Road discourtesy

Ian Alfredo Magno

DESPITE the many incidents and reports of apparent arrogance in the performance of duties by some personnel of the Cagayan de Oro Roads and Traffic Administration (RTA), on a personal note, I have always given such officers the benefit of the doubt.  I would tell myself that perhaps certain people were complaining just because citation tickets were issued against them for a traffic violation or two; and most probably, these complaining motorists are merely justifying their wrong, or it could be that it is their way of retaliating against these RTA officers who, to me, are merely doing their jobs.

So, that was my opinion… until a close encounter with an abusive and arrogant RTA officer was experienced by a person very close to me.

Hence, I took careful time to review CDOC Ordinance 10551-2007 otherwise cited as the “Traffic Code of the City of Cagayan de Oro.” I read from top to bottom, cover-to-cover, so to speak.  And alas! The ordinance lacks a very important matter. It failed to specifically and categorically emphasize the one thing not only drivers and motorists should be mindful of, but also traffic enforcers as well – especially the latter… courtesy.

Traffic enforcers, being the ordinance enforcers that they are, ought to be the epitome of courtesy on the road, and in the use thereof.

Unfortunately, one specific instance shattered the benefit of the doubt I have been personally accordingly such RTA officers.  The incident happened thus.  There was this RTA metal barricade, affixed with large back-to-back “No Enry” signs at its center.  To one direction, entry was actually officially barred.  However, to the other direction, entry was supposedly allowed.  Hence, the other “No Entry” sign was causing confusion to some who were not familiar with that particular spot.  Thus, one car owner gave a candid yet very respectful advice to the RTA officer on duty to have such confusing “No Entry” sign covered. He said, “Maayong gabii sir, mayo siguro tabonan ta ning ‘No Entry’ sign kay gakalibog ang uban, maka atras or dili ba kaha, maka U-turn.”  Very astonishingly indeed, such well-intentioned suggestion was responded with utter hostility by the RTA officer at the post, who yelled, “Unsa’y labot nimo ana? Wala kay paki-alam ana… Drayber ka lang.”

Tsk tsk… such sheer discourtesy, ironically from the very officer who is expected to advocate road courtesy.

The innocent motorist committed no violation. On the contrary, it was the RTA officer who was committing a violation in plain and full view.  Section 21, (c) of Ordinance 10551-2007 provides:

“Where a ‘No Entry’ sign is erected over or adjacent to thoroughfare to face an approaching driver, the driver shall not proceed on that thoroughfare beyond the sign.”

Moreover, Section 22 of the same ordinance provides that the only vehicles exempted from going further beyond the “No Entry” sign are emergency vehicles such as ambulances, or civilian vehicles legitimately transporting a person needing urgent medical attention.

Hence, in above-cited scenario, the RTA officer who was allowing vehicles to pass through the “No Entry” sign – which was actually confusing most motorists – violated Section 22 of City Ordinance no. 10551-2007.  In a nutshell, the car owner who gave the suggestion to cover the confusing sign was actually correcting the violation being committed by the arrogant RTA enforcer.  Very strikingly, however, it was RTA enforcer who was instead very arrogant, condescending and discourteous to the well-meaining motorist – who happens to be senior citizen.

Thus, this column validates the existence of excesses being committed by Cagayan de Oro RTA enforcers on the road. It is hoped that City Ordinance be revisited, to include therein a provision dedicated for requiring RTA enforcers or any officer implementing traffic rules for that matter, to exercise basic road courtesy in the performance of their official duty.

E-mail: ianalfredom@gmail.com