May 20th, 2025
“I respect the Supreme Court’s decision lifting the TRO on the No-Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP). But before it is implemented, four critical safeguards must be in place:
(1) A clear and accessible appeals mechanism—just like in the United States, where NCAP-type violations can be contested before a traffic judge;
(2) Proper road signages and uniform traffic rules across Metro Manila—many roads still suffer from inconsistent or hidden signs;
(3) Assurances that NCAP will not penalize pedestrians unfairly, especially in areas without safe and protected crossings;
(4) And crucially: Guidelines from the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Center to ensure that NCAP implementations—especially those outsourced to private companies through PPPs—do not violate commuter rights or due process.”
“I support high-tech traffic enforcement. But we must never allow a system where drivers and commuters are penalized without recourse, transparency, or fairness. Technology must uphold the Constitution—not bypass it. NCAP must be a tool for justice, not just revenue.”
Background:
Congressman Joey Salceda has long opposed the implementation of the NCAP in its previous form, particularly when it was applied without adequate due process protections. In prior statements, he emphasized that “any enforcement policy must include a clear right to appeal, especially when operated through private entities.” Salceda warned that automated traffic enforcement, without proper signage or redress, risks violating constitutional rights and undermines public trust.