The traditional jeepney does not belong on EDSA, C5, or Roxas Boulevard. It was never designed for highways — and mixing it with buses and trucks at speed is where the safety and congestion issues come from.
Remove it from those roads — not by banning it, but by giving those roads to BRT — and the jeepney finds its natural home: the barangay streets, the narrow collectors, the last-mile corridors where no articulated bus can go.
The jeepney is one of the most recognizable symbols of Filipino identity in the world. The hand-painted murals, the chrome horses, the names of saints along the side — these are a living folk art tradition born from repurposed WWII vehicles that became something entirely our own.
The so-called e-jeepney, frankly, is a different vehicle entirely — closer to a mini-bus or coaster in form and function. What the traditional jeepney actually needs is proper enforcement, safety standards, and route rationalization. Not replacement.
In the recent happenings, amidst the US-Iran War of 2026, Metro Manila as a region was among the cities that got affected by these conflicts. The fuel prices ballooned up to twice its price prior to the start of the US-Iran War. Many experts pointed out that the Oil Deregulation of 1998 is the main reason why a typical Juan Dela Cruz bears the sudden impact of the tensions far from our native soil.[1]
If a typical Juan Dela Cruz is already affected, what more for public transportation, and more importantly the ‘Jeepney Drivers’ in Metro Manila who, even today, are still running under the ‘boundary system’.[2]
Unlike major cities outside the country, “boundary-system” seems to be a foreign system to them. Thus, it makes “boundary-system” kinda unique, the same uniqueness we have in our traditional jeepneys.
Let's dig deeper into the main issues that lie under ‘boundary-system’.
The word ‘boundary-system’, and ‘public transportation’ are two words that technically contradict each other. If you really think about it, the boundary system was never designed to work with the movement of people, or at least in favor of the commuter?
But the question is, does it even favor the drivers, and operators themselves?
The implementation of the boundary system resonates with the “economic viability” of the LTFRB. This explains why they are fine removing traditional jeepneys in the streets of Metro Manila but not the “economic viability” and not promote “urban planning” in the region.
No, it doesn't favor the region with 14 million people. It only favors those regions that are relatively low in population, thus meriting a low transportation demand.
Honestly, has the boundary system made a good impact?
Again, this system needs no rocket science. Just look at different cities and learn from them. For the nth time, demand is never the problem, we are 14 million as a region.
Now, you might be wondering: if indeed 14 million is a target market of these “jeepney drivers”, then it would be safe to assume that these jeepney drivers will have unlimited ridership, right?
Then you're wrong. Again, following the hierarchy of movement, the streets of Manila are flooded with jeepneys, UV Express, and at the same time, private vehicles, Grab, taxi, and even motorcycles which are considered lower tiers of the hierarchy.
So, yes 14 million is the number but the market has already shifted, from prioritising public transportation, the 14 million have already decided to take transportation into their own hands, which explains “private transportation”. Hence the rise of Grab, Angkas, JoyRide and many more.
The call for removal of the ‘boundary system’ is nothing new. This has been brought up to the discussion table over and over again. Just search it in Google and articles up to 2010, 2011 and 2012 have been pointing it out already. As to why it was never implemented, I personally don't know. A lack of alternatives? A lack of political will?
Seriously, when and what are the short-term plans of the country's transportation system in Metro Manila's traffic? Build more rail? Build a train? Removal of traditional jeepneys? Attend another speaking engagement?
Going back, has oil deregulation made a good impact? Depending on which lens you are looking at, the same question applies: has the boundary system made a good impact Again, it depends on which lens you are looking at.
Imagine oil prices controlling everything, your electricity, your goods, your service, and even your “private transportation”, damn it's indeed painful for a Filipino who just wants to live in Metro Manila.
Again, the point of discussion is not to remove people from governments in the transportation sector, they're paid to improve the lives of many Filipinos. But, if it warrants it, why not?
Mind you, this is the same government institution that pushes for the removal of jeepneys in the streets of Metro Manila.
Again, if we were to talk about roadworthiness of every vehicle, then all vehicles must be in compliance with that — this includes private cars, public vehicles, motorcycles, e-bikes, police patrols, tricycles, ambulances, city hall's red-plate cars, and all. As in all, not just jeepneys.
