REPUBLIC ACT NO.

7924

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7924 - AN ACT CREATING THE METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DEFINING ITS POWERS AND FUNCTIONS, PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFORE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

SECTION 1. Declaration of Policy. It is hereby declared to be the policy of the State to treat Metropolitan Manila as a special development and administrative region and certain basic services affecting or involving Metro Manila as metro-wide services more efficiently and effectively planned, supervised and coordinated by a development authority as created herein, without prejudice to the autonomy of the affected local government units.

Pursuant to this policy, Metropolitan Manila, as a public corporation created under Presidential Decree No. 824, embracing the cities of Caloocan, Manila, Mandaluyong, Makati, Pasay, Pasig, Quezon, and Muntinlupa, and the municipalities of Las Pias, Malabon, Marikina, Navotas, Paraaque, Pateros, San Juan, Tagig, and Valenzuela, is hereby constituted into a special development and administrative region subject to direct supervision of the President of the Philippines.

SECTION 2. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority. The affairs of Metropolitan Manila's shall be administered by the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, hereinafter referred to as the MMDA, to replace the Metro Manila Authority (MMA) organized under Executive Order No. 392 series of 1990.

The MMDA shall perform planning, monitoring and coordinative functions, and in the process exercise regulatory and supervisory authority over the delivery of metro-wide services within Metro Manila without diminution of the autonomy of the local government units concerning purely local matters.

SECTION 3. Scope of MMDA Services. Metro-wide services under the jurisdiction of the MMDA are those services which have metro-wide impact and transcend local political boundaries or entail huge expenditures such that it would not be viable for said services to be provided by the individual local government units (LGUs) comprising Metropolitan Manila. These services shall include:

(a) Development planning which includes the preparation of medium and long-term development plans; the development, evaluation and packaging of projects; investments programming; and coordination and monitoring of plan, program and project implementation.

(b) Transport and traffic management which include the formulation, coordination, and monitoring of policies, standards, programs and projects to rationalize the existing transport operations, infrastructure requirements, the use of thoroughfares, and promotion of safe and convenient movement of persons and goods; provision for the mass transport system and the institution of a system to regulate road users; administration and implementation of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic engineering services and traffic education programs, including the institution of a single ticketing system in Metropolitan Manila.

(c) Solid waste disposal and management which include formulation and implementation of policies, standards, programs and projects for proper and sanitary waste disposal. It shall likewise include the establishment and operation of sanitary land fill and related facilities and the implementation of other alternative programs intended to reduce, reuse and recycle solid waste.

(d) Flood control and sewerage management which include the formulation and implementation of policies, standards, programs and projects for an integrated flood control, drainage and sewerage system.

(e) Urban renewal, zoning, and land use planning, and shelter services which include the formulation, adoption and implementation of policies, standards, rules and regulations, programs and projects to rationalize and optimize urban land use and provide direction to urban growth and expansion, the rehabilitation and development of slum and blighted areas, the development of shelter and housing facilities and the provision of necessary social services thereof.

(f) Health and sanitation, urban protection and pollution control which include the formulation and implementation of policies, rules and regulations, standards, programs and projects for the promotion

and safeguarding of the health and sanitation of the region and for the enhancement of ecological balance and the prevention, control and abatement of environmental pollution.

(g) Public safety which includes the formulation and implementation of programs and policies and procedures to achieve public safety, especially preparedness for preventive or rescue operations during times of calamities and disasters such as conflagrations, earthquakes, flood and tidal waves, and coordination and mobilization of resources and the implementation of contingency plans for the rehabilitation and relief operations in coordination with national agencies concerned.

SECTION 4. Metro Manila Council. The governing board and policy making body of the MMDA shall be the Metro Manila Council, composed of the mayors of the eight (8) cities and nine (9) municipalities enumerated in Section 1 hereof, the president of the Metro Manila Vice Mayors League and the president of the Metro Manila Councilors League.

The heads of the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Department of Tourism (DOT), Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Committee (HUDCC), and Philippine National Police (PNP) or their duly authorized representatives, shall attend meetings of the council as non-voting members. The Council shall be headed by a chairman, who shall be appointed by the President and who shall continue to hold office at the discretion of the appointing authority. He shall be vested with the rank, rights, privileges, disqualifications, and prohibitions of a cabinet member.

The chairman shall be assisted by a general manager, an assistant general manager for finance and administration, an assistant general manager for planning and assistant general manager for operation, all of whom shall be appointed by the President with the consent and concurrence of the majority of the Council, subject to civil service laws, rules and regulations. They shall enjoy security of tenure and may be removed for cause in accordance with law.

The assistant general manager for planning must have not less than five (5) years extensive experience in development and planning or must hold a master's degree in urban planning or similar disciplines.

The chairman and members of the Council shall be entitled to allowance and per diems in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations on the matter.

SECTION 5. Functions and Powers of the Metro Manila Development Authority. The MMDA shall:

(a) Formulate, coordinate and regulate the implementation of medium and long-term plans and programs for the delivery of metro-wide services, land use and physical development within Metropolitan Manila, consistent with national development objectives and priorities;

(b) Prepare, coordinate and regulate the implementation of medium-term programs for metro-wide services which shall indicate sources and uses of funds for priority programs and projects, and which shall include the packaging of projects and presentation to funding institutions;

(c) Undertake and manage on its own metro-wide programs and projects for the delivery of specific services under its jurisdiction, subject to the approval of the Council. For this purpose, MMDA can create appropriate project management offices;

(d) Coordinate and monitor the implementation of such plans, programs and projects in Metro Manila; identify bottlenecks and adopt solutions to problems of implementation;

(e) The MMDA shall set the policies concerning traffic in Metro Manila, and shall coordinate and regulate the implementation of all programs and projects concerning traffic management, specifically pertaining to enforcement, engineering and education. Upon request, it shall be extended assistance and cooperation, including but not limited to, assignment of personnel, by all other government agencies and offices concerned;

(f) Install and administer a single ticketing system, fix, impose and collect fines and penalties for all kinds of violations of traffic rules and regulations, whether moving or non-moving in nature, and confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers' licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and regulations, the provisions of RA 4136 and PD 1605 to the contrary notwithstanding. For this purpose, the Authority shall enforce all traffic laws and regulations in Metro Manila, through its traffic operation center, and may deputize members of the PNP, traffic enforcers of local government units, duly licensed

security guards, or members of non-governmental organizations to whom may be delegated certain authority, subject to such conditions and requirements as the Authority may impose; and

(g) Perform other related functions required to achieve the objectives of the MMDA, including the undertaking of delivery of basic services to the local government units, when deemed necessary subject to prior coordination with and consent of the local government unit concerned.

SECTION 6. Functions of the Metro Manila Council.

(a) The Council shall be the policy-making body of the MMDA.

(b) It shall approve metro-wide plans, programs and projects and issue rules and regulations and resolutions deemed necessary by the MMDA to carry out the purposes of this Act.

(c) It may increase the rate of the allowances and per diems of the members of the Council to be effective during the term of the succeeding Council. It shall fix the compensation of the officers and personnel of the MMDA, and approve the annual budget thereof for submission to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).

(d) It shall promulgate rules and regulations and set policies and standards for metro-wide application governing the delivery of basic services, prescribe and collect service and regulatory fees, and impose and collect fines and penalties.

SECTION 7. Functions of the Chairman. The chairman shall:

(a) Appoint, subject to civil service laws, rules and regulations, all subordinate officers and employees, who shall enjoy security of tenure and may be removed only for cause in accordance with law. The chairman is hereby authorized to engage the services of experts/consultants either on full time or parttime basis, as may be required in the performance of his functions and duties as may be determined by him;

(b) Execute the policies and measures approved by the Metro Manila Council and be responsible for the efficient and effective day-to-day management of the operations of the MMDA;

(c) Prepare the annual budget for the operations of the MMDA for submission to the Council;

(d) Submit for consideration of the Council such other policies and measures as he may deem necessary to carry out the purposes and provisions of this Act;

(e) Subject to the guidelines and policies set by the Council, prepare the staffing pattern and fix the number of subordinate officials and employees of the MMDA; and exercise the power to discipline subordinate officials and employees under the provisions of law;

(f) Prepare an annual report on the accomplishments of the MMDA at the close of each calendar year for submission to the Council and to the President of the Philippines; and

(g) Perform such other duties as may be assigned to him by the President or by the Council.

