The transportation department held a press con this afternoon to explain that the train crash this week was due to “human error”.
Legally, however, this does not absolve the MRT corporation, the transportation department, and its officials from responsibility…. here are the pertinent laws — this podcast plays automatically … unless the audio is derailed, jumps off the tracks, flies off, smashes against cement… crumples into a heap.
(Music, a few seconds’ snippet, from a song written by Peter Tosh, performed by Bob Marley, photo from the DOTC website on an MRT contract-signing, both used here non-commercially for academic purposes)
breaking news. first posted here at 11:15 am Nov. 15, updated at 11:33: Aksyon 5 news director DJ Sta. Ana broke the story live from Leyte that Energy Secretary Petilla announced that the government has taken over two gas stations in the province for an orderly and rational distribution of fuel. Petilla said that soldiers have been deployed to guard the gas stations to avoid chaos and ensure that fuel will be distributed equitably.
Good work. Decisive. While the President has not gotten any emergency powers from Congress
and some of the senators and congressmen are happily vacationing, someone in government exercised a semblance of “emergency powers” (or emergency powers in its technical, legal sense, the way that it is defined in constitutional law, see yesterday’s blog post below). Don’t use the word “take-over” na lang muna , the President should ask for emergency powers. Lawyers will find a legal provision defending your action under the Civil Code or Administrative Code — we can find a provision. (i never thought lawyers would have a role to play in an apocalyptic event, one would think we’re useless and only doctors, nurses, engineers, journalists, etc. could help). This act of guarding the gas stations and volunteering to distribute the gas using government personnel in an emergency is defensible. In the meantime … Energy Secretary Petilla can say: to save lives by preventing chaos and violence, the government bought on credit the energy supply of two gas stations and government offered to distribute the fuel using government personnel, and the owners agreed.
News peg: MMDA tears down posters of “epal” politicians. [“epal” politicians are those who promote themselves thru the visual media (tarps and posters) and the multimedia (ads and other forms of publicity) in the guise of sending out greetings, giving free services, “sponsoring” infrastructure.]
Aside from the pertinent city ordinances prohibiting vandalism, the MMDA may also rely on the following provisions of the Civil Code:
Book II. Property, Ownership, and its Modifications. Title VIII.- Nuisance.
“Art. 694. A nuisance is any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of property, or anything else which:
(1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others; or
(2) Annoys or offends the senses; or
(3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality; or
(4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water; or
(5) Hinders or impairs the use of property.
(Underscoring supplied)
Art. 695. Nuisance is either public or private. A public nuisance affects a community or neighborhood or any considerable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance, danger or damage upon individuals may be unequal. A private nuisance is one that is not included in the foregoing definition.
Art. 697. The abatement of a nuisance does not preclude the right of any person injured to recover damages for its past existence.
Art. 698. Lapse of time cannot legalize any nuisance, whether public or private.
Art. 699. The remedies against a public nuisance are:
(1) A prosecution under the Penal Code or any local ordinance: or
(2) A civil action; or
(3) Abatement, without judicial proceedings.
Art. 704. Any private person may abate a public nuisance which is specially injurious to him by removing, or if necessary, by destroying the thing which constitutes the same, without committing a breach of the peace, or doing unnecessary injury. But it is necessary:
(1) That demand be first made upon the owner or possessor of the property to abate the nuisance;
(2) That such demand has been rejected;
(3) That the abatement be approved by the district health officer and executed with the assistance of the local police; and
(4) That the value of the destruction does not exceed three thousand pesos.
Art. 705. The remedies against a private nuisance are:
(1) A civil action; or
(2) Abatement, without judicial proceedings.
Art. 706. Any person injured by a private nuisance may abate it by removing, or if necessary, by destroying the thing which constitutes the nuisance, without committing a breach of the peace or doing unnecessary injury. However, it is indispensable that the procedure for extrajudicial abatement of a public nuisance by a private person be followed.
Art. 707. A private person or a public official extrajudicially abating a nuisance shall be liable for damages:
(1) If he causes unnecessary injury; or
(2) If an alleged nuisance is later declared by the courts to be not a real nuisance.
