Metro Manila is served by 2 metropolitan rail systems, the
Manila Light Rail Transit System, popularly known as the LRT, and the Manila
Metro Rail Transit System, popularly known as the MRT, Metrostar Express or
Metrostar. [1]
Last January 4, 2015, the public was dismayed after the
Department of Transportation and Communications (DoTC) implemented a hike
increase in MRT/LRT fares using the P 11.00 (base fare) + P 1.00 (per
kilometer) formula for fares at the Light Rail Transit Lines 1 and 2 (LRT-1 and
LRT-2) and the Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (MRT-3) as evidenced by Department
Order No. 2014-14. [2]
As examples of the increased rates, an MRT-3 trip from North
Avenue in Quezon City to Taft Avenue in Manila now costs P28 pesos for the
original P15; an LRT 1 trip from Roosevelt Avenue in Quezon City to Baclaran in
Paranaque City is now P30 from P20; and an LRT 2 trip from C.M. Recto ni Manila
to Santolan Road in Pasig City is now P25 from the original P15. [3]
Commuters complain on the sudden increase contending that
such action is unjustified and unreasonable considering the poor quality of
services that the MRT and LRT offer, such as non-functioning of escalators and
elevators, and safety issues such as the recent derailment of the MRT at Taft Avenue .
According to the DOTC, the increase is in line with the 2011-2016
Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan. Currently, LRT and MRT operations are
subsidized by government in the amount of approximately P12 billion per year.
Since the government subsidizes around 60% of the cost for each LRT-1 and LRT-2
passenger and around 75% of each MRT-3 passenger, an estimated of P2 billion
will be freed up for development projects and relief operations. They emphasized
that around P10 billion will still go to subsidizing LRT and MRT passengers while
the P2 billion will be allotted to those vast majority of Filipinos outside of
Metro Manila most especially those whose lives have been severely affected by
typhoons and calamities. [4]
However, several petitions in the Supreme Court have been
filed by citizens assailing the constitutionality of the LRT/MRT fare hike
increase. Among them are Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) led by its
secretary-general Renato Reyes, former Congressman Syjuco, Bayan Muna party
list Rep. Neri Colmenares and the United Filipino Consumers Commuters, Inc.
(UFFC). [5]
Petitioners claimed that Department Order No. 2014-14 or the
‘Implementation of the Uniform Distance based Fare Scheme for three train lines’
is unconstitutional alleging that the DOTC acted with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, when it approved the imposition of
the new fare increases which is branded as “arbitrary, unreasonable and
unconstitutional”. According to them, “Not a single public hearing or proper
discussion was made by herein respondents, that would show the justification,
reasoning or proper computation for such abrupt and huge fare increase”. And as
such, the said order was also violative of due process as there were no public
consultations before the rates were adopted and subsequently implemented. [6]
Lawmakers were also up in arms against the fare hike
increase as they were practically deceived by transportation officials by not
disclosing any planned fee increase in MRT and LRT lines during deliberations
of 2015 national budget. Such an impression given to senators following the
decision of the DoTC to adjust the far of the MRT and LRT last month shortly
after the two Houses of Congress approved this year’s P2.6 trillion national
budget. The DoTC, however, said there was a public hearing that happened in
2011. “If that is their basis for the hike in 2015, I think that is not fair.
They will implement the fare hike four years after the public hearing and they
will tell us that is the public hearing as required by law? I certainly disagree
with that logic,” said Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero. [7]
As pointed out by petitioners, light trail systems are
common carriers that are considered public services that are essential to the
daily lives of the community. As public services, they are subject to
regulation not only as regards to their routes and quality of service but also
to the manner of fixing their rate of fees that they impose for the use of
their services. As such, they cannot be unilaterally increased without being
subjected to prior notice and public hearings before they can be implemented. Thus,
the increase violates the due process clause guaranteed by the Constitution.
The public should always be the paramount consideration in implementing
laws for they are the foremost subjects who will benefit or suffer from such
implemented act. If indeed public officials intend public interest over these anomalous
allegations, the increase should have been implemented years ago and that, the
public was provided with adequate notice and consultations. The timing of the
increase and the nearing of the 2016 national elections, however, create a
doubt on the minds of the Filipino citizens as such can be another political
tactics of filthy politicians.
No comments:
Post a Comment