In July 1, 2022 4 cities in National Capital Region in the Philippines have implemented the No-Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP). These are: Manila City, Quezon City, Valenzuela City, and Parañaque City. The program aims to enhance road safety, alleviate traffic congestion, and instil traffic discipline among motorists traversing the said cities.  

NCAP is a private-public partnership programme that utilises state-of-the-art cameras with artificial intelligence technology to capture, photograph, and record the conduction stickers and plate numbers of vehicles in violation of traffic rules and regulations.  When the said cameras detect a traffic violation, the system will generate a Notice of Violation or NOV to be sent to the Local Government Unit for review and approval. Once approved, the NOV will be given to the residence of the registered owner of the vehicle within 14 days and they will be given 30 days to pay their fines. The NOV entails a photograph with a timestamp of the motor vehicle in the place where the violation was committed, along with the corresponding details relevant to the violation cited. It will also serve as a written warning and a means of alerting citizens that the program is already in effect.

Within 3 weeks of implementation, Quezon City Government has announced that it has apprehended 11,083 "traffic violators", with different offences ranging from Disobedience to traffic control signal and signs to reckless driving. Despite the good for society and meaningful goals of the programme, it seems to be causing a lot of grief and confusion to the general motoring populace. 

Here are a couple of key points that presents the intrinsic flaws in the system that renders NCAP ineffective: 

1. NCR Roads are not perfect. During the pandemic, the Philippine government implemented the Metro Manila Bike Lane Network. While it was a good initiative to encourage alternative modes of transportation, provide safe roads for bikers and minimise traffic by reducing the number of vehicles plying the streets of Metro Manila, the initiative was done very hurriedly and haphazardly. Old lane markings were simply painted over and what was formerly 2 car lanes simply became 1.5 lanes plus 1 bike lane.  To be able to use the 0.5 lanes, which is the only way to turn a corner and not be in violation of "Disobedience to traffic control signal and signs”, the driver will have to straddle 2 solid lines to make a turn. Which does not make any sense at all. To make matters worse, some LGUs have taken to put orange barriers or bollards to protect bike lanes, to the detriment of vehicles. There are also instances where a driver was charged for swerving because he swerved to avoid a major pothole on the road ahead near an intersection. Such instances are not considered by the ones implementing NCAP.
2. Inconsistent lane markings that do not make sense. Across the 4 cities implementing NCAP and across different areas within the said LGUs, there are different coloured bike lane markings. Some in blue, green and white. Some solid all the way while the others have broken lines in corners. Some have painted islands which they say are buffered bike lanes, some with orange barriers or bollards. While there’s nothing wrong with bike lanes, inconsistent painting of these did not take into consideration establishments and corners that are along the different streets or the existing width of the said streets. Shared or dedicated bike lane rules are even more confusing because there’s no standard markings for it. And rules implementation across the 4 LGUs are also different.
3. The Land Transportation Office (LTO) doesn’t require/mandate strict transfer of ownership in car registration records in cases of 2nd hand car sales. This situation has caused a lot of strife for car owners who have sold their cars to “violators”. The NCAP system cross references the plate number of errant vehicle via the LTO registration system that holds the corresponding registered car owner’s name and address.
   Scenario 1: If one has sold their car but the buyer commits a violation, the old owner receives receives the violation notices and the buyer will only be made aware of these violations and fines when he’s going to renew the car’s registration and is unable to do so. 
   Scenario 2: If one commits a violation then sells the car but is not transparent of his violations or is unaware of the said violations. The buyer will only know of the violations and fines when he’s going to renew the car’s registration and is unable to do so.
   These 2 scenarios are not new pain points to Philippine motoring industry as when reckless imprudence resulting to damages to property or physical injuries or worse, homicide, the registered owner of the vehicle is always held accountable despite having already sold the car and without any knowledge of the incident. There should be a strict requirement but easy way to change the ownership of vehicles.
4. It’s disadvantageous to Public Transport Operators. Public transport operators and public transport drivers usually have a very casual relationship. Drivers come and go and they are not beholden to stay with operators. As long as they meet the daily boundary fees, the rest is the driver’s earnings. With the NCAP system in place, errant drivers do not receive NOV notices, only the operator does. The trouble comes when the violations pile up and the driver has already left the employ of the operator. The operator then has to contend with the trouble of having to pay for all the fines… imagine multiplying it by the number of vehicles he has.  This issue is not only limited to public transport operators, it’s cumbersome to private car owners as well who own multiple vehicles. While most private car owners have tenured drivers, the fact that owners are made accountable to the errs of others is very unfair.
5. It’s an anti-poor policy. The minimum wage in NCR is P570 per day while the minimum fine for a traffic violation under the NCAP system is P2,000 per violation. This means that driver earning only minimum wage will have to sacrifice 4 days of work just to be able to pay the fine. What’s also anti-poor about the process is the need to miss another day of work when they choose to contest the fine. They will have to fill out a contest form, have it notarised (spend minimum of P120 for notarisation) then try to reason to the traffic adjudication officer who never says yes and let you go with a warning. Chances of that happening has been close to nil to my present and personal knowledge.
6. Data Privacy Concerns & Vehicle Registration is held hostage. Once the vehicle's plate number is captured, it cross-references across LTO's database of registered car owner and his/her registered address. I'm not expert in data privacy, however, as a car owner, I did not knowingly consent to the sharing of my personal details. I feel as though my privacy has been somewhat breached by this initiative/policy since I'm already fined without due process. Further, in the wrong hands, my name and home address, my movements can be tracked by cameras around the metro. Now that's pretty far fetched but I don't feel secure about this. And the issue on LTO holding my annual vehicle registration on hold until I pay the fines which I probably didn't do or have no knowledge about, doesn't also sit well. That's just holding my car's registration hostage until I pay up the inhumane fines. The vehicle registration issue is especially taxing to public transport operators whose daily earnings rely heavily on the ability of their vehicles to be brought out to serve the riding public. There's been instances wherein a taxi operator who has 12 units can only allow 8 units out as the 4 units' vehicle registration has been on hold by the LTO for unpaid fines. Fines for violations which her drivers have done, but she has no knowledge of and which she cannot any more run after for accountability due to the casual relationship she has with her drivers.

