Are ‘Magnificent 7’ allowed to intervene?

ILOILO City – At least seven transport groups have asked the Supreme Court to allow them to participate in the petition seeking to stop the government from implementing the Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program (PUVMP).

The transport groups led by Pasang Masda filed the petition for intervention with the High Court relative to the petition for certiorari and prohibition against the Department of Transportation ( DOTr) and its attached agency, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).

Apart from Pasang Masda, the other petitioners are the Alliance of Transport Operators and Drivers Association of the Philippines, the Alliance of Concerned Transport Organization, and Liga ng mga Transportation at mga Operator ng Pilipinas.

The transport groups called themselves “Magnificent 7,” who expressed their support for the implementation of the PUVMP.

Are the “Magnificent 7” allowed to intervene?

Under Rule 19 of the Rules of Court, an individual who may be allowed to intervene is the one who has a legal interest in the case.

Those who wanted to intervene should also need to establish his interest, or that he stands to be adversely affected by the petition.

That means the legal interest must be “actual, material, direct and of an immediate character” and not merely conditional or hopeful, so that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the decision of the tribunal.

The requisites for those who want to intervene in a pending case include filing a motion requesting the court to allow them to intervene.

The interested party to intervene must also show that he has “legal interest” in the litigation or the success of the parties in the litigation.

After the deadline of the consolidation lapsed on Dec. 31, 2023, the LTFRB allowed unconsolidated jeepney owners to operate until Jan. 31, 2024.

But the Office of Transportation Cooperatives clarified that those who did not undergo the government’s consolidation, which ended on Dec. 31, will no longer be allowed to consolidate.

The petitioners have sought to enjoin the enforcement and declare the nullity of Department Order 2017-011 dated June 19, 2017, or the Omnibus Guidelines on the Planning and Identification of Public Road Transportation Services, issued by the DOTr.

They also questioned the validity of LTFRB Memorandum Circular No .2018-008 (Consolidation of Franchise Holders in compliance with the Omnibus Franchising Guidelines), LTFRB Memo Circular 2020 – 084 (Extension of Time to File Application for Consolidation Pursuant to Industry Consolidation of PUVMP), LTFRB Memo Circular 2023-047 (Guidelines for the Acceptance of Application for Consolidation), LTFRB Memo Circular 2023 – 047 (Guidelines for the Acceptance of Application for Consolidation), and LTFRB Memo Circular 2023-051 (Allowing Operations of Consolidated Transport Entities in All Routes with Filed Application for Consolidation on or before Dec. 23, 2023).

The LTFRB has already submitted its comment to the SC.

The Omnibus Franchising Guidelines provide the planning and identification of public road transportation services and franchise issuances under the PUV modernization program.

The petitioners – the No to PUV Phaseout Coalition of Panay, Komyut, Piston, Bayan Muna Partylist, and Advocates for Inclusive Transport – earlier filed the petition for certiorari and prohibition before the High Court against the DOTr and LTFRB.

Launched in June 2018, the PUVMP is the flagship, noninfrastructure project of former President Rodrigo Duterte. It seeks to phase out PUVs aged 15 years or older.

The program promises a “comfortable, safe, reliable, convenient, affordable, and environmentally sustainable” public transportation system in the country.

This includes promotions of a “safe rand more environmentallyfriendly transport system ,” wherein the government proponents are pushing to replace jeepneys with Euro 4-powered engines or electrically-powered engines with solar panels for roofs.

Under the program, drivers and operators are promised stable, sufficient, and dignified livelihoods while commuters get to their destinations quickly, safely, and comfortably.

For the DOTr, the PUVMP is not merely a vehicle modernization program, but a “comprehensive system reform that will entirely change the public land transportation industry.”

But several transport and cause-oriented groups decried the program as “anti-poor,” arguing that the new jeepney unit would cost them roughly P2.4 million per unit.

They also lamented that only multi-million peso companies can afford to buy the new “fleet management system” that sets a minimum of 15 units per franchise.

The transport leaders also claimed that some components of the program are disadvantageous to the transport cooperatives such as forcing the cooperative to avail of the modern units.

They said the modern jeepney units would go up to P2.8 million, thus would be a burden to the transport cooperatives despite the government’s promised subsidy of P160,000./