Agustin v. Edu GR. NO.

L-49112

Facts:

This case is a petition assailing the validity or constitutionality of the Pres. Marcos Letter of
Instruction No. 229, requiring all vehicle owners, users and drivers to procure early warning
devices to be installed a distance away from such vehicles when it stalls. The Commissioner of
Land Transportation Office then issued Administrative Order No. 1 for compliance upon receipt
of the Letter Of Instruction. Assailed LOI No. 229 was based on hazards posed by such
obstructions to traffic which statistics show is one of the major causes of fatal or serious
accidents in land transportation. The 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals which
was ratified by the Philippine Government under PD No. 207 recommended the enactment of
local legislation for the installation of road safety signs and devices.

Petitioner is an owner of a Volkswagen Beetle Car which is already equipped with blinking lights
fore and aft contends that his car has already enough to provide warning to other motorists
and that the mandate to compel motorists to buy a set of reflectorized early warning devices is
redundant.

Petitioner alleges that such Letter Of Instruction and subsequent administrative order are
unconstitutional as it violates the provisions of due process, equal protection of the law and
undue delegation of police power.

Issue:

Whether or not Letter of Instructions No. 229 and the subsequent Administrative Order No. 1
by the LTO is unconstitutional.

Held:

The Supreme Court ruled for the dismissal of the petition. The statutes in question are deemed
constitutional.

The early warning device requirement is not an expensive redundancy, nor oppressive for car
owners because said device is universal among signatory countries to the said 1968 Vienna
Convention, and visible even under adverse conditions at a distance of at least 400 meters, any
motorists from this country or from any part of the world, who sees a reflectorized rectangular
early warning device installed on the roads, will conclude, without thinking, that somewhere
along that road, there is a motor vehicle which is stationary, stalled or disabled which obstructs
or endangers passing traffic.

These were definitely in the exercise of police power as such was established to promote public
welfare and public safety. The Letter of Instruction was based on the constitutional provision of
adopting to the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land.
The Letter of Instruction mentions, as its premise and basis, the resolutions of the 1968 Vienna
Convention on Road Signs and Signals and discussions on traffic safety by the United Nations –
that such Letter of Instructions was issued in consideration of a growing number of road
accidents due to stalled or parked vehicles on the streets and highways.