MMDA v. Garin April 15, 2005 | J.

Chico-Nazario Facts: Dante Garin was issued a traffic violation receipt (TVR) and his drivers license confiscated for parking illegally in Binondo. TVR served as a temporary drivers license for 7 days from date of apprehension and it directed Garin to report to the MMDA otherwise a criminal case shall be filed for failure to redeem the license after 30 days Garin wrote a letter to MMDA Chairman Oreta requesting the return of his license and expressing his preference for his case to be filed in court Garin filed with the RTC a complaint with preliminary injunction saying that in the absence of any IRR, Sec 5(f) of RA 7924 grants MMDA unbridled discretion to deprive erring motorists of their licenses, preempting a judicial determination of the validity of the deprivation thus violating the due process clause of the Constitution It also violates the constitutional prohibition against undue delegation of legislative authority because it allows MMDA to fix and impose fines and penalties on motorists MMDA says that the powers granted by Sec 5(f) are limited to fixing, collecting and imposition of fines and penalties for traffic violations which powers are legislative and executive in nature and that the judiciary retains the right to determine the validity of the penalty imposed MMDA presented MMDA Memo Circular No. TT-95-001 which was allegedly the implementing rules however Garin said that this was passed without the quorum of the Metro Manila Council Judge issued a TRO extending the validity of the TVR and later on, preliminary mandatory injunction was granted and MMDA was directed to return Garins license TC held that the summary confiscation deprived Garin of a property right without due process Issue: WON Sec. 5(f) of RA 7924 which authorizes the MMDA to confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the enforcement of traffic laws and regulations is valid (NO, it grants MMDA with the duty to enforce existing traffic rules and regulations) Ruling: MMDA argues that a license to operate a motor vehicle is neither a contract nor a property right but is a privilege subject to reasonable regulation. It also argues that the revocation or suspension of this privilege does not constitute taking without due process as long as the licensee is given the right to appeal the revocation MMDA also argues that Sec 5(f) of RA 7924 is self executor and doesnt require the issuance of any IRR SC says that a license to operate a motor vehicle is a privilege that the state may withhold in the exercise of police power subject to the procedural due process requirements MMDA however is not vested with police power as ruled in MMDA v. Bel-Air. All its functions are administrative in nature Sec 5(f) is understood by the lower court and by the petitioner to grant the MMDA the power to confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses without need of any other legislative enactment such is an unauthorized exercise of police power Sec 5(f) grants the MMDA with the duty to enforce existing traffic rules and regulations. Thus, where there is a traffic law or regulation validly enacted by the legislature or those agencies to whom legislative powers have been delegated, MMDA is not precluded to confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the exercise of its mandate of transport and traffic management Judgment: petition dismissed.