The Supreme Court has ruled that the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) does not have the power to remove the signages, billboards, and other advertisements installed in the premises of the Metro Rail Transit (MRT).

In a nine-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin, the SC First Division upheld the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and Court of Appeals (CA) declaring that the MMDA does not have the authority to dismantle billboards, signages, and other advertisements installed in MRT premises.

The MMDA sought the nullification of the adverse rulings by the CA on May 9, 2007, which had affirmed the ruling of the Pasig RTC that permanently enjoined the MMDA from removing the billboards and streamers installed by Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, Vending, and Promotions, Inc.

The SC First Division dismissed the petition of the MMDA seeking to reverse the ruling and instead affirmed the CA ruling.

The Court rejected the claim of the MMDA that it was only implementing Presidential Decree No. 1096, or the Building Code, in dismantling Trackworks’ billboards and signages.

The Court noted that the power to implement the provisions of the Building Code belongs to the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and not to MMDA.

The Court held that MMDA Regulation No. 96-009 -- which prohibits posting, installation and display of billboards, signages and other advertising media clutters in any part of the road, sidewalk, center island, posts, trees, park and open space -- applied only to public areas, and not to private properties such as MRT 3.

The SC supported the stand of the CA in holding that the regulation does not apply to the advertising materials installed by Trackworks on MRT 3 as they cannot be considered as a “center island” because it (MRT 3) is a private property.

The SC explained that Trackworks derived its right to install its billboards and signages in the MRT 3 from the authority of the Metro Rail Transit Corporation (MRTC) under the build-lease-transfer (BLT) agreement.

Under the BLT agreement, MRTC owns the MRT 3 for 25 years, upon expiration of which the MRTC would transfer ownership of the MRT 3 to the government.

Since the MRTC remains to be the owner of the MRT 3, according to the Court, its contract for advertising services with Trackworks “was a valid exercise of ownership by the former.”

“It is futile for the MMDA to simply invoke its legal mandate to justify the dismantling of Trackworks’ billboards, signages and other advertising media. The MMDA simply had no power on its own to dismantle, remove, or destroy the billboards, signages and other advertising media installed on the MRT structure by Trackworks,” said Bersamin, “ponente” (writer) of the decision. Concurring with the ruling were Chief Justice Reynato Puno and Associate Justices Conchita Carpio Morales, Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, and Martin Villarama, Jr.

Records showed that the MRTC entered into a contract for advertising services with Trackworks on October 17, 1998. The contract is authorized by the August 8, 1997 BLT agreement between the government and MRTC.

In the BLT agreement, theMRTC was allowed either by itself or through any estate developers, to obtain income by developing commercial premises in the MRT 3.