SECTION 8. Functions of the General Manager. The general manager shall:

(a) Assist the chairman in the administration of the MMDA and supervision of subordinate personnel;

(b) Assist the chairman in the supervision of the operation of the various operating centers and units of the MMDA;

(c) Assist the chairman in the review of plans and programs for the MMDA and for Metro Manila in the preparation of the annual report of activities and accomplishments of the MMDA; and

(d) Perform such other duties and functions as may be lawfully delegated or assigned by the chairman from time to time.

SECTION 9. Institutional Linkages of the MMDA. The MMDA shall, in carrying out its functions, consult, coordinate and work closely with the LGUs, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and other national government agencies mentioned in Section 4 hereof, and accredited people's organizations (POs), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector operating in Metro Manila. The MMDA chairman or his authorized representative from among the Council members, shall be ex officio member of the boards of government corporations and committees of the department and offices of government whose activities are relevant to the objectives and responsibilities of the MMDA which shall include but not be limited to Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), DOTC, DPWH, HUDCC and Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG).

The MMDA shall have a master plan that shall serve as the framework for the local development plans of the component LGUs.

The MMDA shall submit its development plans and investment programs to the NEDA for integration into the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) and public investment program.

The implementation of the MMDA's plans, programs, and projects shall be undertaken by the LGUs, the concerned national government agencies, the POs, NGOs and the private sector and the MMDA itself where appropriate. For this purpose, the MMDA may enter into contracts, memoranda of agreement and other cooperative arrangements with these bodies for the delivery of the required services within Metropolitan Manila.

The MMDA shall, in coordination with the NEDA and the Department of Finance, interface with the foreign assistance agencies for purposes of obtaining financing support, grants and donations in support of its programs and projects.

SECTION 10. Sources of Funds and the Operating Budget Of MMDA:

(a) To carry out the purposes of this Act, the Amount of One billion pesos (P1,000,000,000) is hereby authorized to be appropriated for the initial operation of the MMDA. Thereafter, the annual expenditures including capital outlays of the MMDA shall be provided in the General Appropriations Act.

(b) The MMDA shall continue to receive the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) currently allocated to the present MMA.

(c) The MMDA is likewise empowered to levy fines, and impose fees and charges for various services rendered.

(d) Five percent (5%) of the total annual gross revenue of the preceding year, net of the internal revenue allotment, or each local government unit mentioned in Section 2 hereof, shall accrue and become payable monthly to the MMDA by each city or municipality. In case of failure to remit the said fixed contribution, the DBM shall cause the disbursement of the same to the MMDA chargeable against the IRA allotment of the city or municipality concerned, the provisions of Section 286 of RA 7160 to the contrary notwithstanding.

SECTION 11. Transitory Provisions. To prevent disruption in the delivery of the basic urban services pending the full implementation of the MMDA's organizational structure and staffing pattern, all officials and employees of the interim MMA shall continue to exercise their duties and functions and receive their salaries and allowances until they shall have been given notice of change of duties and functions, and of being transferred to another office or position.

All assets and properties presently in use or under the accountability of the interim MMA and all its obligations, indebtedness, or liabilities shall be transferred to and assumed by the MMDA created under this Act, subject to the conditions that may be established by the Department of Budget and Management, Office of the President, and Commission on Audit.

The civil service laws, rules and regulations pertinent to the displacement of personnel affected by this Act shall be strictly enforced. The national government shall provide such amounts as may be necessary to pay the benefits accruing to displaced employees at the rate of one and one-fourth (1 1/4) month's salary for every year of service: provided, that, if qualified for retirement under existing retirement laws, said employees may opt to receive the benefits thereunder.

SECTION 12. Repealing Clause. Executive Order No. 392 dated January 9, 1990 is hereby repealed. All other laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 13. Separability Clause. If any part or provision of this Act is held unconstitutional or invalid, other parts or provisions thereof which are not affected shall continue to remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 14. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following completion of its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation

You are going through a period, Libra, where the big picture is starting to fall together in the love department. If you are attached, do not dwell on any practical matters or realistic concerns that may impede your romantic goals. The details can be tended to when the time is right, and this is not your focus today. Instead reflect on the progress you have made, and enjoy this experience for what it is, and what it will be. If you are single, strong connections with a permanent potential are favored for you right now. You may be surprised with just how fast feelings can develop and commitments can be made by someone you would least expect it from.

The Inside Man

Killers on the Highway or Killer Highway?
Is Commonwealth Avenue really a Killer Highway?
Text: Tito F. Hermoso / Photos: posted May 24, 2011 14:50
5

Another esteemed member of the Media is killed in a road accident on Commonwealth Avenue. We'd like to think that the MMDA is always concerned, always on its toes, always thinking of new ways to reduce accidents, be it homeless rugby boys, drugged or drunk drivers, nocturnal sprinting jay walkers in fashionable all black gets maimed or killed on Commonwealth Avenue or any other Metro Manila road. The initial Press Release is to blame 2 "racing" buses and the solution is to mount radar guns on motorcycles. The bus

company was suspended for 30 days, a bit heavy handed considering the bus drivers involved in the accident have disappeared. Is any one really watching? Within a day, 70 arrests for speeding were recorded in a day, perhaps for the Network TV cameras and despite the MMDA's claim for non-contact arrests. Which begs the question? Didn't the MMDA make a big splash about monitoring the 60km/h speed limit on Commonwealth, first by getting the assistance of the NLEx anti-speeding team and then deploying laser guided Radar speed cameras on their own? Didn't MMDA release a long list of images of car plate numbers that were caught speeding on Commonwealth Avenue, the killer highway? Their next step is to deploy radar on motorcycles. Knee jerk First of all the hand held radar speed guns were not designed to be used on motorcycles. But I guess the MMDA knows that. For motorcycle or car mounted moving radar, the old fashioned VASCAR equipment that used to be deployed by the CHP [California Highway Patrol], would be appropriate. Passe, for good reason But many law enforcement agencies are already ditching VASCAR, in favor of LIDAR which is already used in both the NLEx and SCTEx, just like most Gulf states, European and Chinese highway traffic enforcers. Why? Because jurisprudence require rather complex and tedious rules of engagement when using VASCAR. The CHP procedure is to shadow a suspected speeding car for 3 miles at a stealth distance so the would be violator would not know he is under surveillance. If the subject car notices he is being followed by a prowl car and slows down to the legal limit within the 3 miles, he is not cited for the violation. The equipment is safeguarded from Police abuse which makes its evidence admissible in traffic court. Now, do the homework Now Commonwealth does not have vistas long enough for an MMDA mounted cop to shadow an errant motorist, be it car or bus. Besides, a comprehensive

accident investigation should determine the impact speed of any major collision, whether or not it causes fatalities. A bus strictly cruising at 60km/h on Commonwealth but fails to brake in time or swerves instead of braking is not guilty of speeding. But the same bus that doesn't follow prescribed minimum following distances will have very little time and distance to brake if the driver has to avoid a pedestrian or vehicle. In the case of the taxi the esteemed media personage was riding, the bus may have hit the taxi at an impact speed of 40km/h and cause that much damage and death. We have doubts that the accidents on the killer highway is truly caused by speeding but rather, the failure to brake. Is speeding really the cause? Also, if the MMDA is truly monitoring speeds on the killer highway 24/7 with radar guns on side of the road, the median and the footbridges, Commonwealth Avenue is already adequately covered. Thus there will be no need for motorcycles chasing/tailing buses, which is very dangerous and can cause peripheral accidents in the ensuing pursuit. Shadowing and pursuit requires special training and poor hapless MMDA mounted traffic aides have a lot on their plate already. In fact, most Police forces today never engage in the spectacular hot pursuits that we see on late night TV documentaries because an accident that ensues from hot pursuit makes the Police criminally liable to the collateral property damage and fatalities the chase may lead to. More road engineering Nevertheless, Commonwealth Avenue has gained the notoriety of being called killer highway. There is still a lot that can be done. Though there are signs identifying the proper lane to use on this 10x10 lane road, the signs should be all uniform and consistent. If possible, the signs should be on gantries but Commonwealth is so wide that the gantry signs are going to be very expensive. Right now, the signs that lead to the U-turns are only visible to motorists on lane 01 and 02 but not to those occupying lanes farthest from the median. Signs that segregate traffic between those bound for at-grade Tandang Sora and the straight through flyover are confusing. Lighting is patchy. This is where overhead lateral cables with hung luminaires can be strung to illuminate the black spots that mast street lighting cannot cover.

