Mayor Benjamin Magalong has vetoed the Baguio City Council’s proposed ordinance to exempt senior citizens from the Number Coding Scheme. The veto is scheduled to be discussed by the city council during their regular session on August 5, 2024.
This is the first ordinance vetoed by Magalong since he was sworn in as mayor in 2019.
In his letter dated July 24, 2024, Magalong enumerated perceived challenges in implementing the ordinance which led to his veto.
“I appreciate the initiative of the Honorable Council in incorporating respect and incentives for our senior citizen constituents. However, there are challenges to implementing the ordinance, particularly because the provided exemption applies only in very specific circumstances,” Magalong wrote.
The ordinance states that for a motor vehicle to be exempted from the number coding scheme, it must be used by a senior citizen who is a resident of Baguio City. Magalong noted that this provision may be discriminatory against senior citizens residing outside the city who regularly traverse the roads within the Central Business District (CBD) for essential and urgent purposes.
“This is because our healthcare facilities [also] cater to patients who are not residents of the city, or who live in localities where specialized patient care is not available. There may also be emergency situations where the nearest adequate health facility is found in Baguio,” Magalong stated.
“The same is applied to places of work since our city is a business and education hub that employs senior citizens who are residents of neighboring local government units,” he added.
The ordinance also states that the exemptions apply only when the vehicle is used to transport the senior citizen to and from a medical clinic, hospital, or place of work. Magalong pointed out that the ordinance does not specify the proof required to establish that the senior citizen driving or riding in the vehicle is on the way to a medical appointment or work. He said that clinics often accommodate walk-in patients who do not need appointments.
Furthermore, the mayor cited cases where self-employed senior citizens would be unable to present an employment ID to verify the purpose of their travel.
He expressed concern that these situations would compel the enforcer to rely on their judgment to determine what constitutes adequate proof that the senior citizen driver or passenger is traveling for medical purposes, potentially leading to confusion or arbitrary enforcement.
He said these circumstances would lead to inquiries by the enforcers to ascertain whether the exemption may be applied to an apprehended vehicle.
“The inquiry need not be long but any time spent idle along a busy road will cause additional traffic and may present a safety hazard for the vehicle passengers as well as the enforcer,” Magalong said.
According to the mayor, the ordinance needs to be referred to the concerned implementing offices for a thorough traffic impact study.
During a public consultation on the ordinance, Daryll Longid, head of the Public Order and Safety Division (POSD), echoed similar concerns.
At the same public consultation, Councilor Jose Molintas, main proponent of the ordinance, emphasized the importance of maintaining a presumption of honesty in the implementation of the exemption. He said it is unnecessary to question whether the rights of senior citizens are being abused and suggested assuming that their travel purposes are legitimate.
He stressed that there are possible negative impacts of apprehending senior citizens en route to medical facilities, claiming that such actions could worsen their conditions, especially in life-threatening situations.
The councilor proposed giving the senior citizens the benefit of the doubt rather than engaging in lengthy discussions about possible abuse of the exemption. He suggested that, instead of strictly enforcing apprehensions, there should be an emphasis on intensifying briefings for senior citizens regarding the purpose of the ordinance and road regulations.
City council’s power to override a veto
According to 19.A of the Codified and Revised Internal Rules of Procedure (IRP) of the Baguio City Council (Resolution 281-2022), the local legislative body can reconsider the vetoed ordinance. To override the veto and make the ordinance effective despite the mayor’s objections, the city council must achieve a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of all its members.
If the city council successfully overrides the veto, the ordinance becomes effective and enforceable for all legal purposes.
The city council’s power to override a veto based on its IRP is consistent with Section 54 of Republic Act 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991.
According to the Local Government Code, local chief executives can veto ordinances they deem ultra vires (beyond legal power) or prejudicial to public welfare. **Jordan G. Habbiling
