The Traffic Management Coordination Board (TMC) of Cebu City held an online special board meeting on Monday morning, Dec. 29, 2025, in response to numerous complaints from motorists. This followed the closure of a portion of the national road — from the corner of Pope John Paul II Ave. to the corner of L. Tudtud St. — by Mabolo barangay officials. The road was reportedly utilized solely as a practice ground for a dance troupe competing in the 2026 Sinulog Grand Parade.
A report from the Cebu City Traffic Office (CCTO) indicates that Mabolo Barangay Captain Danny Arguedo ordered the closure of this stretch of M.J. Cuenco Ave., a national road fronting the Barangay Hall and across from the church. The closure began on Dec. 20 at 12:55 a.m. and lasted until 2:21 a.m. It closed again at 7:21 p.m. that evening, remaining shut until 2:02 a.m. the following day.
That same portion of M.J. Cuenco Ave. was closed again on Friday, Dec. 26, from 8 p.m. until 2 a.m. on Saturday, Dec. 27. It was shuttered once more at 9 p.m. on Dec. 27, opening at 1 a.m. on Sunday, Dec. 28, and closed again at 10 p.m. on Dec. 28 until 2 a.m. on December 29. Notably, the barangay’s firetruck and ambulance were used to block traffic.
Motorists, caught unaware by the sudden closures, experienced horrific traffic gridlock at the intersection of Pope John Paul II Ave. and M.J. Cuenco Ave. TMC Board chairman Koko Holganza was flooded with calls inquiring if City Hall had initiated the closure — an outcry that compelled Holganza to convene the emergency meeting. I also received text messages from friends mired in the gridlock.
Since the closure was conducted without a permit from City Hall, Philippine National Police Traffic and CCTO officers visited Arguedo at the Barangay Hall. Arguedo, who is a lawyer, allegedly told them he was willing to “face them anywhere” when required and dared CCTO officials to file charges. Well, those charges might be forthcoming.
The question now is: Could he be held liable administratively or criminally? Quite possibly, yes. Cebu City ordinances and the provisions of the Local Government Code are clear: they prohibit the closure of thoroughfares unless a city permit is granted and the purpose of the closure complies with the rigid requirements of the law — specifically, City Ordinance 2131.
Barangay Captain Arguedo may have had good intentions, as the closure supported the rehearsals of a Sinulog contingent. However, laws regulate the use of roads — especially national roads under the jurisdiction of the City of Cebu. Furthermore, the closure was executed without regard for the safety and well-being of the motoring public.
Of course, we all love Sinulog. It is culture, faith, and identity rolled into one. But even our most cherished traditions do not authorize public officials to suspend the law at will.
The closure of the road fronting the Mabolo Barangay Hall raises a fundamental question of authority. Undeniably, a barangay captain cannot act unilaterally in this regard. While City Ordinance 2131 and the Local Government Code allow barangays to promote culture, the regulation of traffic remains within the City Government’s purview. Permits exist not to stifle celebration, but to ensure coordination, safety and convenience for all.
This is not a mere technicality. Roads are public property. They are used by workers, students, emergency vehicles and ordinary citizens who have rights equal to those of the Mabolo dancers. Closing a road without authority is not a harmless act; it is an assertion of power where none legally exists.
Good intentions do not erase liability, cultural pride does not excuse procedural shortcuts and popularity does not legalize unilateral action.
Administratively, closing a road without a city permit constitutes an abuse of authority or misconduct, as it bypasses the lawful processes every public official is duty-bound to follow. While criminal liability may not be automatic, it becomes conceivable when a public officer knowingly disregards existing ordinances and assumes powers reserved for higher authorities.
The more troubling aspect is the precedent this sets. If barangay officials can close roads for rehearsals today, what stops others from doing so tomorrow for private events or political gatherings? Governance by improvisation is a slippery slope.
Sinulog deserves celebration, but it also deserves discipline. Order is not the enemy of culture; it is what allows culture to flourish without trampling on the rights of others. Public office is not a license to “act first and explain later.” Especially at the barangay level — the government unit closest to the people — respect for the law should be most visible.
In the end, this is not about dancers or drums. It is about the principle that no one is above the law. While this incident may not land the barangay captain in jail immediately, it squarely raises issues of administrative accountability. At the end of the day, the issue is not Sinulog — it is governance.
Happy New Year!