but there are exceptions as well in meritorious cases, and this is one such case.
“I do appreciate the work the MTPB is doing to ensure smooth and orderly traffic in the nation’s capital. But at the same time, law enforcement should be tempered with due consideration for the actual situation on the ground.”
When I submitted the letter to City Hall contesting the violation, I noticed that there were many others waiting in line at the MTPB office.
I was told to attend a hearing by an Adjudication Officer one month later.
I dutifully showed up before the Adjudication Officer on the day of the hearing.
It didn’t take him a minute to read my letter of explanation and to look at the video evidence to dismiss the case outright for lack of merit.
Many netizens are also up in arms against the traffic scheme and urging LGUs to install 21st century digital traffic lights with the minutes remaining for green lights to turn to amber and red instead of the old ones with no such numbers.
This, they are saying in unison, stacks the cards against motorists and allows the government to demand hefty fines from them without due process.
Sure, you can contest the violation but you have to go through a lot of inconvenience going to City Hall, lining up for hours so that you can explain yourself before traffic authorities. Many, I think, simply cough up the fines imposed so they can avoid all the hassle.
The lesson here: the no-contact apprehension program, by “convicting” the offender on the basis of video evidence and demanding payment of fines during these hard times, appears to me as nothing less than institutional shakedown.
Or perhaps, even plain and simple extortion.
(Email: [email protected])
