Karapatan ng motorista at pasahero ng PUV kapag may checkpoint

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta - @Magtanong Kay Attorney | February 13, 2022

Napansin ninyo ba ang mas dumaraming “checkpoint” dahil sa napapalapit na naman na eleksiyon? Kung ang tugon mo ay “oo”, marahil ay isa rin kayo sa mga kababayan nating nagtatanto tungkol sa legalidad ng mga checkpoint tuwing eleksiyon at ang sakop ng karapatan ng ating mga kababayan tuwing sumasailalim sa nasabing pagsusuri ng kapulisan.

Para sa inyong kaalaman, balido at legal ang hangarin at pagkakaroon ng checkpoint tuwing panahon ng eleksiyon. Ito ay alinsunod sa pangangailangan ng kaayusang pambayan at sa kondisyon na ang pagsasagawa nito ay sa paraang hindi gaanong nakakaabala sa mga motorista.

Hinggil dito, nabanggit ng Korte Suprema sa kamakailan na kasong Sullano vs. People (G.R. No. 232147, June 8, 2020), sinulat ni Honorable Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, na pinahihintulutan naman ng batas ang mga checkpoint tulad ng mga isinasagawa tuwing eleksiyon bilang pagpapatupad ng gun ban ng COMELEC, viz:

“The checkpoint conducted by the Malay Police was pursuant to the gun ban enforced by the COMELEC. Checkpoints, which are warranted by the exigencies of public order and are conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists, are allowed since the COMELEC would be hard put to implement the ban if its deputized agents are limited to a visual search of pedestrians. It would also defeat the purpose for which such ban was instituted. Those who intend to bring a gun during election period, would know that they only need a car to be able to easily perpetrate their malicious designs. X x x

The search of persons in a public place is valid because the safety of others may be put at risk. Given the present circumstances, the Court takes judicial notice that public transport buses and their terminals, just like passenger ships and seaports, are in that category.”

(Binigyang-diin)

Gayunman, upang maging wasto at balido ang nasabing checkpoint, tulad ng nasabi sa nasiping desisyon, nararapat na ang pagsasagawa nito ay sa paraang hindi gaanong nakakaabala sa mga motorista at pasahero ng mga pampublikong sasakyan. Kaugnay nito, nasabi rin ng Kataas-taasang Hukuman sa kasong Saluday vs. People (G.R. No. 215305, April 3, 2018), isinulat ni Honorable Former Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, ang alituntunin at karapatan ng mga motorista at pasahero ng mga pampublikong sasakyan na sumasailalim sa mga inspeksyon sa bawat checkpoint:

“First, as to the manner of the search, it must be the least intrusive and must uphold the dignity of the person or persons being searched, minimizing, if not altogether eradicating, any cause for public embarrassment, humiliation or ridicule. Second, neither can the search result from any discriminatory motive such as insidious profiling, stereotyping and other similar motives. In all instances, the fundamental rights of vulnerable identities, persons with disabilities, children and other similar groups should be protected. Third, as to the purpose of the search, it must be confined to ensuring public safety. Fourth, as to the evidence seized from the reasonable search, courts must be convinced that precautionary measures were in place to ensure that no evidence was planted against the accused. X x x

Aside from public transport buses, any moving vehicle that similarly accepts passengers at the terminal and along its route is likewise covered by these guidelines. Hence, whenever compliant with these guidelines, a routine inspection at the terminal or of the vehicle itself while in transit constitutes a reasonable search. Otherwise, the intrusion becomes unreasonable, thereby triggering the constitutional guarantee under Section 2. Article III of the Constitution.”

(Binigyang-diin)

Samakatwid, gamit ang nasabing desisyon bilang gabay, bagama’t pinahihintulutan ang mga checkpoint tuwing eleksiyon, nararapat na ang karapatan-pantao ay mapananatili at maipatutupad nang naayon sa layunin at hangarin ng batas.