Killers all! Ultimately, the real culprit are the people themselves. Why do they prefer to risk their lives sprinting across 10 lanes of fast flowing traffic? Why do the bus drivers feel the need to swerve and cut each other up? Why do they have to accelerate hard, only to brake hard when they spot a lone passenger? Why do they have to even race, swerve and cut for one solitary fare? Even if the buses have speed limiters, which they do in all other countries, the kind of rude driving our drivers do will still cause accidents. The poor road gets the blame So before the MMDA risks its own motorcycle traffic aides to new and hard to enforce methods to tamp speeding, better spend more time really monitoring traffic from their CCTV network and spotters on the footbridges. If the accidents are properly investigated, almost all of the fatalities and injuries on the killer highway were caused by failure to brake, losing control through swerving and confusion on where to go. Not speeding. Its really bad driving, bad manners. Commonwealth Avenue is only a killer highway because of killer drivers. MMDA's thrust to reform bus drivers compensation from commission "boundary" system that breeds greed and ruthless driving to monthly wages is a step in the right direction.

As MMDA refuses to heed SC ruling...

Nobody is above the law, Atienza reminds Bayani
January 18, 2006, 8:00am

Manila Mayor Lito Atienza, president of the League of Metro Manila Mayors, yesterday admonished the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) to heed the Supreme Court to avoid usurpation of the powers of local government units (LGUs) The Supreme Court recently ruled that the MMDA has no police powers and therefore cannot enforce traffic laws in Metro Manila. "I am urging MMDA Chairman Bayani Fernando to be reminded of the solemn responsibility of those in government to uphold the rule of law enshrined in the Constitution as the only roadmap to political stability, harmony, and progress, Atienza said. The Manila mayor said it is very clear that the decision of the Highest Tribunal has established jurisprudence in correctly upholding the rule of law while strengthening ordinances governing LGUs to avoid confusion and restore order, specially in the streets of Metro Manila. The continued defiance by Fernando of the Supreme Court ruling, Atienza stressed, leads to anarchy.

In an interview with TV station ANC, Atienza also urged Fernando to remember that nobody is above the law and that upholding the rule of law is a fundamental obligation of any decent society." Even after the High Court had issued the said ruling, MMDA continues to enforce its police powers by confiscating licenses of traffic rules violators, Atienza said. This continued disobedience of the Supreme Court decision will force Metro Manila mayors to arrest MMDA operatives in their respective jurisdiction for usurpation of public function as provided by law. "It is the consensus among Metro Manila Mayors to enforce local ordinances and put a stop to Fernandos grand misinterpretation of the law, Atienza said. What Metro Manila Mayors are asking for, Atienza said, is simply for "better coordination from Chairman Fernando, to at least give local executives some respect before he goes ahead with what he wants to do. "Some city and municipal mayors sometimes feel compelled to advise Chairman Fernando to run for mayor of Metro Manila so he can do whatever he wants, like paint Metro Manila pink, put up expensive, unsanitary but unnecessary urinals and bicycle lanes, etc. Atienza commented. He said that at a time of severe political discontent, "all the Presidents men must rally behind the government to achieve unity and harmony." "It has been said that the rule of law obliges those who are in government to be the supreme example of faithful adherence to the laws of the land. If those in government insist to ignore or throw the law to the winds, then we can never expect those whom we govern to respect those who themselves do not respect the law, Atienza said.

FIRST DIVISION [G.R. No. 135962. March 27, 2000] METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, Petitioner, vs. BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, INC., Respondent. DECISION PUNO, J.: Not infrequently, the government is tempted to take legal shortcuts to solve urgent problems of the people. But even when government is armed with the best of intention, we cannot allow it to run roughshod over the rule of law. Again, we let the hammer fall and fall hard on the illegal attempt of the MMDA to open for public use a private road in a private subdivision. While we hold that the general welfare should be promoted, we stress that it should not be achieved at the expense of the rule of law.

Petitioner MMDA is a government agency tasked with the delivery of basic services in Metro Manila. Respondent Bel-Air Village Association, Inc. (BAVA) is a non-stock, non-profit corporation whose members are homeowners in Bel-Air Village, a private subdivision in Makati City. Respondent BAVA is the registered owner of Neptune Street, a road inside Bel-Air Village. On December 30, 1995, respondent received from petitioner, through its Chairman, a notice dated December 22, 1995 requesting respondent to open Neptune Street to public vehicular traffic starting January 2, 1996. The notice reads: "SUBJECT: NOTICE of the Opening of Neptune Street to Traffic "Dear President Lindo, "Please be informed that pursuant to the mandate of the MMDA law or Republic Act No. 7924 which requires the Authority to rationalize the use of roads and/or thoroughfares for the safe and convenient movement of persons, Neptune Street shall be opened to vehicular traffic effective January 2, 1996. "In view whereof, the undersigned requests you to voluntarily open the points of entry and exit on said street. "Thank you for your cooperation and whatever assistance that may be extended by your association to the MMDA personnel who will be directing traffic in the area. "Finally, we are furnishing you with a copy of the handwritten instruction of the President on the matter. "Very truly yours, PROSPERO I. ORETA Chairman"1 On the same day, respondent was apprised that the perimeter wall separating the subdivision from the adjacent Kalayaan Avenue would be demolished. On January 2, 1996, respondent instituted against petitioner before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 136, Makati City, Civil Case No. 96-001 for injunction. Respondent prayed for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining the opening of Neptune Street and prohibiting the demolition of the perimeter wall. The trial court issued a temporary restraining order the following day. On January 23, 1996, after due hearing, the trial court denied issuance of a preliminary injunction.2 Respondent questioned the denial before the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 39549. The appellate court conducted an ocular inspection of Neptune Street 3 and on February 13, 1996, it issued a writ of preliminary injunction enjoining the implementation of the MMDAs proposed action.4 On January 28, 1997, the appellate court rendered a Decision on the merits of the case finding that the MMDA has no authority to order the opening of Neptune Street, a private subdivision road and cause the demolition of its perimeter walls. It held that the authority is lodged in the City Council of Makati by ordinance. The decision disposed of as follows: "WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED; the challenged Order dated January 23, 1995, in Civil Case No. 96-001, is SET ASIDE and the Writ of Preliminary Injunction issued on February 13, 1996 is hereby made permanent.

"For want of sustainable substantiation, the Motion to Cite Roberto L. del Rosario in contempt is denied.5 "No pronouncement as to costs. "SO ORDERED."6 The Motion for Reconsideration of the decision was denied on September 28, 1998. Hence, this recourse. Petitioner MMDA raises the following questions: "I HAS THE METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MMDA) THE MANDATE TO OPEN NEPTUNE STREET TO PUBLIC TRAFFIC PURSUANT TO ITS REGULATORY AND POLICE POWERS? II IS THE PASSAGE OF AN ORDINANCE A CONDITION PRECEDENT BEFORE THE MMDA MAY ORDER THE OPENING OF SUBDIVISION ROADS TO PUBLIC TRAFFIC? III IS RESPONDENT BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, INC. ESTOPPED FROM DENYING OR ASSAILING THE AUTHORITY OF THE MMDA TO OPEN THE SUBJECT STREET? V WAS RESPONDENT DEPRIVED OF DUE PROCESS DESPITE THE SEVERAL MEETINGS HELD BETWEEN MMDA AND THE AFFECTED BEL-AIR RESIDENTS AND BAVA OFFICERS? V HAS RESPONDENT COME TO COURT WITH UNCLEAN HANDS?"7 Neptune Street is owned by respondent BAVA. It is a private road inside Bel-Air Village, a private residential subdivision in the heart of the financial and commercial district of Makati City. It runs parallel to Kalayaan Avenue, a national road open to the general public. Dividing the two (2) streets is a concrete perimeter wall approximately fifteen (15) feet high. The western end of Neptune Street intersects Nicanor Garcia, formerly Reposo Street, a subdivision road open to public vehicular traffic, while its eastern end intersects Makati Avenue, a national road. Both ends of Neptune Street are guarded by iron gates. Petitioner MMDA claims that it has the authority to open Neptune Street to public traffic because it is an agent of the state endowed with police power in the delivery of basic services in Metro Manila. One of these basic services is traffic management which involves the regulation of the use of thoroughfares to insure the safety, convenience and welfare of the general public. It is alleged that the police power of MMDA was affirmed by this Court in the consolidated cases of Sangalang v. Intermediate Appellate Court.8 From the premise that it has police power, it is now urged that there is no need for the City of Makati to enact an ordinance opening Neptune street to the public.9 Police power is an inherent attribute of sovereignty. It has been defined as the power vested by the Constitution in the legislature to make, ordain, and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable

