UPDATE: August 5, 2022. Back in 2020, the House Committee on Transportation decided to consolidate two House Bills (HBs) that seek to protect law-abiding drivers from unfair rulings during road incidents.
The two bills are House Bill No. 899, or the Fair Road Crash Investigation and Accountability Act, and House Bill No. 1987, otherwise known as the Philippine Responsible Driving and Accountability Act. There are some overlaps between these two, hence the consolidation.You can view the full documents by clicking here and here.
During the hearing in 2020, the House Committee decided to form a technical working group to lead the consolidation of the two bills, but there were no specific timelines laid out. It appears as if the planned consolidation never happened, though, as only HB 899 was refiled in the 19th Congress.
The principal author Representative Marvey Mariño of the 5th District of Batangas refiled the bill as is, and it is now known as House Bill No. 920. You can check out the official document here.
ALSO READ:
Pasig City: Motorists must maintain one-meter distance from cyclists, yield to bikers
Baguio City might soon begin charging tourists with cars a P50 congestion fee
For context, you can also check out these excerpts from the two bills:
Instances in which culpability of the indicated party shall be presumed, under HB 899:
- When the driver is intoxicated or driving under the influence of illegal drugs
- When the driver has no license or has an expired license
- When there is failure [on the part of the driver] to present the Official Receipt or Certificate of Registration (OR/CR) when asked by the first responder
- When there is a commission of other serious traffic violations
- When the driver flees the scene of the crime
- When there is no evidence [presented by the driver] of franchise or Certificate of Public Convenience presented during apprehension
- When the person injured was not crossing at a pedestrian lane or road intersection
- When the person injured crosses the street or highway instead of using the designated pedestrian crossing or nearby footbridge
- When the person injured is a motorcycle/bicycle/tricycle not wearing road safety devices traveling on a national highway and not driving in the designated or rightmost lane of the roadway in accordance with international standards
- When the driver or person injured did not have the right of way at the exact time of the accident
- Other analogous circumstances
Instances in which the vehicle driver will not be automatically presumed at fault, under HB 1987:
- The victim is intoxicated or under the influence of drugs
- The victim was not crossing the street at a pedestrian lane or road intersection
- The victim crossed a street or highway instead of using a footbridge
- The victim is a bike rider not wearing protective gear or wearing dark clothing
- The victim is operating a motorcycle, tricycle, or bicycle traveling on a national highway under the minimum speed limit or not on the rightmost lane
- The victim is a driver who did not have right of way
- The driver did not flee the scene of the incident
- The driver was suffering a medical emergency, like a heart attack or stroke, at the time of the accident
- The driver of the other vehicle has non-functional headlights, taillights, or other warning devices
We still can’t say for certain if this will eventually be passed into law, but hopefully there’ll be more progress with the bill this time around. What do you guys think?
