Local government units in Metro Manila are now enforcing the No Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP). The City of Manila has recently applied the NCAP against a lawyer for alleged obstruction of the pedestrian lane.

The motorists allegedly violating the NCAP is a lawyer who is now contesting before the Supreme Court the NCAP for its legality. He alleged that the notices of violation were sent not to his but to a wrong address and that his right to privacy was allegedly violated.

It turned out that he only learned the supposed violations when he tried to renew the registration of his vehicle before the Land Transportation Office which recorded the said infractions. He was fined with a payment of P20,360. The imposition has the corresponding penalty since it was paid at a later date. This was due to the wrong address.

The lawyer paid the said amount in protest which means that his payment is not an admission of the supposed infractions while he is contesting the legality of the NCAP before the highest court. In addition, he has filed a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the implementation of the policy.

On the alleged violation of his right to privacy, the lawyer said that when he checked the supposed traffic violations with the Manila City website, he said that personal information of the vehicle owner was disclosed thus against the privacy right. This is just one among the many complaints against the implementation of the NCAP by the local government units in Metro Manila.

Since the start of its implementation, there have been some clamors from motorists against the NCAP. Only this time, a lawyer is contesting its legality before the Supreme Court which finally re-echoed the voices of the motoring public. The policy has many flaws and vague provisions that needs more study and amendments perhaps.

In other countries, there are motoring laws just like the NCAP. However, we have different situation and different motoring laws in the Philippines. Even the technology that is applied with the surveillance and operation of cameras and other gadgets is different. Include to this fact is the attitude of drivers which is quite different from foreign lands.

Prior to the implementation of a law or a policy especially in motoring or traffic, there should be a more thorough study of the same. Experiments and dry-runs should be conducted to rectify and correct any flaw or any insufficiency of what is to be implemented. What would affect the public should be carefully simulated before any implementation.

While the NCAP has good intentions and that is to discipline the motoring public and generate revenues from traffic law violations, many things and factors should have been considered. Later on, the NCAP might be implemented too in cities and provinces outside Metro Manila.


For any comments, suggestions or opinions, text or call The Advocate at 0921-3636360 or send email at dencious@gmail.com.