laws, statutes and ordinances, either with penalties or without, not repugnant to the Constitution, as they shall judge to be for the good and welfare of the commonwealth, and for the subjects of the same.10 The power is plenary and its scope is vast and pervasive, reaching and justifying measures for public health, public safety, public morals, and the general welfare.11 It bears stressing that police power is lodged primarily in the National Legislature.12 It cannot be exercised by any group or body of individuals not possessing legislative power.13 The National Legislature, however, may delegate this power to the President and administrative boards as well as the lawmaking bodies of municipal corporations or local government units.14 Once delegated, the agents can exercise only such legislative powers as are conferred on them by the national lawmaking body.15 A local government is a "political subdivision of a nation or state which is constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs."16The Local Government Code of 1991 defines a local government unit as a "body politic and corporate"17 -- one endowed with powers as a political subdivision of the National Government and as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants of its territory.18 Local government units are the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays.19 They are also the territorial and political subdivisions of the state.20 Our Congress delegated police power to the local government units in the Local Government Code of 1991. This delegation is found in Section 16 of the same Code, known as the general welfare clause, viz: "Sec. 16. General Welfare.Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government units shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants."21 Local government units exercise police power through their respective legislative bodies . The legislative body of the provincial government is the sangguniang panlalawigan, that of the city government is the sangguniang panlungsod, that of the municipal government is the sangguniang bayan, and that of the barangay is the sangguniang barangay. The Local Government Code of 1991 empowers the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod and sangguniang bayan to "enact ordinances, approve resolutions and appropriate funds for the general welfare of the [province, city or municipality, as the case may be], and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of the Code and in the proper exercise of the corporate powers of the [province, city municipality] provided under the Code x x x."22 The same Code gives the sangguniang barangay the power to "enact ordinances as may be necessary to discharge the responsibilities conferred upon it by law or ordinance and to promote the general welfare of the inhabitants thereon."23 Metropolitan or Metro Manila is a body composed of several local government units - i.e., twelve (12) cities and five (5) municipalities, namely, the cities of Caloocan, Manila, Mandaluyong, Makati, Pasay, Pasig, Quezon, Muntinlupa, Las Pinas, Marikina, Paranaque and Valenzuela, and the municipalities of Malabon, , Navotas, , Pateros, San Juan and Taguig. With the passage of Republic Act (R. A.) No. 792424 in 1995, Metropolitan Manila was declared as a "special development and administrative region" and the Administration of "metro-wide" basic services affecting the region placed under "a development authority" referred to as the MMDA .25 "Metro-wide services" are those "services which have metro-wide impact and transcend local political boundaries or entail huge expenditures such that it would not be viable for said services to be provided by the individual local government units comprising Metro Manila."26 There are seven (7) basic metro-wide services and the scope of these services cover the following: (1) development

planning; (2) transport and traffic management; (3) solid waste disposal and management; (4) flood control and sewerage management; (5) urban renewal, zoning and land use planning, and shelter services; (6) health and sanitation, urban protection and pollution control; and (7) public safety. The basic service of transport and traffic management includes the following: "(b) Transport and traffic management which include the formulation, coordination, and monitoring of policies, standards, programs and projects to rationalize the existing transport operations, infrastructure requirements, the use of thoroughfares, and promotion of safe and convenient movement of persons and goods; provision for the mass transport system and the institution of a system to regulate road users; administration and implementation of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic engineering services and traffic education programs, including the institution of a single ticketing system in Metropolitan Manila;"27 In the delivery of the seven (7) basic services, the MMDA has the following powers and functions: "Sec. 5. Functions and powers of the Metro Manila Development Authority.The MMDA shall: (a) Formulate, coordinate and regulate the implementation of medium and long-term plans and programs for the delivery of metro-wide services, land use and physical development within Metropolitan Manila, consistent with national development objectives and priorities; (b) Prepare, coordinate and regulate the implementation of medium-term investment programs for metro-wide services which shall indicate sources and uses of funds for priority programs and projects, and which shall include the packaging of projects and presentation to funding institutions; (c) Undertake and manage on its own metro-wide programs and projects for the delivery of specific services under its jurisdiction, subject to the approval of the Council. For this purpose, MMDA can create appropriate project management offices; (d) Coordinate and monitor the implementation of such plans, programs and projects in Metro Manila; identify bottlenecks and adopt solutions to problems of implementation; (e) The MMDA shall set the policies concerning traffic in Metro Manila, and shall coordinate and regulate the implementation of all programs and projects concerning traffic management, specifically pertaining to enforcement, engineering and education. Upon request, it shall be extended assistance and cooperation, including but not limited to, assignment of personnel, by all other government agencies and offices concerned; (f) Install and administer a single ticketing system, fix, impose and collect fines and penalties for all kinds of violations of traffic rules and regulations, whether moving or nonmoving in nature, and confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and regulations, the provisions of RA 4136 and PD 1605 to the contrary notwithstanding. For this purpose, the Authority shall impose all traffic laws and regulations in Metro Manila, through its traffic operation center, and may deputize members of the PNP, traffic enforcers of local government units, duly licensed security guards, or members of non-governmental organizations to whom may be delegated certain authority, subject to such conditions and requirements as the Authority may impose; and (g) Perform other related functions required to achieve the objectives of the MMDA, including the undertaking of delivery of basic services to the local government units, when deemed necessary subject to prior coordination with and consent of the local government unit concerned." The implementation of the MMDAs plans, programs and projects is undertaken by the local government units, national government agencies, accredited peoples organizations, non-governmental

organizations, and the private sector as well as by the MMDA itself. For this purpose, the MMDA has the power to enter into contracts, memoranda of agreement and other cooperative arrangements with these bodies for the delivery of the required services within Metro Manila.28 The governing board of the MMDA is the Metro Manila Council. The Council is composed of the mayors of the component 12 cities and 5 municipalities, the president of the Metro Manila Vice-Mayors League and the president of the Metro Manila Councilors League.29 The Council is headed by a Chairman who is appointed by the President and vested with the rank of cabinet member. As the policy-making body of the MMDA, the Metro Manila Council approves metro-wide plans, programs and projects, and issues the necessary rules and regulations for the implementation of said plans; it approves the annual budget of the MMDA and promulgates the rules and regulations for the delivery of basic services, collection of service and regulatory fees, fines and penalties. These functions are particularly enumerated as follows: "Sec. 6. Functions of the Metro Manila Council. (a) The Council shall be the policy-making body of the MMDA; (b) It shall approve metro-wide plans, programs and projects and issue rules and regulations deemed necessary by the MMDA to carry out the purposes of this Act; (c) It may increase the rate of allowances and per diems of the members of the Council to be effective during the term of the succeeding Council. It shall fix the compensation of the officers and personnel of the MMDA, and approve the annual budget thereof for submission to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM); (d) It shall promulgate rules and regulations and set policies and standards for metro-wide application governing the delivery of basic services, prescribe and collect service and regulatory fees, and impose and collect fines and penalties." Clearly, the scope of the MMDAs function is limited to the delivery of the seven (7) basic services. One of these is transport and traffic management which includes the formulation and monitoring of policies, standards and projects to rationalize the existing transport operations, infrastructure requirements, the use of thoroughfares and promotion of the safe movement of persons and goods. It also covers the mass transport system and the institution of a system of road regulation, the administration of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic engineering services and traffic education programs, including the institution of a single ticketing system in Metro Manila for traffic violations. Under this service, the MMDA is expressly authorized "to set the policies concerning traffic" and "coordinate and regulate the implementation of all traffic management programs." In addition, the MMDA may "install and administer a single ticketing system," fix, impose and collect fines and penalties for all traffic violations. It will be noted that the powers of the MMDA are limited to the following acts: formulation, coordination, regulation, implementation, preparation, management, monitoring, setting of policies, installation of a system and administration. There is no syllable in R. A. No. 7924 that grants the MMDA police power, let alone legislative power. Even the Metro Manila Council has not been delegated any legislative power. Unlike the legislative bodies of the local government units, there is no provision in R. A. No. 7924 that empowers the MMDA or its Council to "enact ordinances, approve resolutions and appropriate funds for the general welfare" of the inhabitants of Metro Manila. The MMDA is, as termed in the charter itself, a "development authority."30 It is an agency created for the purpose of laying down policies and coordinating with the various national government agencies, peoples organizations, non-governmental organizations and the private sector for the efficient and expeditious delivery of basic services in the vast metropolitan area. All its functions are administrative in nature and these are actually summed up in the charter itself, viz: "Sec. 2. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority. -- x x x.

