LTFRB Must Not Weaponize Franchises Against Peaceful Protest
The government has a duty to protect commuters and ensure adequate transportation. It should meet that duty through lawful contingency measures, meaningful dialogue, and concrete action on the conditions driving transport workers and operators to protest—not by threatening their livelihoods.
September 27, 2026
The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers is a nationwide voluntary association of human rights lawyers in the Philippines, committed to the defense, protection, and promotion of human rights, especially of the poor and the oppressed.

Press Statement
27 September 2026

The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers condemns the LTFRB’s threat to fine, suspend, or cancel the franchises of transport operators who join the impending transport strike.

Issued on the eve of collective action against soaring fuel prices, the warning is not a routine reminder of franchise obligations. It is a direct threat to operators’ livelihoods: join the protest, and risk losing the authority to operate.

The LTFRB has the power to regulate public transportation and enforce valid franchise conditions. But regulatory authority is not a license to suppress dissent. A certificate of public convenience imposes obligations to the riding public; it does not extinguish the constitutional freedoms of speech, peaceful assembly, association, and petition.

The LTFRB cannot use its regulatory powers to punish transport operators for exercising these freedoms. Participation in a peaceful transport strike is not, by itself, proof of abandonment, refusal to provide service, or any other franchise violation.

Nor may the LTFRB impose automatic, collective, or predetermined punishment. Before any sanction is imposed, the Board must establish an actual violation, identify the operator or units responsible, and provide each respondent with notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. A show-cause proceeding cannot be reduced to a formality after guilt has already been announced.

These safeguards are indispensable when the threatened penalties include suspension or cancellation of a franchise. The government cannot hold operators’ livelihoods hostage to their silence or use the threat of economic ruin to deter collective action against government policy.

In Philippine Blooming Mills Employment Organization v. Philippine Blooming Mills Co., the Supreme Court recognized the preferred position of the freedoms of expression, assembly, and petition. The State may regulate conduct to protect legitimate public interests, but it cannot impose sweeping threats of punishment to silence protest.

The government has a duty to protect commuters and ensure adequate transportation. It should meet that duty through lawful contingency measures, meaningful dialogue, and concrete action on the conditions driving transport workers and operators to protest—not by threatening their livelihoods.

We call on the LTFRB to withdraw its blanket threat against participants in the transport strike and to refrain from treating participation in peaceful protest as franchise violation. ###

📷 Photo credit: Pinoy Weekly

Read more

Defend the youth speaking against injustice, corruption, and red-tagging

Defend the youth speaking against injustice, corruption, and red-tagging

The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers-National Capital Region (NUPL-NCR) stands with youth activists and their fundamental right to free speech and expression. NUPL-NCR assisted youth leader Christian Mataverde on October 20, 2026 as he filed his counter-affidavit before the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Rizal in the cyberlibel complaint brought against him by an official of the University of Rizal System (URS), Pililla Campus, for violation of Section 4(c)(4) of Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. Cyberlibel potentially carries the penalty of up to eight years in prison.

Four UST students appeal sanctions over PAF exhibit: NUPL and PILC ask Rector to stay penalties and reverse OSA resolutions

Four UST students appeal sanctions over PAF exhibit: NUPL and PILC ask Rector to stay penalties and reverse OSA resolutions

Raven Kristine Racelis, Ralph Christian Manuel, Mecaella Sean Carl Capalar, and Dex Anderson Frogoso, represented by the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL) and the Public Interest Law Center (PILC), asked the Office of the Rector to reverse and set aside the separate resolutions issued by the UST Office for Student Affairs on October 2. They also sought an urgent stay of their suspensions and all related sanctions while the appeal is pending.

NUPL seeks to keep Gorgonio amparo case in Manila

NUPL seeks to keep Gorgonio amparo case in Manila

NUPL President Atty. Ephraim Cortez speaks outside the Court of Appeals on September 29, 2026, following the filing of a motion seeking reconsideration of the transfer to Cebu of the amparo and habeas data proceedings involving NUPL–Negros Chairperson Atty. Rey Gorgonio and three development workers of the Paghida-et sa Kauswagan Development Group (PDG).

US sanctions against the ICC: Imperial power in the service of impunity

US sanctions against the ICC: Imperial power in the service of impunity

Under Trump’s Executive Order No. 14203, the designation subjects the ICC to US financial sanctions that threaten to restrict its access to American banks, technology, and other essential services. Given the United States’ influence over the global financial system, these restrictions could disrupt the Court’s operations, including investigations, witness protection, and even the delivery of assistance and reparations to victims.

Share This