Republic of the Philippines )

City of Butuan ) SS

AFFIDAVIT OF PROTEST

I, BELLA V. YARANON, Filipino citizen, of legal age, and presently

residing at P-4, Barangay 4, Poblacion, San Francisco, Agusan del Sur, after
having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say
that:

1. I am the registered owner of a Toyota Hi-Ace Commuter Van

(hereinafter referred as VAN) with Motor Vehicle Plate No.
ZAA1767, Engine No. 1KD2666301, and Chassis No.
JTFJT02P7G5006682;

2. The VAN is one of the fourteen (14) units of DIAMOND

TRANSPORT SERVICE COOPERATIVE (DATSCO) granted with
SPECIAL PERMIT for INTEREM UV EXPRESS Service on the route:
BAH-BAH, PROSPERIDAD, AGUSAN DEL SUR – BUTUAN CITY,
AGUSAN DEL NORTE AND VICE VERSA under CASE NO. 2019-
XIII-0082 UV CRG;

3. On October 3, 2022, at 2:30 PM, the VAN, which was driven by

JACQUELOU C. RANOLLO, was apprehended by LTFRB Caraga
Region personnel at Patin-ay, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur allegedly
for being “COLORUM/OUT OF LINE W/3 PAYING PASSENGER
FROM SAN FRANCISCO, BAH-BAH AND BUTUAN, 200, 100
PER HEAD”. (emphasis and underlining added)

4. The subject vehicle was impounded per Motor Vehicle Impounding

Receipt No. 014729 dated October 3, 2022;

5. With all due respect, the allegation “W/3 PAYING PASSENGER

FROM SAN FRANCISCO, BAH-BAH AND BUTUAN, 200, 100 PER
HEAD” constituting the offense “COLORUM/OUT OF LINE
(COLORUM)” is legally infirm.

6. At the time of apprehension at Patin-ay, Prosperidad, Agusan del

Sur, the VAN came from its garage at the residence of the owner at P-
4, Barangay 4, Poblacion, San Francisco, Agusan del Sur and heading
towards terminal in Bah-bah, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur. It is
beyond comprehension and logic that the passengers on board the
VAN include passengers from Bah-bah and Butuan City when the
VAN came from San Francisco and still travelling at Patin-ay,

Page 1 of 4
 Prosperidad, Agusan del Norte towards Bah-bah, Prosperidad,
Agusan del Sur.

7. Further, the “200, 100 per head” may not be factual since there
was/were no definite destination/s of the passengers. What was
stated in the MVIR was “W/3 PAYING PASSENGER FROM SAN
FRANCISCO, BAH-BAH AND BUTUAN, 200, 100 PER HEAD”
without destination. How was the fare determined without an
specific destination?

8. The allegations of facts constituting the offense charged are

substantial matters because they determine the real nature and cause
of the offense against the respondent in order for the latter to prepare
his explanation. A proper appraisal of the allegations would give the
respondent an opportunity to adequately prepare for his or her
explanation. Otherwise, substantial justice would be undermined.
(717 Phil. 1, 6 [2013])

9. In observing administrative due process, it is essential that the

accused be accorded the right to be informed of the accusations
against him or her. Fair play requires that the accused be equipped
with the necessary information for the preparation of his or her
defense. (G.R. No. 180745, August 30, 2017)

10. Considering the above, there was a violation of due process with
respect to the allegation “W/3 PAYING PASSENGER FROM SAN
FRANCISCO, BAH-BAH AND BUTUAN, 200, 100 PER HEAD”. To
do so would violate the right of the respondent owner to due process.

11. Be that as it may, undersigned owner asserts that the VAN WAS
NOT OPERATING “COLORUM/OUT OF LINE W/3 PAYING
PASSENGER FROM SAN FRANCISCO, BAH-BAH AND BUTUAN,
200, 100 PER HEAD” at the time of apprehension.

12. It was apprehended at Patin-ay, Prosperidad , Agusan del Sur, a

point beyond the route BAH-BAH, PROSPERIDAD, AGUSAN DEL
SUR – BUTUAN CITY, AGUSAN DEL NORTE AND VICE VERSA
because the VAN came from the its garage at the residence of the
owner at P-4, Barangay 4, Poblacion, San Francisco, Agusan del Sur.

13. The driver decided to proceed to San Francisco to report to the

undersigned owner a disturbing sound emanating from the VAN’s
engine. After a brief check with a mechanic and with the latter’s

Page 2 of 4
 advice that it was not a major defect that may affect the safety of
passengers, the VAN was allowed to resume its operations.

14. Incidentally, there were close relatives that took advantage of the
return of the VAN to Bah-bah, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur, thus, the
request to hitch ride was accommodated, they’re not paying
passengers. Their plea cannot be refused, since we are filipinos who
are known to be accommodating in the spirit of filipino customs and
traditions.

15. There was no intention for the VAN to solicit paying passengers from
San Francisco, in fact, the sign “NOT AVAILABLE” was visibly
hanged on its wind shield at the time of apprehension.

16. Upon arrival at Patin-ay, the VAN was flagged down by the LTFRB
Apprehending Team, my relatives were shocked by the way the
LTFRB personnel questioned them and rattled to declare the
traditional fare they used to pay when travelling Butuan City to San
Francisco.

17. Under LTFRB Memorandum Circular Number 2006-023, the

following are not considered Out of Line Operations:

xxxxx

2. When the driver is from or going back to its authorized garage to

and from the point of its authorized route, provided it has no
passengers;

xxxxx

5. When the unit is being used for emergency, personal, and family
use, as provided under Memorandum Circular No. 91-014.

18. Here,

a. The VAN reported to the undersigned owner, at its garage at P-4,

Barangay 4, Poblacion, San Francisco, Agusan del Sur, a
disturbing sound emanating from the VAN’s engine that may
jeopardize the safety of the passengers. The VAN came from its
authorized garage and was going back to operation after it was
determined to be roadworthy.
b. The passengers of the VAN were relatives. On its way from San
Fancisco to Bah-bah, Prosperidad, it was a personal and family
use. In fact, the sign “NOT AVAILABLE” was appropriately and
visibly hanged on the front of the VAN.

Page 3 of 4
 19. That I am executing this affidavit to contest the apprehension
“COLORUM/OUT OF LINE W/3 PAYING PASSENGER FROM
SAN FRANCISCO, BAH-BAH AND BUTUAN, 200, 100 PER HEAD”
and in order to attest to the truth of the foregoing facts.

20. Attached to this Affidavit of Protest is the Affidavit of Driver

JACQUELOU C. RANOLLO.

PRAYER

21. The undersigned Affiant-Owner is hereby appealing for the kind

compassion and understanding of the Honorable DOTr/LTFRB for
the RELEASE of the VAN on the ground that, at the time of
apprehension, it was NOT operating as COLORUM.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this

_____ day of October 2022 at Butuan City, Philippines.

BELLA V. YARANON
Affiant-Owner

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, this _____ day of

October 2022 at Butuan City, Philippines. Affiant exhibited to me his
competent proof of identity.

Doc. No. _____;

Page No. _____;
Book No. X;
Series of 2022. DELMER LAGASCA RIPARIP
Notary Public
Roll of Attorneys No. 66714 (May 23, 2017)
IBP O.R. No. 172477 (Jan 07, 2022)
PTR No. BC 2175665 (Jan 03, 2022)
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0007798
MCLE Compliance No VII-0011677
TIN 924-782-121-000
Email: delmer.riparip@yahoo.com
Mobile No. 09483603708

Page 4 of 4