The MMDA shall perform planning, monitoring and coordinative functions, and in the process exercise regulatory and supervisory authority over the delivery of metro-wide services within Metro Manila, without diminution of the autonomy of the local government units concerning purely local matters."31 Petitioner cannot seek refuge in the cases of Sangalang v. Intermediate Appellate Court32 where we upheld a zoning ordinance issued by the Metro Manila Commission (MMC), the predecessor of the MMDA, as an exercise of police power. The first Sangalang decision was on the merits of the petition,33 while the second decision denied reconsideration of the first case and in addition discussed the case ofYabut v. Court of Appeals.34 Sangalang v. IAC involved five (5) consolidated petitions filed by respondent BAVA and three residents of Bel-Air Village against other residents of the Village and the Ayala Corporation, formerly the Makati Development Corporation, as the developer of the subdivision. The petitioners sought to enforce certain restrictive easements in the deeds of sale over their respective lots in the subdivision. These were the prohibition on the setting up of commercial and advertising signs on the lots, and the condition that the lots be used only for residential purposes. Petitioners alleged that respondents, who were residents along Jupiter Street of the subdivision, converted their residences into commercial establishments in violation of the "deed restrictions," and that respondent Ayala Corporation ushered in the full commercialization" of Jupiter Street by tearing down the perimeter wall that separated the commercial from the residential section of the village.35 The petitions were dismissed based on Ordinance No. 81 of the Municipal Council of Makati and Ordinance No. 81-01 of the Metro Manila Commission (MMC). Municipal Ordinance No. 81 classified Bel-Air Village as a Class A Residential Zone, with its boundary in the south extending to the center line of Jupiter Street. The Municipal Ordinance was adopted by the MMC under the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for the National Capital Region and promulgated as MMC Ordinance No. 81-01. BelAir Village was indicated therein as bounded by Jupiter Street and the block adjacent thereto was classified as a High Intensity Commercial Zone.36 We ruled that since both Ordinances recognized Jupiter Street as the boundary between Bel-Air Village and the commercial district, Jupiter Street was not for the exclusive benefit of Bel-Air residents. We also held that the perimeter wall on said street was constructed not to separate the residential from the commercial blocks but simply for security reasons, hence, in tearing down said wall, Ayala Corporation did not violate the "deed restrictions" in the deeds of sale. We upheld the ordinances, specifically MMC Ordinance No. 81-01, as a legitimate exercise of police power.37 The power of the MMC and the Makati Municipal Council to enact zoning ordinances for the general welfare prevailed over the "deed restrictions". In the second Sangalang/Yabut decision, we held that the opening of Jupiter Street was warranted by the demands of the common good in terms of "traffic decongestion and public convenience." Jupiter was opened by the Municipal Mayor to alleviate traffic congestion along the public streets adjacent to the Village.38 The same reason was given for the opening to public vehicular traffic of Orbit Street, a road inside the same village. The destruction of the gate in Orbit Street was also made under the police power of the municipal government. The gate, like the perimeter wall along Jupiter, was a public nuisance because it hindered and impaired the use of property, hence, its summary abatement by the mayor was proper and legal.39 Contrary to petitioners claim, the two Sangalang cases do not apply to the case at bar. Firstly , both involved zoning ordinances passed by the municipal council of Makati and the MMC. In the instant case, the basis for the proposed opening of Neptune Street is contained in the notice of December 22, 1995 sent by petitioner to respondent BAVA, through its president. The notice does not cite any ordinance or law, either by the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Makati City or by the MMDA, as the legal basis for the proposed opening of Neptune Street. Petitioner MMDA simply relied on its authority under its charter "to rationalize the use of roads and/or thoroughfares for the safe and convenient movement of persons." Rationalizing the use of roads and thoroughfares is one of the acts

that fall within the scope of transport and traffic management. By no stretch of the imagination, however, can this be interpreted as an express or implied grant of ordinance-making power, much less police power. Secondly, the MMDA is not the same entity as the MMC in Sangalang. Although the MMC is the forerunner of the present MMDA, an examination of Presidential Decree (P. D.) No. 824, the charter of the MMC, shows that the latter possessed greater powers which were not bestowed on the present MMDA. Metropolitan Manila was first created in 1975 by Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 824. It comprised the Greater Manila Area composed of the contiguous four (4) cities of Manila, Quezon, Pasay and Caloocan, and the thirteen (13) municipalities of Makati, Mandaluyong, San Juan, Las Pinas, Malabon, Navotas, Pasig, Pateros, Paranaque, Marikina, Muntinlupa and Taguig in the province of Rizal, and Valenzuela in the province of Bulacan.40 Metropolitan Manila was created as a response to the finding that the rapid growth of population and the increase of social and economic requirements in these areas demand a call for simultaneous and unified development; that the public services rendered by the respective local governments could be administered more efficiently and economically if integrated under a system of central planning; and this coordination, "especially in the maintenance of peace and order and the eradication of social and economic ills that fanned the flames of rebellion and discontent [were] part of reform measures under Martial Law essential to the safety and security of the State."41 Metropolitan Manila was established as a "public corporation" with the following powers: "Section 1. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila.There is hereby created a public corporation, to be known as the Metropolitan Manila,vested with powers and attributes of a corporation including the power to make contracts, sue and be sued, acquire, purchase, expropriate, hold, transfer and dispose of property and such other powers as are necessary to carry out its purposes. The Corporation shall be administered by a Commission created under this Decree."42 The administration of Metropolitan Manila was placed under the Metro Manila Commission (MMC) vested with the following powers: "Sec. 4. Powers and Functions of the Commission . - The Commission shall have the following powers and functions: 1. To act as a central government to establish and administer programs and provide services common to the area; 2. To levy and collect taxes and special assessments, borrow and expend money and issue bonds, revenue certificates, and other obligations of indebtedness. Existing tax measures should, however, continue to be operative until otherwise modified or repealed by the Commission; 3. To charge and collect fees for the use of public service facilities; 4. To appropriate money for the operation of the metropolitan government and review appropriations for the city and municipal units within its jurisdiction with authority to disapprove the same if found to be not in accordance with the established policies of the Commission, without prejudice to any contractual obligation of the local government units involved existing at the time of approval of this Decree; 5. To review, amend, revise or repeal all ordinances, resolutions and acts of cities and municipalities within Metropolitan Manila;

6. To enact or approve ordinances, resolutions and to fix penalties for any violation thereof which shall not exceed a fine ofP10,000.00 or imprisonment of six years or both such fine and imprisonment for a single offense; 7. To perform general administrative, executive and policy-making functions; 8. To establish a fire control operation center, which shall direct the fire services of the city and municipal governments in the metropolitan area; 9. To establish a garbage disposal operation center, which shall direct garbage collection and disposal in the metropolitan area; 10. To establish and operate a transport and traffic center, which shall direct traffic activities; 11. To coordinate and monitor governmental and private activities pertaining to essential services such as transportation, flood control and drainage, water supply and sewerage, social, health and environmental services, housing, park development, and others; 12. To insure and monitor the undertaking of a comprehensive social, economic and physical planning and development of the area; 13. To study the feasibility of increasing barangay participation in the affairs of their respective local governments and to propose to the President of the Philippines definite programs and policies for implementation; 14. To submit within thirty (30) days after the close of each fiscal year an annual report to the President of the Philippines and to submit a periodic report whenever deemed necessary; and 15. To perform such other tasks as may be assigned or directed by the President of the Philippines." The MMC was the "central government" of Metro Ma nila for the purpose of establishing and administering programs providing services common to the area. As a "central government" it had the power to levy and collect taxes and special assessments, the power to charge and collect fees; the power to appropriate money for its operation, and at the same time, review appropriations for the city and municipal units within its jurisdiction. It was bestowed the power to enact or approve ordinances, resolutions and fix penalties for violation of such ordinances and resolutions. It also had the power to review, amend, revise or repeal all ordinances, resolutions and acts of any of the four (4) cities and thirteen (13) municipalities comprising Metro Manila. P. D. No. 824 further provided: "Sec. 9. Until otherwise provided, the governments of the four cities and thirteen municipalities in the Metropolitan Manila shall continue to exist in their present form except as may be inconsistent with this Decree. The members of the existing city and municipal councils in Metropolitan Manila shall, upon promulgation of this Decree, and until December 31, 1975, become members of the Sangguniang Bayan which is hereby created for every city and municipality of Metropolitan Manila. In addition, the Sangguniang Bayan shall be composed of as many barangay captains as may be determined and chosen by the Commission, and such number of representatives from other sectors of the society as may be appointed by the President upon recommendation of the Commission. x x x.

