MMDA+v+Bel Air+Digest

METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, petitioner  AUTHORITY,  petitioner , vs vs.. BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, INC., respondent . by Conrad Lacsina

Facts: 1. Petitioner Petitioner MMDA is a government government agency tasked with the delivery of basic services in Metro Manila, including “transport and traffic management.” Respondent Bel-Air Village Association, Inc. is the registered owner of Neptune Street, a private road inside Bel-Air Village. 2. Neptune runs parallel parallel to Kalayaan Kalayaan Avenue, Avenue, a national road road open to the general general public. 3. Bel-Air received received from from MMDA, through through its its Chairman, Chairman, a notice notice requesting requesting it to open open Neptune Street to public vehicular traffic “for the safe and convenient movement of persons”. Bel-Air was also apprised that the perimeter wall separating the subdivision from the adjacent Kalayaan Avenue would be demolished. 4. Bel-Air instituted instituted against against MMDA MMDA a case case for injunction injunction and prayed for for the issuance issuance of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining the opening of Neptune Street and prohibiting the demolition of the perimeter wall. 5. MMDA claims claims that it has has the authority authority to to open Neptune Neptune Street Street to public public traffic because it is an agent of the state endowed with police power in the delivery of  basic services in Metro Manila so that there is no need for the City of Makati to enact an ordinance opening Neptune Street to the public.

Whether or not the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) has the mandate to open Neptune Street to public traffic pursuant to its regulatory and police powers? Issue:

Decision :

No.

Ratio: 1.

2.

Police power is lodged primarily in the National Legislature. It cannot be exercised by any group or body of individuals not possessing legislative power. Our Congress delegated police power to the local government units in the Local Government Code of 1991. But the MMDA is not a local government unit or a public corporation endowed with legislative power. Even its governing board, the Metro Manila Council has not been delegated any legislative power, unlike the legislative bodies of local government units. The functions of MMDA are administrative in nature. According to its Charter, R.A. 7924: "Sec. 2. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila Development   Authority . -- –x x x. The MMDA shall perform planning, monitoring and coordinative functions, and in the process exercise regulatory and supervisory authority over the delivery of metro-wide services within Metro Manila, without diminution of the autonomy of the local government units concerning purely local matters."

3.

Petitioner cannot seek refuge in the cases of Sangalang v. Intermediate  Appellate Court where the Court upheld certain ordinances as a legitimate exercise of police power because both Makati and the then Metro Manila Commission which issued the said ordinances had the power to enact them. The MMC under P. D. No. 824 is not the same entity as the MMDA under R. A. No. 7924. Unlike the MMC, the MMDA has no power to enact ordinances for the welfare of the community.