Does an ‘e’ on e-trike really mean exclusion?

By Ray Adrian Macalalag

Branded as a necessary safety measure, electric bicycles and electric tricycles will be excluded from national highways beginning December 1, 2025. Under this directive, these types of electric vehicles (EVs) face impoundment if caught violating the restriction. The Department of Transportation (DOTr), an agency that still lacks regional presence, has called for this long overdue implementation. Unfortunately, this swift decision places the Land Transportation Office on the frontlines, forcing them to absorb the inevitable public outcry.

Two distinct issues arise from this directive. First, the DOTr has been arguably unclear regarding the specific policies in place. Second, the erratic network of national roads in the Philippines creates unnecessary disconnects in urban mobility. While this order effectively shields local governments from blame by allowing them to point fingers at an entity beyond their control, it creates a volatile political landscape centered on the basic human right to mobility.

Admittedly, these electric personal mobility vehicles are a pet peeve for many motorists and even pedestrians. Valid arguments exist regarding their presence on major thoroughfares. Owners pay neither registration fees nor road user charges, and the drivers often lack licenses and the courtesy for all road users. With this considered, these e-vehicles can indeed become a nuisance and a safety hazard. However, focusing solely on the nuisance aspect ignores the systemic defects we have long turned a blind eye to. People need to move from point A to point B comfortably and with dignity, whether our egos like it or not.

From a legal perspective, Bicol Saro Partylist Representative Terry Ridon expressed concern given the ambiguity of the DOTr’s proclamation. There must be a clear distinction regarding whether the ban applies to private use, vehicles for hire, or both.

It is clear that some personal use EVs are technically exempted based on a provision in the Electric Vehicle Industry Development Act Implementing Rules and Regulations. This exemption falls into the category of light electric vehicles (LEVs), which must weigh less than 50 kilograms and, crucially, must not traverse public highways. Consequently, any road listed under the inventory of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) becomes a no-go zone for these LEVs, including e-bikes.

To put Iloilo City into context, the impact is staggering. The ban effectively isolates the vicinity of Plaza Libertad, the entirety of Muelle Loney, and Fort San Pedro from LEVs. It cuts off Taft North and El 98 Street that connects the centers of Jaro and Mandurriao districts. Major arteries like Rizal Street (passing the Iloilo Terminal Market and Central Market), as well as Delgado and Ledesma Streets in the City Proper, where we usually see these types of vehicles, are also included in the restricted roads.

Compliance will be a logistical nightmare for Iloilo City. These LEVs have become a lifeline for low-income families, offering an affordable alternative to a fractured transport network. The hard reality is that while the policy is highly exclusionary, the law exists. There is currently no grey area explaining why it should not be implemented, nor is there a clear compromise in place.

E-trikes, meanwhile, must register and must be operated by licensed drivers, simply because these vehicles do not fall within the LEV category with its weight exceeding 50 kilograms. Whether private or public use, no stipulation is permitting the status quo.

Nevertheless, the prevalence of LEVs and e-trikes not falling within this category stems from the never-ending lack of a truly modern public transportation system, a reliable last mile option, and an adequate, humane pedestrian infrastructure. These vehicles filled a vacuum that the transportation department has long failed to address. The potential low-hanging fruit, such as allowing LEVs to legally operate within subdivisions or on secondary roads, remains limited because our road hierarchy under the standard guidelines of DPWH are not updated and forces everyone onto highways to get anywhere meaningful. The practice of converting local roads to national roads have also become problematic turning roads of hope into roads of divide.

The lack of enforcement in previous years, combined with a lack of foresight for the mobility needs of the people, has exacerbated the magnitude of this DOTr policy. We are now trying to correct a systemic failure we unconsciously built for ages. Until we prioritize moving people rather than just moving vehicles disguised as a safety agenda, the collision between policy and reality will continue to leave the average commuter as the casualty, and those in low-income communities hopeless.