The Sangguniang Bayan may recommend to the Commission ordinances, resolutions or such measures as it may adopt; Provided, that no such ordinance, resolution or measure shall become effective, until after its approval by the Commission; and Provided further, that the power to impose taxes and other levies, the power to appropriate money and the power to pass ordinances or resolutions with penal sanctions shall be vested exclusively in the Commission." The creation of the MMC also carried with it the creation of the Sangguniang Bayan. This was composed of the members of the component city and municipal councils, barangay captains chosen by the MMC and sectoral representatives appointed by the President. The Sangguniang Bayan had the power to recommend to the MMC the adoption of ordinances, resolutions or measures. It was the MMC itself, however, that possessed legislative powers. All ordinances, resolutions and measures recommended by the Sangguniang Bayanwere subject to the MMCs approval. Moreover, the power to impose taxes and other levies, the power to appropriate money, and the power to pass ordinances or resolutions with penal sanctions were vested exclusively in the MMC. Thus, Metropolitan Manila had a "central government," i.e., the MMC which fully possessed legislative and police powers. Whatever legislative powers the component cities and municipalities had were all subject to review and approval by the MMC. After President Corazon Aquino assumed power , there was a clamor to restore the autonomy of the local government units in Metro Manila. Hence, Sections 1 and 2 of Article X of the 1987 Constitution provided: "Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays. There shall be autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as herein provided. Section 2 . The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy local autonomy." The Constitution, however, recognized the necessity of creating metropolitan regions not only in the existing National Capital Region but also in potential equivalents in the Visayas and Mindanao.43 Section 11 of the same Article X thus provided: "Section 11. The Congress may, by law, create special metropolitan political subdivisions, subject to a plebiscite as set forth in Section 10 hereof. The component cities and municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be entitled to their own local executives and legislative assemblies. The jurisdiction of the metropolitan authority that will thereby be created shall be limited to basic services requiring coordination." The Constitution itself expressly provides that Congress may, by law, create "special metropolitan political subdivisions" which shall be subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected; the jurisdiction of this subdivision shall be limited to basic services requiring coordination; and the cities and municipalities comprising this subdivision shall retain their basic autonomy and their own local executive and legislative assemblies. 44 Pending enactment of this law, the Transitory Provisions of the Constitution gave the President of the Philippines the power to constitute the Metropolitan Authority, viz: "Section 8. Until otherwise provided by Congress, the President may constitute the Metropolitan Authority to be composed of the heads of all local government units comprising the Metropolitan Manila area."45 In 1990, President Aquino issued Executive Order (E. O.) No. 392 and constituted the Metropolitan Manila Authority (MMA). The powers and functions of the MMC were devolved to the MMA.46 It ought to be stressed, however, that not all powers and functions of the MMC were passed to the MMA. The MMAs power was limited to the "delivery of basic urban

services requiring coordination in Metropolitan Manila."47 The MMAs governing body, the Metropolitan Manila Council, although composed of the mayors of the component cities and municipalities, was merely given the power of: (1) formulation of policies on the delivery of basic services requiring coordination and consolidation; and (2) promulgation of resolutions and other issuances, approval of a code of basic services and the exercise of its rule-making power.48 Under the 1987 Constitution , the local government units became primarily responsible for the governance of their respective political subdivisions. The MMAs jurisdiction was limited to addressing common problems involving basic services that transcended local boundaries. It did not have legislative power. Its power was merely to provide the local government units technical assistance in the preparation of local development plans. Any semblance of legislative power it had was confined to a "review [of] legislation proposed by the local legislative assemblies to ensure consistency among local governments and with the comprehensive development plan of Metro Manila," and to "advise the local governments accordingly."49 When R.A. No. 7924 took effect, Metropolitan Manila became a "special development and administrative region" and the MMDA a "special development authority" whose functions were "without prejudice to the autonomy of the affected local government units." The character of the MMDA was clearly defined in the legislative debates enacting its charter. R. A. No. 7924 originated as House Bill No. 14170/ 11116 and was introduced by several legislators led by Dante Tinga, Roilo Golez and Feliciano Belmonte. It was presented to the House of Representatives by the Committee on Local Governments chaired by Congressman Ciriaco R. Alfelor. The bill was a product of Committee consultations with the local government units in the National Capital Region (NCR), with former Chairmen of the MMC and MMA,50 and career officials of said agencies. When the bill was first taken up by the Committee on Local Governments, the following debate took place: "THE CHAIRMAN [Hon. Ciriaco Alfelor]: Okay, Let me explain. This has been debated a long time ago, you know. Its a special we can create a special metropolitan political subdivision. Actually, there are only six (6) political subdivisions provided for in the Constitution: barangay, municipality, city, province, and we have the Autonomous Region of Mindanao and we have the Cordillera. So we have 6. Now. HON. [Elias] LOPEZ: May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman. In the case of the Autonomous Region, that is also specifically mandated by the Constitution. THE CHAIRMAN: Thats correct. But it is considered to be a political subdivision. What is the meaning of a political subdivision? Meaning to say, that it has its own government, it has its own political personality, it has the power to tax, and all governmental powers: police power and everything. All right. Authority is different; because it does not have its own government. It is only a council, it is an organization of political subdivision, powers, no, which is not imbued with any political power.mis If you go over Section 6, where the powers and functions of the Metro Manila Development Authority, it is purely coordinative. And it provides here that the council is policymaking. All right. Under the Constitution is a Metropolitan Authority with coordinative power. Meaning to say, it coordinates all of the different basic services which have to be delivered to the constituency. All right. There is now a problem. Each local government unit is given its respective as a political subdivision. Kalookan has its powers, as provided for and protected and guaranteed by the Constitution. All right, the exercise. However, in the exercise of that power, it might be deleterious and disadvantageous to

other local government units. So, we are forming an authority where all of these will be members and then set up a policy in order that the basic services can be effectively coordinated. All right. Of course, we cannot deny that the MMDA has to survive. We have to provide some funds, resources. But it does not possess any political power. We do not elect the Governor. We do not have the power to tax. As a matter of fact, I was trying to intimate to the author that it must have the power to sue and be sued because it coordinates. All right. It coordinates practically all these basic services so that the flow and the distribution of the basic services will be continuous. Like traffic, we cannot deny that. Its before our eyes. Sewerage, flood control, water system, peace and order, we cannot deny these. Its right on our face. We have to look for a solution. What would be the right solution? All right, we envision that there should be a coordinating agency and it is called an authority. All right, if you do not want to call it an authority, its alright. We may call it a council or maybe a management agency. x x x."51 Clearly, the MMDA is not a political unit of government. The power delegated to the MMDA is that given to the Metro Manila Council to promulgate administrative rules and regulations in the implementation of the MMDAs functions. There is no grant of authority to enact ordinances and regulations for the general welfare of the inhabitants of the metropolis. This was explicitly stated in the last Committee deliberations prior to the bills presentation to Congress. Thus: "THE CHAIRMAN: Yeah, but we have to go over the suggested revision. I think this was already approved before, but it was reconsidered in view of the proposals, set-up, to make the MMDA stronger. Okay, so if there is no objection to paragraph "f" And then next is paragraph "b," under Section 6. "It shall approve metro-wide plans, programs and projects and issue ordinances or resolutions deemed necessary by the MMDA to carry out the purposes of this Act." Do you have the powers? Does the MMDA because that takes the form of a local government unit, a political subdivision. HON. [Feliciano] BELMONTE: Yes, I believe so, your Honor. When we say that it has the policies, its very clear that those policies must be followed. Otherwise, whats the use of empowering it to come out with policies. Now, the policies may be in the form of a resolution or it may be in the form of a ordinance. The term "ordinance" in this case really gives it more teeth, your honor. Otherwise, we are going to see a situation where you have the power to adopt the policy but you cannot really make it stick as in the case now, and I think here is Chairman Bunye. I think he will agree that that is the case now. Youve got the power to set a policy, the body wants to follow your policy, then we say lets call it an ordinance and see if they will not follow it. THE CHAIRMAN: Thats very nice. I like that. However, there is a constitutional impediment. You are making this MMDA a political subdivision. The creation of the MMDA would be subject to a plebiscite. That is what Im trying to avoid. Ive been trying to avoid this kind of predicament. Under the Constitution it states: if it is a political subdivision, once it is created it has to be subject to a plebiscite. Im trying to make this as administrative. Thats why we place the Chairman as a cabinet rank. HON. BELMONTE: All right, Mr. Chairman, okay, what you are saying there is . THE CHAIRMAN: In setting up ordinances, it is a political exercise. Believe me. HON. [Elias] LOPEZ: Mr. Chairman, it can be changed into issuances of rules and regulations. That would be it shall also be enforced. HON. BELMONTE: Okay, I will .

