Mirasol v. DPWH,
G.R. No. 158793, June 8, 2006
Nature: Petition for review
on certiorari
CARPIO, J.
Facts:
Petitioner assailed the constitutionality of an administrative regulation
banning the use of motorcycles at the toll way on the ground that it is
baseless and unwarranted for failure to provide scientific and objective data
on the dangers of motorcycles plying the highways. Respondent avers that the
toll ways were not designed to accommodate motorcycles and that their presence
in the toll ways will compromise safety and traffic considerations.
ISSUE:
Whether or not administrative regulation banning the use of motorcycles is
unconstitutional.
HELD: No, the use of public highways by motor
vehicles is subject to regulation as an exercise of the police power of the
state. The sole standard in measuring its exercise is
reasonableness, not exact definition and scientific formulation. It is evident
that assailed regulation does not impose unreasonable restrictions, but
outlines precautionary measures designed to ensure public safety.
NOTE: Petitioners are not being deprived of
their right to use the limited access facility. They are merely being required,
just like the rest of the public, to adhere to the rules on how to use the
facility. AO 1 does not infringe upon petitioners’ right to travel but merely
bars motorcycles, bicycles, tricycles, pedicabs, and any non-motorized vehicles
as the mode of traveling along limited access highways. There exists real and
substantial differences exist between a motorcycle and other forms of transport
sufficient to justify its classification among those prohibited from plying the
toll ways. A classification based on practical convenience and common knowledge
is not unconstitutional simply because it may lack purely theoretical or
scientific uniformity.
No comments:
Post a Comment