THE Court of Appeals has affirmed the validity of the order issued by the Land Transportation Office increasing the penalties for violations of traffic rules.
The CA’s Tenth Division through Associate Justice Zenaida Galapate-Laguilles dismissed the petition filed by 1-United Transport Koalisyon (1-UTAK) assailing the increased fines and penalties the LTO imposed in 2008, through Department Order No. 2008-39.
“There exists no absolute right to drive. On the contrary, it is a privilege heavily regulated,” the appellate court ruled, adding that the LTO order cannot be considered an exercise of Congress’ power to tax.
“Department Order No. 2008-39 indeed imposes administrative fees, charges, fines and penalties. These raise revenues, just as levied taxes would. But such are merely incidental and hardly the primary purpose for which they were imposed. Department Order No. 2008-39 enforces administrative fees, charges, fines and penalties principally as regulatory measures and deterrents,” the appellate court stressed.
LTO Department Order 2008-39 which came into effect on March 2009 imposes a penalty of P5,000 on drunk drivers and P10,000 on drivers under the influence of drugs.
It also imposes fines of P1,500 for driving without a license; P400 for driving with an expired license; P2,000 for possessing a fake driver’s license; P3,000 for conviction for a crime perpetrated with the use of a motor vehicle; and P6,000 for driving a public utility vehicle out of line.
But 1-UTAK argued that the LTO order is unconstitutional as it usurps the power of Congress to tax.
The group also described the rates imposed as unreasonable, confiscatory and deprives the livelihood of public utility vehicle drivers and operators considering that the income of public utility drivers and operators ranged from P100 to P500 per day.
On June 2, 2014, Department Order No. 2008-39 was superseded by Joint Administrative Order No. 2014-01 issued by the LTO and Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).
The joint issuance revised the schedule fines and penalties for violations of laws governing land transportation services and the procedures for apprehension and resolution of cases.
Despite this development, the appellate court said it is necessary for it to settle the validity of Department Order No. 2008-39 since there are still pending cases before the Supreme Court assailing the constitutionality of the joint order which if granted will likely revert the rates of penalties prescribed under the LTO order.