Considering all of the above-mentioned factors and systemic flaws, below are suggestions that we wish the LGU Mayors and LTO to consider: 

1. Temporarily halt and re-review the implementation of NCAP
2. Correct all lane markings, standardise bike lanes markings and launch a re-education campaign to educate all road users and drivers of the correct way to use the roads. It’s possible that the government should consider re-designing certain streets, roads and boulevards based on traffic volume.
3. Correct and fix traffic light systems (with digital timers and adaptive system) and fix damaged roads. 
4. Lower the fines to more humane levels.
5. Revisit public transport employment system or the NCAP system for public transportation whereby NCAP violations are not the sole responsibility of the operator.
6. LTO to require/mandate strict transfer of ownership of vehicles.
7. LTO to not hold the annual registration of vehicles hostage.

Our countrymen have suffered so much during the pandemic. As we try to rebuild our nation, I urge the LGU Mayors to stop and review the NCAP Implementation. Please do not use the intrinsic systemic flaws of our roads, infrastructure and policies and NCAP as a means to earn easy money on the general motoring populace. I urge them to reconsider.

I’m very much aware there are consistently erring drivers out there who find joy in breaking as many traffic rules as they can or beating as many red lights possible. BUT there are many other drivers who wish to simply get to where they need to be and are willing to follow traffic rules and regulations. I recognise the need traffic rules and regulations to keep our roads safe and corresponding fines to ensure strict implementation and adherence to such rules. However, the said rules are only effective if there are no inherent systemic flaws that cause drivers to fail from the get go. So I urge the LGU Mayors to correct everything first then fine the traffic violators, at least that's a justified violation. Not like this.