Regulation Without Infrastructure is a Dead End

The Land Transportation Office (LTO) recently hit the brakes on its plan to impound light electric vehicles (LEVs) on national highways, moving the enforcement deadline to January 2. While LTO Chief Assistant Secretary Markus Lacanilao frames this as a grace period for an “information drive,” let us call it what it is: a realization that the government is trying to enforce a penalty for a crime they helped create.

The reprieve is welcome, but the mindset remains worrying. The threat to impound e-bikes and e-trikes exposes a regulatory body sticking to a 1980s combustion-engine playbook while trying to police 2020s electric innovation.

For the regulator, the e-bike is a nuisance – a slow-moving obstacle in a fast lane. But for the commuter, the e-bike is a survival mechanism. In an economy where fuel prices are volatile and public transport is broken, LEVs have democratized mobility.

As Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon noted, these vehicles allow families to bypass the suffocating costs of traditional transport. Banning them from national highways without providing viable alternatives is not a safety measure; it is an anti-poor policy that protects traditional transport monopolies.

We must look at our neighbors. In Vietnam, the government did not respond to the electric two-wheeler boom with blanket bans on connectors. They integrated them. Vietnam manages over 60 million two-wheelers by enforcing speed limits and registration for higher-powered e-motorcycles, while leaving low-speed e-bikes accessible. They adapted the road hierarchy to the vehicle; the Philippines is trying to purge the vehicle to suit the hierarchy.

The LTO justifies the crackdown citing safety, noting a rise in accidents. This is a valid concern. However, the chaos on the roads is not solely the fault of the riders; it is the result of the government’s failure to implement the Electric Vehicle Industry Development Act (EVIDA).

Republic Act No. 11697 (EVIDA) is clear: it mandates the creation of segregated lanes for LEVs. The law envisions a future where micromobility is integrated into the national network. Yet, where are these lanes?

The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and local governments have lagged significantly in connecting bike lane networks. By threatening to impound vehicles before building the legally mandated infrastructure, the government is setting a trap. They are forcing riders onto highways because there is nowhere else to go, and then punishing them for being there.

We need a realistic path forward that respects both safety and economic necessity.

1. Build Before You Ban:The government must halt all impoundment threats for private users until the “segregated lanes” mandated by EVIDA are physically present. You cannot fine a citizen for failing to use a lane that does not exist.
2. Distinguish the Users:We must separate the For-Hire e-trikes from Private e-bikes. E-trikes operating as public utility vehicles (PUVs) soliciting passengers should absolutely be regulated, insured, and restricted to local routes, similar to gas-powered tricycles. However, a private citizen using a low-speed e-bike to get to work should be left alone, as RA 11697 exempts private LEVs from LTO registration.
3. Modernize the Metrics:Instead of arbitrary bans on “national roads” (which often cut through the heart of provincial towns), regulations should be based on speed and weight.

The LTO’s delay is an opportunity to pivot. If the government wants to avoid accidents, the answer isn’t to confiscate the poor man’s vehicle. The answer is to paint the lanes, fix the infrastructure, and catch up with the rest of Southeast Asia.

Enforcement without integration is not regulation – it is oppression.