HON. LOPEZ: And you can also say that violation of such rule, you impose a sanction. But you know, ordinance has a different legal connotation. HON. BELMONTE: All right. I defer to that opinion, your Honor. THE CHAIRMAN: So instead of ordinances, say rules and regulations. HON. BELMONTE: Or resolutions. Actually, they are actually considering resolutions now. THE CHAIRMAN: Rules and resolutions. HON. BELMONTE: Rules, regulations and resolutions."52 The draft of H. B. No. 14170/ 11116 was presented by the Committee to the House of Representatives. The explanatory note to the bill stated that the proposed MMDA is a "development authority" which is a "national agency, not a political government unit."53 The explanatory note was adopted as the sponsorship speech of the Committee on Local Governments. No interpellations or debates were made on the floor and no amendments introduced. The bill was approved on second reading on the same day it was presented.54 When the bill was forwarded to the Senate, several amendments were made. These amendments, however, did not affect the nature of the MMDA as originally conceived in the House of Representatives.55 It is thus beyond doubt that the MMDA is not a local government unit or a public corporation endowed with legislative power. It is not even a "special metropolitan political subdivision" as contemplated in Section 11, Article X of the Constitution. The creation of a "special metropolitan political subdivision" requires the approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected.56 R. A. No. 7924 was not submitted to the inhabitants of Metro Manila in a plebiscite. The Chairman of the MMDA is not an official elected by the people, but appointed by the President with the rank and privileges of a cabinet member. In fact, part of his function is to perform such other duties as may be assigned to him by the President, 57 whereas in local government units, the President merely exercises supervisory authority. This emphasizes the administrative character of the MMDA. Clearly then, the MMC under P. D. No. 824 is not the same entity as the MMDA under R. A. No. 7924. Unlike the MMC, the MMDA has no power to enact ordinances for the welfare of the community. It is the local government units, acting through their respective legislative councils, that possess legislative power and police power. In the case at bar, the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Makati City did not pass any ordinance or resolution ordering the opening of Neptune Street, hence, its proposed opening by petitioner MMDA is illegal and the respondent Court of Appeals did not err in so ruling. We desist from ruling on the other issues as they are unnecessary. We stress that this decision does not make light of the MMDAs noble efforts to solve the chaotic traffic condition in Metro Manila. Everyday, traffic jams and traffic bottlenecks plague the metropolis. Even our once sprawling boulevards and avenues are now crammed with cars while city streets are clogged with motorists and pedestrians. Traffic has become a social malaise affecting our peoples productivity and the efficient delivery of goods and services in the country. The MMDA was created to put some order in the metropolitan transportation system but unfortunately the powers granted by its charter are limited. Its good intentions cannot justify the opening for public use of a private street in a private subdivision without any legal warrant. The promotion of the general welfare is not antithetical to the preservation of the rule of law. IN VIEW WHEREOF , the petition is denied. The Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 39549 are affirmed.

SO ORDERED. Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), Kapunan, Pardo, and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.

In the case of MMDA vs. Bel Air, the Supreme Court held that MMDA have no police power because there is no provision under its charter (RA7924) that empowers the MMDA or its Council to exercise police power and legislative power, however the SC ruled that police and legislative power can be delegated to an administrative agency like MMDA. Therefore MMDA can exercise police power and legislative power when there is a proper delegation of such powers from the legislative (senate, house of Rep, City council, etc.)

In the case of MMDA vs. Garin, The Supreme Court held that MMDA cannot Confiscate Drivers License, because as held in the previous case(MMDA vs. Bel air) MMDA have no police power, however the SC reiterated that these power of the state can be validly delegated to MMDA, and if delegated MMDA is duty bound to confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the exercise of its mandate of transport and traffic management, as well as the administration and implementation of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic engineering services and traffic educationprograms. Therefore MMDA can exercise police power and legislative power when there is a proper delegation of such powers from the legislative (senate, house of Rep, City council, etc.).

MMDA issued Memorandum Circular No. 04 outlining the procedures for the use of the Metropolitan Traffic Ticket (MTT) scheme. Under the circular, erring motorists are issued an MTT, which can be paid at any Metrobank branch. Traffic enforcers may no longer confiscate drivers licenses as a matter of course in cases of traffic violations. All motorists with unredeemed TVRs were givenseven days from the date of implementation of the new system to pay their fines and redeem their license or vehicle plates.

Now that the facts are clear, should erring motorists stop and give his/her drivers license to MMDA enforcers?

The Answer is YES. Because there maybe a delegation of police or legislative power in the city/jurisdiction where a motorists committed traffic violation in favor of MMDA. Granting that there is no delegation, still he/she should stop and give his/her drivers license because under MMDA Memorandum Circular No. 04, erring motorists are issued a Metropolitan Traffic Ticket (MTT). So MMDA traffic enforcer will need the drivers license to copy the needed information but they will return it back because they cannot confiscate it. Then erring motorists will pay it at any Metro bank branch, in short MMDA can impose fine against traffic violators.

Now, when I was apprehended by MMDA traffic enforcer in Quezon ave, C3 because of a

traffic violation, is it right to stop and give my license? Of course Yes.

How about in the case of Mirasol Vs. Dpwh, did the supreme held that in case AO1 was not filed to ONAR, AO1 will be automatically void? You contended that AO1 is void because of its non filing to ONAR.

BTW The MMDA case is an example of PRESUMPTION of LEGALITY. If Atty. Garin did not assailed the validity of confiscating of drivers' license by MMDA WITHOUT authority/delagation from legislative, do you think it will be illegal or invalid automatically? No, because judicial declaration is essential.

Motorcycle lane challenged in court

By CHITO A. CHAVEZ October 24, 2011, 7:11pm

MANILA, Philippines A motorcycle rider is challenging in court road rules limiting bike riders to a specific lane in two major streets in Metro Manila. Jobert Christian Bolanos Monday petitioned the Quezon City Prosecutors Office to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) and writ of preliminary injunction urging the city government, Land Transportation Office (LTO), Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), and other concerned agencies to stop imposing limitations in the use of motorcycles on Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City. Bolanos filed the petition on the same day the MMDA began issuing traffic tickets to out-of-lane bike riders. Violators must pay a P500 fine. He said he filed the suit as an ordinary citizen, chairman of the Motorcycle Rights Association and road user of Commonwealth Avenue. The petition questions Ordinance Number SP-1835, S. 2008 which was passed by the Quezon City Council and approved by the city mayor in 2008, but was not immediately enforced. The MMDA has re-established a motorcycle lane on Commonwealth and Macapagal Avenue in Paraaque City following a spate of accidents involving bikes. In his 17-page petition, Bolanos said bike riders have been selectively discriminated by limiting them to the fourth lane from the curb. The limitations also expose riders to greater danger, he said. It need not be emphasized that motorcycles need to have the ability to move about to avoid any obstacles and contact with other vehicles or objects. By enclosing and restricting the freedom of the motorcycle riders to use only the designated private and motorcycle lane on Commonwealth Avenue negates the maneuverability and/or capacity of movement of the motorcycle, making the riders chances of avoiding and getting through dangerous situations smaller, Bolanos said. He said that under the law, it is the Department of Transportation and Communication (DoTC) which is authorized to administer and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations in the field of transportation and to regulate related activities.

