Comments on the Proposed New Rules for Some Motorcycles to be able to Enter the Tollways
Since the DPWH published their revised rules and regulations on Sunday 22nd July 2001we have received quite a few questions and comments. If you have more please visit the forums or email us
Back to the Published Proposal page
1. The court writ orders the TRB and all their agents etc (obviously including the PNCC) to immediately cease the illegal restrictions on motorcycles using the tollways. Doesn’t this mean that these new rules and regulations are in themselves illegal making those who published them liable for charges of contempt of court?
2. The proposal starts with “By virtue of the authority granted the Secretary of Public Works and Highways under Section 3 of R.A. 2000…” but the court decision and writ makes it very clear that the ban was illegal because the DPWH, PNCC, etc have no legal right to make up these rules and that RA2000 does not give them any authority whatever to ban or restrict any motorcycles on any roads. This paragraph seems to be a direct contradiction of the court order.
3. 1a(i) says “there are no sidecars attached and that the motorcyle only has two wheels;” Tricycles are not allowed on main highways and are commericial vehicles that can legally be banned anyway so why put this in. They are so far few in number but why are bike trikes and big bikes with sidecars picked on. Big trikes are even safer and more stable than a two wheeled bike on a tollway.
4. 1a(vi) states “motorcyle riders must comply with all safety requirements prescribed by competent authorities;” who are competent autorities?
5. 1a(ix) “motorcyles shall not be allowed to “lane-split” or overtake in between lanes.” Is this a deliberate attempt to cause accidents to justify a ban? Staying behind slow moving vehicles on the badly lit tollways could be suicidal as you are likely to get a bus or truck with faulty lights smash into your rear end. Many international studies, including the Hurt report, show that lane spilitting is safer.
6. 1g. “Motorcyle operators shall conform to the requirements of law, rules and regulations of the LTO and other pertinent rules and regulations including those of the expressway/toll road operator.” Doesn’t this mean the PNCC or any other road operator can come up with any ridiculous and dangerous rules they like and then not obeying is punishable by law? Wasn’t the court action successful because it is illegal for these people to make up their own rules, usually based on ignorance and creating danger for road users?
7. 2. “Violations of any provision of this Order shall be punishable under Section 10 of R.A. No. 2000″. How can any of this be punishable under Section 10 of RA2000 when it is RA2000 that shows these very rules in themselves to be illegal?
8. “This Department Order supersedes all other orders, instructions and instructions or portions thereof inconsistent herewith.” and “This Department Order supercedes all other orders, instructions and instructions or portions thereof inconsistent herewith.” Could both be taken to mean that this order supersedes the law and the court writ which of course it cannot possibly do.
Back to the Published Proposal page
