WITH the mounting complaints against the “no contact apprehension policy” (NCAP), Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert “Ace” Barbers has formally asked the House of Representatives to immediately suspend the program, which monitors traffic violations with cameras, for further review.

While saying the objective of the new policy was laudable, Barbers said the NCAP’s implementation has given rise to more questions than answers. He cited issues that needed to be clarified, including what agency is in charge of traffic rules in the National Capital Region; if there are enough road signs and warnings; and whether cameras can capture the alleged violator’s plate number at night or during heavy rain.

He also inquired whether violation citations are issued to government vehicles.

There’s more to the issue though than those being raised by Barbers.

Proponents hail the NCAP as the solution to help authorities enforce traffic regulations through the use of advanced traffic management technology, powered by a network of cutting-edge camera systems controlled by computer-vision artificial intelligence, that is supposed to make it efficient and error-free.

The system, being machine-based and therefore free from as much human error as possible, depends on visual inputs from camera images and video. These are then interpreted to identify erring motorists who violate traffic ordinances, all supposedly without the need for enforcers.

Supposedly that is. But in actuality, the NCAP fails to zero in on its target — the erring motorist — as the system captures the actual vehicle involved in a particular traffic violation. This is being hotly contested by lawyer Ariel Inton of the Lawyers for Commuters’ Safety and Protection. According to Inton, it is the driver who should be responsible for any violation on the road and not the vehicle involved or its owner unless he or she is the one driving the subject vehicle.

While the NCAP provides for an appeal, an owner of a vehicle that figured in a traffic violation is already treated as a “suspect,” and thus will have to work to prove his or her “innocence.”

But with the rigorous process involved in filing an appeal, Inton said car owners are forced to pay the fines rather than contest them. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford to skip the appeal and simply shell out some bucks. Like the case of a TNVS operator whose driver racked up more than a P100,000 in fines.

Aggravating matters is that, sources say, fines for violations have increased fourfold. What used to be a P500 fine will now cost you P2,000. On top of that is a P40 computer fee. And where do the fines go? Half goes to the service provider, Qpax Traffic System, which then raises another question — legality.

According to the proponents of the NCAP, the system utilizes highresolution artificial intelligence (AI), or AI-enabled cameras that capture violations committed by motorists.

Thus, technically, the role of traffic enforcement is now being handled by a private entity. Traffic enforcement has just been privatized.

Now, can anyone explain to me like I’m a 6-year-old kid if this is legal? Someone has a lot of explaining to do.

***

The other day, social media was abuzz after former senator Juan Ponce Enrile questioned former congressman Michael Defensor’s presence in what seemed to be an official MMDA function.

While Defensor said he had clarified the issue with Manong Johnny, we deem it best to publish his statement.

Here’s Mike Defensor’s statement on the issue:

“Yesterday, I got so many calls from the media asking me to react to the post of Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile calling me out in a photo where I was seen in a conference with MMDA officials. I opted to keep quiet until I had spoken to Manong Johnny and personally clarify with him as regards the points he raised.

First of all, that particular meeting was regarding the Oplan Balik Eskwela, where the preparations are being made to ensure the smooth flow of traffic when we officially open classes.

As a friend of chairman Engr. Carlo Dimayuga and as a former chief of staff of the President, I was asked to help out in the MMDA effort since this will be the first time after two years that we will open our schools.

I have always been involved in the Balik Eskwela effort in the past and, in particular, in the discussions on the traffic preparations. The picture posted where I was seen talking was a question I raised about choke points in traffic, which included Ateneo and La Salle, where we usually experience heavy traffic during the opening of classes. The bike lanes of La Salle and the strict security of Ateneo were particularly discussed along with the clearing operations and ongoing constructions along the school vicinities.

I am not an official nor a consultant of MMDA as this is a violation of law in my one year prohibition. I am not getting a single centavo in my effort to help the administration. I do not hold office there nor do I order people around. It was one meeting where my assistance was sought to help the government effort to ensure the success of our traffic response and the safety and convenience of our students and their families.

I explained this to Manong Johnny and he also explained to me his role in protecting the President. We are in agreement.

I will continue to help the President and his administration in my private capacity and when I am asked to do so. Parati natin sinasabi na pwede naman tayong tumulong kahit wala sa posisyon. Hindi naman siguro masama kung sa aking maliit na kaalaman sa gobyerno ay maka ambag ako sa mga panahon ng pangangailangan.”