Remove illegal parking

The initiative of the Department of the Interior and Local Government to remove illegally parked cars on major roads is well-intentioned, but could be self-defeating if the outcome is only to give more road space to private motor vehicles. Because of the phenomenon of “induced demand,” any measure that makes driving easier by giving more space to cars only attracts further car (and motorcycle) use, eventually leaving our roads even more congested than before.

Because road space is limited, we need to use our roads so that they deliver the greatest good for the greatest number — this means prioritizing the most productive, inclusive and socially beneficial travel options on any road space. The desired outcome of the removal of illegal vehicle parking should be to enhance the safety, comfort and attractiveness of walking, cycling and public transport (instead of offering the added road space to private motor vehicles). Not only is this approach desirable from the standpoint of transportation science, it is what is required based on principles of equity and social justice.

Giving additional road space to private motor vehicles is, in effect, choosing the least efficient and most environmentally damaging application for a scarce resource; it would be a foolish and wasteful use of public assets. One road lane (3.5-meter width) used mainly by cars can move 600 to 2,000 persons per hour per direction. If the same space is converted into a pathway for pedestrians or cyclists, the same space can move five to 10 times more people. If the road space is dedicated to public transport (buses, jeepneys, etc.), the space can move from five to 20 times more people. Any investment in our roads should encourage a shift to these desirable, space-efficient and low-impact travel modes. It is a no-brainer.

Devoting any freed-up space for public transport, walking and cycling also make sense when one considers that car owners are only a small minority in the Philippines. Nationwide, only 6 percent of households own four-wheeled motor vehicles (11.5 percent of households for Greater Manila, defined as Metro Manila plus surrounding provinces). About one-third of Filipino households own motorcycles. This means that the majority of Metro Manila’s population depends on walking, bicycles or public transportation to get around their neighborhoods and cities. This segment is also the most vulnerable and disadvantaged — they should be the focus of measures to improve mobility using freed-up road space.

Pedestrians are endangered when they have to mix in the same road space with fast-moving motor vehicles. For this reason, safe pathways for pedestrians should be a part of any urban road. Sidewalks are essential because they save lives. Unfortunately, all over Philippine cities, many sidewalks have been illegally converted into parking spaces or have become part of the roadway for motor vehicles. In the absence of safe sidewalks, many avoid walking and shift to using a motor vehicle. If we want fewer motor vehicles on our congested roads, we need to rectify this anomaly and make our streets walkable.

With a wider sidewalk, shade trees and greenery can be planted. A tree-shaded street delivers many benefits for a neighborhood, foremost of which is the lowering of ambient temperatures by 5 to 10 degrees centigrade. Because a very large number of trips daily are for journeys of 3 kilometers or less (therefore, very walkable), many of these trips could be completed via walking as long as there are pathways that are safe, shaded and accessible by persons with disability.

The same arguments justify the creation of protected bike lanes out of the road space occupied by illegally parked cars. The owners of bicycles today outnumber the owners of cars by a factor of 4:1. Many more Filipinos would use bicycles to move around our cities if there were safe and continuous bike paths connecting residential neighborhoods to destinations with jobs, social services and markets. Millions of Filipinos are already using bicycles daily to travel — achieving shorter, more predictable journey times; adopting healthier, more active lifestyles; and generating savings in travel costs that can be used for food, health care, personal development or investment.

Freed-up road space should also be used to create dedicated lanes for public transport (which could include school transport and emergency vehicles), enabling them to have faster and more predictable travel times. National and local government planners should meet with public transport operators to discuss how buses and jeepneys can escape traffic bottlenecks and achieve more round trips if offered exclusive road space.

A recent concern is the fact that many jeepneys and buses are parked on public roads when not in use, mainly because they have no access to depots or garages. Instead of penalizing owners of these vehicles, local governments should help to organize common depot space for such units in every locality, so that transport services can also be better managed and coordinated. This is one way that a local government unit can help deliver better services to constituents by enabling public transport operators to be more efficient and financially viable.

Forget about removing illegally parked cars in order to offer more lanes to private motor vehicles. The focus should be on making walking, cycling and public transport safe, convenient and attractive, thereby facilitating a shift away from private motor vehicle use.

Source: Manila Times

Can We Execute a Joint Will?

When planning for the future, many couples naturally consider the idea of simplifying things—including their wills. One common question that arises is: “Can we execute a joint will?” The short answer is: it depends on your country’s laws, but in most places, joint wills are possible but generally discouraged. Let’s explore why.

What Is a Joint Will?

A joint will is a single legal document created by two or more people, typically spouses or partners, outlining how their assets will be distributed after both of them pass away. It usually states that when one person dies, the surviving partner inherits everything, and when the second person passes, the assets go to the designated beneficiaries (like children or relatives).

Are Joint Wills Legal?

In many countries, including the Philippines, the United States, and the UK, joint wills are generally discouraged and sometimes even considered invalid, depending on how they're structured. Instead, what is more commonly allowed is a mutual will or mirror wills, where each partner creates a separate will with identical terms.