And with regard to safety, a High Speed Rail is not meant to consume the rail tracks of LRT-1, MRT3, heck even the Dalian Train Set was never compatible for MRT3 due to its safety[3]then what more a High Speed Rail, same analogy with the jeepneys — why were they even allowed to run in Commonwealth, Roxas Boulevard, EDSA, and immediately raises the idea of safety — if in the first place they should never have been given a Certificate of Public Convenience or a route there?
Guess why again?
Same old Section 5A of Executive Order 202 of 1987, which views jeepneys in these highways solely on its economic viability and not through its capacity and even its safety.
Make use of jeepneys where they shine the most, the tight streets of Manila where buses are awkward to run through. Streets of Tondo, Sampaloc and even in the Binondo Area. Heck, do we really expect buses to fit within those tiny streets?
Let the jeepney be preserved. No need to phase it out.
Remove the boundary system and replace it with a network of mass public transportation for the whole region, and remove these people from a transportation system that lacks initiative in improving the lives of every Juan.
Now to end this, are we even trying to adapt and create more measures so that a sudden crisis in the Middle East can't immediately break a typical Juan Dela Cruz, again?
Apparently yes, since Republic Act 11697 of April 15, 2022 was signed,[4] then indeed we as a state already support EVs as they already have no color coding anymore.
Indeed Metro Manila is on the right path of bettering its public transportation. Cheers to us all!
References
[1] US-Iran War — Oil Price Impact on the Philippines. The Iran war contributed to sharp increases in global oil prices with particularly significant effects in the Philippines. Diesel prices effectively doubled during this period — and for the first time, fuel costs reached triple-digit pesos per liter, equating to over $6.50 US dollars per gallon. On March 24, 2026, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. issued an executive order declaring a national energy emergency. The Philippines is doubly leveraged to oil — about 30% of primary energy supply comes from oil, virtually all of it imported, and the country's transportation system is almost entirely oil-based. The country also lacks sufficient fuel storage capacity to absorb supply disruptions, which amplifies pressure when shortages occur. Via Collins, Gabriel and Tim Koeppl. “The Iran War's Energy Aftershocks in the Philippines.” Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, Center for Energy Studies, March 27, 2026: bakerinstitute.org
[2] Boundary System — Quota and Boundary Systems in PUVs. Under the boundary system, drivers must rent the vehicle from owners or operators by paying the “boundary” fee, shoulder the costs of fuel and light maintenance, and collect all revenue from fares. This means jeepney drivers are incentivized to behave erratically — loading and unloading passengers in illegal locations and skimping on maintenance since it directly affects their take-home pay. As transport economist R. Anthony Siy noted, the system forces drivers to make a difficult choice: drive dangerously or let their families starve. The boundary system has a legal foundation traceable to DOLE Memorandum Circular 118-12 of 2012, which allows PUV staff to be compensated based on ridership — a provision that directly incentivizes the dangerous driving behavior observed daily on Metro Manila roads. Via VISOR.ph, July 12, 2018, by R. Anthony Siy (Transport Economist): visor.ph
[3] Dalian Train Set — MRT3 Compatibility and Safety Issues. The 48 Dalian trains were delivered in 2016 but remained unused due to compatibility issues. The DOTr confirmed that the trains exceeded the total weight required in the contract — each train was specified at 46.4 tons but the delivered trains weighed 49.7 tons. Chinese firm CRRC Dalian Company Limited agreed to absorb all costs related to repairing the trains after high-level meetings in Beijing. The trains were purchased under the Aquino administration in 2014 for ₱3.8 billion. It was not until July 16, 2025 — nearly a decade after delivery — that the first Dalian train was finally deployed for revenue service on MRT-3. Primary source via Rappler, August 30, 2018 (Dalian agrees to pay costs): rappler.com. Supporting source via Rappler, July 16, 2025 (finally deployed): rappler.com. Supporting source via Philippine Star, February 4, 2018 (₱3.8B refund sought): philstar.com
[4] Republic Act 11697 — Electric Vehicle Industry Development Act (EVIDA). Under Section 25(a)(2) of Republic Act 11697, also known as the Electric Vehicle Industry Development Act (EVIDA), electric vehicles are explicitly exempted from the Unified Vehicular Volume Reduction Program (UVVRP) — more commonly known as number coding — as confirmed by the Department of Energy. Primary source via Supreme Court E-Library: elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph. DOE confirmation via Philippine News Agency, October 8, 2025: pna.gov.ph