HERE are a few cases that re-enforce a personal, if not wider, perception that we have more than enough laws which too often are ignored or violated – and blatantly at that.

        One of such laws is the Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2003 (RA 9257) which provides among other things the granting of twenty percent (20%) discount in bus fares for 60-and-above year-old Filipino citizens.

        Last January 17 on our way back to Naga City, we boarded an air-con bus (HJMJ Transit) with plate number EVS-385 in Polangui, Albay. We were issued tickets (Nos. 1851442 and 1851443) for P70 each, a rate higher than what the other air-con bus had charged us for the same kilometer-distance earlier that day. When asked about the “discrepancy”, the bus conductor pulled out a “fare matrix” that bore no stamp or signature from the Land Transportation and Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB), and which showed the “effective” date (of the latest fare increase?) as “November 19, 2007”. Granting the P70 fare was the “latest authorized” rate, we insisted that being ID-bearing senior citizens we should be made to pay only P56 (after deducting 20%). The bus conductor refused and even dared us to “complain” elsewhere.

        It really is disturbing to have observed that many public utility buses plying our roads don’t display any authenticated fare matrix despite LTFRB’s Memorandum Circular No. 2005-034 “requiring mandatory display of fare matrix and imposing penalties from non-compliance thereof”. Equally depressing are sights of people, especially the old, the weak or the scrofulous, being made to undergo unnecessary stress in trying to assert their rights under this society fraught with so many freak laws.

        Sad to note, our own Naga City, the “maogmang lugar”, has quite a number of such laws. Consider these:

        Ordinance No. 93-086 prohibits “smoking in public places in the City of Naga” and imposes “penalty for violation thereof”. But, try boarding jeepneys or even tri-mobiles crisscrossing the city streets and chances are this law gets infringed on with certain arrogance and impunity. Something has to be done. And, if only to warn smokers from imposing their will or whim (to pollute the air) on non-smokers, the local authorities should require –and strictly enforce – the “mandatory display” of “no-smoking” signs on vehicles and designated places.

        Same could be said of Ordinance No. 99-084 which is supposed to rid our roads and streets of “smoke belching” vehicles; penalize their operators; and padlock corruptible “smoke-emission-testing” centers. So with Ordinance Nos. 86-019 and 2003-013 which should at least make people become “environment friendly” or think twice before making the city streets and its main river as their dumpsites.

        One more thing, please. We need not pass any more ordinances to keep wayward motorists, particularly tri-mobile drivers, from almost running down pedestrians on lanes designated for them. Perhaps, teaching motorists simple road courtesy and making those who can’t or won’t learn walk back and forth 100 times across the city’s congested or busy streets would be much more effective than legislating 100 “dead” laws.

        Now, isn’t it frustrating, to say the least, for the ordinary citizens to live or suffer with the harsh reality that much of our taxes only end up getting wasted on ineffective or non-enforceable laws, if not on unabated greed and official corruption?

MANUEL A. COLLAO
manuelc223@yahoo.com