For example:

• Philippines: Joint wills are not valid under Philippine law. Article 818 of the Civil Code specifically prohibits joint wills, even if executed abroad by Filipinos.

• United States: Some states allow joint wills but courts often discourage them due to potential complications.

• United Kingdom: Joint wills are technically allowed but rarely used in modern practice due to legal and practical downsides.

  
  

Why Are Joint Wills Discouraged?

Lack of Flexibility

Once one partner dies, a joint will usually cannot be changed—even if circumstances change, like remarriage, estrangement from beneficiaries, or new grandchildren.

Legal Complications

If poorly drafted, joint wills can lead to court battles, misunderstandings, and disputes among surviving family members.

Better Alternatives Exist

Most estate lawyers recommend creating mirror wills or mutual wills, which are separate documents but can reflect the same intentions. These are more flexible, legally sound, and easier to amend if needed.

What’s the Best Option?

• Mirror Wills: Each partner creates a separate will leaving everything to the other, then to agreed beneficiaries.

• Mutual Wills (with contract): Legally binding wills that cannot be changed after one partner dies, but with clearer enforceability than joint wills.

• Living Trusts: In some cases, a trust may offer more flexibility and privacy for asset distribution.

  
  

Final Thoughts

While the idea of a joint will sounds simple and romantic—“one will for both of us”—the reality is that it can lead to more problems than solutions. In most jurisdictions, joint wills are either invalid, problematic, or outdated in modern estate planning.

💡 Tip: Always consult with a qualified estate lawyer familiar with the laws of your country or region. They can help you create a legally sound and flexible estate plan that honors your wishes without unnecessary risks.

Source: Ziggurat Real Estate

Naturalization for a foreigner married to a Filipina

The process that foreigners undergo to become Filipino citizens is called naturalization.

Naturalization is a legal process that grants foreigners full recognition as citizens of the Philippines. It gives them rights and privileges such as voting, obtaining a Philippine passport and accessing public services. As citizens, they also gain the right to legally work or run a business in the country and to receive protection from the government.

Along with these rights come responsibilities, such as paying taxes and obeying the laws of the country. The naturalization process in the Philippines ensures that those who wish to become citizens truly understand and accept the responsibilities and rights of being a Filipino.

Marriage between a foreigner and a Filipina does not automatically grant the foreigner Filipino citizenship. Section 2 of Commonwealth Act (CA) 473, or the Revised Naturalization Law, outlines the qualifications required for naturalization: "Sec. 2. Qualifications. – Subject to Section four of this Act, any person having the following qualifications may become a citizen of the Philippines by naturalization:

"First. He must be not less than twenty-one years of age on the day of the hearing of the petition;

"Second. He must have resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not less than ten years;

"Third. He must be of good moral character and believes in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution, and must have conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Philippines in his relation with the constituted government as well as with the community in which he is living;

"Fourth. He must own real estate in the Philippines worth not less than five thousand pesos, Philippine currency, or must have some known lucrative trade, profession, or lawful occupation;

"Fifth. He must be able to speak and write English or Spanish and any one of the principal Philippine languages; and

"Sixth. He must have enrolled his minor children of school age, in any of the public schools or private schools recognized by the Office of Private Education of the Philippines, where the Philippine history, government and civics are taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum, during the entire period of the residence in the Philippines required of him prior to the hearing of his petition for naturalization as Philippine citizen."

One of the basic qualifications is continuous residence in the country for at least ten (10) years. However, according to Section 3(3) of CA 473, the required 10 years of continuous residence in the Philippines may be reduced to five (5) years if the applicant is married to a Filipina, viz.: "Sec. 3. Special qualifications.

The ten years of continuous residence required under the second condition of the last preceding Sec. shall be understood as reduced to five years for any petitioner having any of the following qualifications: x x x "3. Being married to a Filipino woman; x x x" In response to your question, your marriage did not automatically make your French husband a Filipino citizen. He still has to go through the process of naturalization.

He will need to submit an application, and it will be carefully reviewed by the court to determine whether he will be granted a Certificate of Naturalization. The effect of your marriage is that the required 10 years of continuous residence in the Philippines will be reduced. It may become only five (5) years instead of 10.

Aside from this, he must still meet the qualifications stated by law, and he must not fall under any of the disqualifications.

The disqualifications are listed in Section 4 of C.A. 473: "Sec. 4. Who are disqualified. – The following cannot be naturalized as Philippine citizens:

"Persons opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines opposing all organized governments;

"Persons defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of violence, personal assault, or assassination for the success and predominance of their ideas;

"Polygamists or believers in the practice of polygamy;

"Persons convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude;

"Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious diseases;

"Persons who, during the period of their residence in the Philippines, have not mingled socially with the Filipinos, or who have not evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions, and ideals of the Filipinos;

"Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the United States and the Philippines are at war, during the period of such war;

"Citizens or subjects of a foreign country other than the United States whose laws do not grant Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens or subjects thereof."

Source: Manila Times