Checkpoints need to have written permission to be set up. Where they are allowed to set it up at is very specific in the memorandum.
Not at all, that only applies to checkpoints. They just aren't allowed to change the location of the checkpoint or operate outside of the scope of work from what the paperwork gives them permission for.
Yup, can't operate outside of the scope of work. Would be to hard to type "+/- 200 meters in either direction". Also would be to hard for officers not part of the checkpoint to be "just riding by" and stop to see what the crowd on the side of the road is doing and write a crap load of tickets.
Scope of work is not the location of work. The scope of work would be something like "look for illegal firearms/check vehicle registrations". Law enforcement works very different in the Philippines. I bet it is not as simple as just stopping/pulling people over that are stopped on the side of the road. It isn't even that simple in the US. I personally don't want the Philippines to turn into a heavily policed country like most countries in the West. The "unregulated" nature of the country is one of the main reasons I decided to move there in the first place.
I asked some of the local pnp a few years back why they don't ticket more of them with no papers of licences. I wasn't really surprised at the answer. "They are poor people who can't afford food or he is related to such n such so we can't book them! No hope what so ever here.
Nobody is suggesting that the LTO move from the checkpoint. What is being suggested is that additional LTO should come and apprehend law breakers. Is that against the law also?
All they have to do is set up a checkpoint 100m either side of a cockpit 10 minutes the fights have stated and check all vehicles within the zone. Of course they would require the army to be there, to quell the riot that would ensue.