Bolanos named as respondents in his petition Quezon City Mayor Herbert Bautista, LTO, MMDA Chairman Francis Tolentino, members of the Quezon City Council,

MMDA chair welcomes suit vs. motorcycle lanes

25 OCTOBER 2011 ONE COMMENT

MANILA, PhilippinesMetropolitan Manila Development Authority chair Francis Tolentino has welcomed a suit filed by a motorcycle safety advocacy group against the implementation of the motorcycle lanes at Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City and Macapagal Avenue in Pasay City. We welcome this lawsuit with an end view of fine-tuning [the policy], Tolentino said in a televisioninterview, insisting that the new measure is very helpful to the public. He lamented that it appeared the judicial process was apparently being used to stop a policy which he said tried to instill discipline among motorists. Sometimes I ask myself whats wrong about it? I cannot help but question the broad democratic space we have, the official continued. Our judicial system is being used. Tolentino explained the ordinance was passed and signed into law by the Quezon City Government in 2007. Following the usual procedure, stakeholders were always invited to public hearings into proposed legislation, he said. From the information he gathered, Tolentino said it appeared the Motorcycle Rights Association was not registered at the Securities and Exchange Commission at the time the legislation was being debated upon. The group asked the Quezon City Regional Trial Court to stop the local government and the MMDA from implementing the motorcycle lane policy on Commonwealth Avenue. There is always presumption of regularity. When this was approved by the city government, no one questioned the policy, Tolentino said. Its only now that theres opposition to this.

He added that the policy is still in the trial period which would last for about one to two months and then evaluated and refined if necessary. Motorcycle accidents have been significantly reduced since the implementation of the motorcycle lanes last week. The MMDA recorded only one incident since Oct. 17 from an average of 26 to 42 motorcycle mishaps weekly, Tolentino said. News source: Miko Morelos/Philippine Daily Inquirer

I then asked her for the ordinance that they are basing the MC lane on... I asked for this because, I wanted to see the Implementing Rules and Regulations for the MC lane... I wanted to see it because of what I did this morning... I called several places and spoke to several people regarding the ordinance that they keep telling reporters that they based the MC lane on... And this is what I found out... According to the Quezon City secretary's office, there has been no ordinance that had gone through their office recently... I went further and called the archives division and spoke to Jane Mangalindan and she said, there has been no submission nor any MC lane ordinance in the archives... All they have is the ordinance on the bicycle lane... But wait, there's more! I also called the assistant City Secretary's office of Atty. John Alferos and spoke to Ken Barrera, staff... He mentioned that their office takes care of screening and finalizing all ordinances before it goes to the hearing stage up to approval... They receive the approved copy and submit it to the implementing department and the City Archive office... And according to him, there has been no ordinance on motorcycle lanes whatsoever... But wait!!! It doesn't stop there... I called the office of Atty. Rochelle Macapili, LEGAL & LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS to ask about the ordinance that MMDA kept on tagging as their basis for the motorcycle lane... And guess what... Louren Mabuti, Legal Assistant to Atty. Macapili told me that there is no ordinance that passed through their office... Then I changed the subject to the Implementing Rules and Regulations and guess what... NADA! Which brings me back to Atty. Dorotan, She said she will text me the ordinance number and will email me a copy... Which I am seriously doubting right now... Then the shift... Suddenly, she tells me to create a position paper and submit it to MMDA for review... She told me that they are open and willing to listen and take in "valuable" suggestions from everybody this time around... I am hoping it was as sincere as it sounded when she told me that...

Quote:

I do have a few questions regarding the two roads being used as the testing grounds for the dedicated lanes: According to the Quezon City DPOS office, Commonwealth Avenue has been declared as a National Road and its jurisdiction and policy making body should be with the LTO and/or DOTC being the agency with the mandate and authority to create and implement new traffic, road and vehicular laws for everything under the National level. Ordinances are not supposed to supercede National Law, is that right? Given that Quezon City still has the right to dictate the traffic law on Commonwealth Avenue, Who creates the Implementing Rules and Regulations for the ordinance? As mentioned on the start of this paper, it will give us a clear understanding of the basis and where the proponents are coming from. Every piece of legislation, ruling or policy being implemented must have a corresponding Implementing Rules and Regulations, is that right? Where is the Implementing Rules and Regulations for the Motorcycle Lane so that we may clearly understand the rules and restrictions of its use. Was there a public hearing for the Motorcycle Lane prior to its implementation? If so, who were present, invited and expected to be part of the hearing? The riding public is not made out of one organization, one group, a manufacturer, or a few known motorcycle personalities should it? As far as we understand, the general riding public, should have been given an invite to this public hearing on the implementation of the Motorcycle Lane as we are all stake holders by right. Why wasnt the rules for all public and private vehicles reinforced during the announcement of the Motorcycle Lane? This would have been more ideal because, it would prepare the public vehicle sector and it would serve as their warning that any public utility vehicle crossing the yellow lane will be apprehended accordingly. This way, you also show everybody that there are rules and regulations for all vehicles and not just motorcycles. Again, this causes an ill feeling of predjudice against motorcycle users. In fact, it should be reinforced and enforced on a daily basis and not just for the purpose of the implementation of the Motorcycle Lane. We strongly believe that strict implementation of the exisiting laws, if carried out accordingly, is enough to keep everybody in check and would promote dicipline amongst all road users. However, it is evident that there are challenges in carrying out the existing laws to the point that a vast number of road users get away with simple to grave violations of the traffic laws. That being the case, any additional law, regulation or implementation will meet numerous challenges and prevent its success simply because the basic and existing laws cannot be carried out properly and extensively. What made you think that a new law can solve the problems on the road?

On September 17, 2007, petitioners James K. Raterta, Carlos Quimson, Ralf Kamb, and Mad Dog Motorcycle Club, Inc. filed before RTC Branch 197, Las Pinas a Petition for Declaratory Judgment with Application for Temporary Restraining Order/Preliminary Injunction docketed as Civil Case SCA-07-0006. The petition sought the nullification of DPWC AO 1 for unconstitutionality and for exceeding the authority granted to respondent DOTC by

RA 2000. The Petition also sought the following: a. to declare null and void the Motorcycle Ban ordered and sought to be enforced by respondent Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) for being issued without authority from the DOTC, and for being in violation of Petitioners' right to due process; b. to enjoin respondents from prohibiting petitioners' access to the Toll Ways, for lack of authority of respondent TRB to do so and if such Motorcycle Ban has been implemented, to cease and desist from preventing Petitioners' access to the Limited Access Highways. On October 3, 2007, the Las Pinas trial court, thru Judge Manuel N. Duque, after due hearing, issued a writ of preliminary injunction stating that "If however, the TRB and DOTC, had already implemented the ban against the use of motorcycles, the said offices are hereby ORDERED to LIFT the said ban and allow petitioners to access the limited access facilities and/or highways, considering that the Injunction Bond filed by plaintiff in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) under Bond No. 00760 issued by Travellers Insurance Surety Corporation was admitted and approved by this Court". IMHO the petition should be dismiss, the Judge should not take cognizance of the case. The validity of AO1 was upheld by the supreme court and RTC cannot reverse the decision of the former. The case is also moot and academic because of DOTC order allowing 400cc and up to use expressways. In legal field, there is a saying... If the RTC committed an error, its called Ignorance of the law. If the court of appeals committed an error, its called Reversible Error.

If the Supreme Court committed an error, its called "Part of the law of the land" Hence SC decision uphelding AO1, whether its correct or not became part of the law of the land and can only be reverse by the SC itself...

Excerpt from MMDA VS. GARIN

Quote:

A last word. The MMDA was intended to coordinate services with metro-wide impact that transcend local political boundaries or would entail huge expenditures if provided by the individual LGUs, especially with regard to transport and traffic management,[23] and we are aware of the valiant efforts of the petitioner to untangle the increasingly traffic-snarled roads of Metro Manila. But these laudable intentions are limited by the MMDAs enabling law, which we can but interpret, and petitioner must be reminded that its efforts in this respect must be authorized by a valid law, or ordinance, or regulation arising from a legitimate source.