Have you ever noticed those temporary barriers placed along national highways near schools? Drivers often treat them as a nuisance. These barriers, called chicanes, are meant to slow vehicles down. They are a modest but vital effort to protect lives, especially those of children. As the new academic year begins, we will see more of them again. And with them, the familiar frustration of motorists who are forced to reduce their speed.

But if slowing down irritates you, that is already a warning sign. It reflects how we continue to value vehicle speed more than road safety. It shows how deeply the idea of car priority is rooted in both our culture and our laws.

Many schools in the country were built along national highways. This is the result of poor urban planning and a failure to anticipate future risks. That is the reality we have inherited. But instead of resisting it, we must adapt with prudence and compassion. These highways may be designed for vehicles, but in areas where people, especially children, cross the road, people must take priority.

Under Section 35 of the Land Transportation and Traffic Code, or Republic Act No. 4136, the speed limit when passing school zones is 20 kilometers per hour. The same limit applies to crowded streets, blind corners, and when passing stationary vehicles. These are all considered high risk areas. However, the law does not define what a school zone is. There is also no requirement for proper signage, pedestrian lanes, speed bumps, or other safety infrastructure. The absence of these details weakens the intent of the law and leaves the matter to subjective judgment. This creates real risk where it matters most.

The law does not define what a school zone is. There is also no requirement for proper signage, pedestrian lanes, speed bumps, or other safety infrastructure.

Section 42 of the same law also reveals a bias toward vehicles. It states that pedestrians have the right of way only when they are within a marked crosswalk. Outside of those, they must yield to vehicles. In other words, if someone crosses the road outside of painted lines, even in areas where there are no proper crossings, the law favors the vehicle. This creates a situation where safety becomes a technicality.

If someone crosses the road outside of painted lines, even in areas where there are no proper crossings, the law favors the vehicle.

That perspective is both outdated and unjust. It does not reflect modern standards for transportation and mobility. Walking is not a disruption. It is a basic right. The law assumes that all pedestrians are able to access and use marked crosswalks. In reality, many communities lack even basic infrastructure. Crosswalks may be too far, broken, unpainted, or blocked. It also assumes that drivers are always alert and disciplined, which statistics do not support. Road crashes continue to happen, and often, the victims are the most vulnerable.

Pedestrian safety should not be conditional. It must be guaranteed. Children, senior citizens, and persons with disabilities are the ones who are most at risk, and they are also the ones least able to protect themselves. The responsibility must shift from the pedestrian to the vehicle. Drivers must be required by law to slow down, to watch for people, and to expect that people will be crossing, even in places not formally marked.

If the law places the burden on the pedestrian to follow limited rules to be protected, we will continue to see tragic road crashes. It is time to revise Republic Act No. 4136. The law must clearly define school zones. It must require proper pedestrian infrastructure. It must prioritize safety over speed and put the rights of people ahead of the convenience of drivers. Slowing down for a child crossing the road should not feel like an inconvenience. It should be the most natural and basic thing we do. Our laws must reflect that standard, not leave it up to chance.