Agustin vs. Edu, 88 SCRA 195 L- 49112 February 22, 1979

Facts: The petitioner was an owner of a volkswagen bettle car, model 13035, already properly equipped when it came out from the assembly lines with blinking lights fore and aft, which could very well serve as an early warning devise in case of emergencies mentioned in Letter of Instructions No.229, as amended as well as the Land Transportation Commission.

Respondent Land Transportation Commissioner Romeo Edu issued Memorandum Circular No. 32 pursuant to Letter of Instruction NO. 229 as amended. It required the use of Early Warning Devices on motor vehicles.

Issue: Whether or not the Letter of Instructions as well as the implementing rules and regulations were unlawful and constitutional.

Ruling: The court held that the letter of instructions No. 229 as amended as well as the implementing rules and regulations were valid and constitutional as a valid police power measure.

The petition itself quoted these two whereas clauses of the assailed Letter of Instruction. Whereas the hazards posed by such obstructions to traffic have been recognized by international bodies concerned with traffic safety, the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals and the United Nation ratified by the Philippine local legislation for the installation of road safety sign and devices. It cannot be disputed then that this declaration of principle found in the constitution possesses relevance because our country adopts the generally accepted principle, thus become part of the law of the land.

The petition was dismissed.