ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN EIA MATTERS: RECENTDEVELOPMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES
Rose-Liza Eisma-Osorio
University of Cebu, PhilippinesOUTLINE OF PRESENTATIONRationale
The Environmental Impact Statement System in the Philippines
Environmental Courts and the Rules of Procedure forEnvironmental Cases
Challenges and Opportunities
Conclusions

RATIONALE
1998 Convention on Access to Information, Public Participationin Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental
Matters (commonly known as the “Aarhus Convention”)
established rules for public participation, appeals, and access tojustice measures.
The access to justice pillar of the Aarhus Convention seeks toensure the implementation of the State’s policies of full public
disclosure and transparency with respect to the fundamental
right to information on matters of public concern and the rightto a balanced and healthful ecology.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT SYSTEM (PRESIDENTIAL
DECREE 1586)
The EIS System was established by Presidential Decree 1586 in
1978 to institutionalize environmental impact assessment as aplanning tool for sustainable development that seeks to reconcile
the exigencies of socioeconomic undertaking with environmentalquality.
Presidential Decree 1586 applies to all proposed projects andundertakings which significantly affects the quality of theenvironment.

PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION
2146 - COVERAGE OF EIA
Environmentally critical projects or areas which have been
declared pursuant to a Presidential Proclamation No. 2146.
These include, in general, heavy industries, resource extractiveindustries, infrastructure projects as environmentally criticalprojects. Important enterprises, such as nuclear power plants,
reclamation projects, mining and quarrying projects, amongothers

GREEN BENCHES(A.M. NO. 07-11-12-SC)
The Supreme Court designated 117 environmental courts,
comprising first and second level courts, to handle all types ofenvironmental cases arising from at least fourteen environmental
laws (Revised Forestry Code, Marine Pollution Law, Toxic
Substances and Hazardous Waste Act, People’s Small-Scale
Mining Act, National Integrated Protected Areas Act, Philippine
Mining Act, Indigenous People’s Rights Act, Philippine Fisheries
Code, Clean Air Act, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act,
National Caves and Cave Resources Management Act, Wildlife
Conservation and Protection Act, Chainsaw Act, and Clean
Water Act).

RULES OF PROCEDURE FORENVIRONMENTAL CASES (A.M. 09-6-8SC)

The Rules govern civil, criminal and special civil actions involving
enforcement or violation of environmental rules and otherrelated laws, rules and regulations.
The new Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases allow for a"citizen suit”.

Resident Mammals & Dolphins of Tañon Strait,represented by legal guardians v. Secretary Reyes, etal., G.R. No. 180771 & 181527, April 21, 2015

THE COURT’S RULING:
LIBERALIZED STANDING TO SUE
While developments in Philippine legal theory and jurisprudence
have not progressed as far as Justice Douglas’s paradigm of legal
standing for inanimate objects, the current trend moves
towards simplification of procedures and facilitating
court access in environmental cases.
Locus standi in environmental cases has been given a more
liberalized approach. Human stewards who have joined as real
parties in interest and not only just in representation of themarine mammals have legal standing as well.

CITIZEN SUIT
Any citizen in representation of others, including minors or generations
yet unborn, may file an appropriate civil, criminal or administrative actionin the proper courts/bodies an action to enforce rights or obligations
under environmental laws against any violators of environmental law,rules and regulations.
Citizen Suit is limited to Filipino citizens and one that is filed in the public
interest, hence, NO PROOF OF PERSONAL INJURY IS REQUIRED.
The “citizen suit” provision liberalizes standing for all cases filed enforcing
environmental laws and collapses the traditional rule on personal anddirect interest, on the principle that humans are stewards of nature.

NOTICE TO SUE
Prior to initiating an action in court, a NOTICE TO SUE is an
important remedy against any violator or appropriate
government agency or public officer.
The Notice indicates the action required:
Access to official documents (e.g., EIS, ECC, Monitoring
Reports, etc.)
Specific performance of actions, such as, issuance of CDO orcompliance with environmental laws

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ACT
Executive Order 2, 2016 - OPERATIONALIZING IN THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH THE PEOPLE’S CONSTITUTIONALRIGHT TO INFORMATION AND THE STATE POLICIES TO
FULL PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND TRANSPARENCY IN THE
PUBLIC SERVICE AND PROVIDING GUIDELINES THEREFORSECTION 3. Access to information. Every Filipino shall haveaccess to information, official records, public records and todocuments and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions ordecisions, as well as to government research data used as basis
for policy development.

CHALLENGES
Pursuant to the issuance of Executive Order 2 (2016), DENR FOI Manual(DAO 2016-29) was issued and became effective on 1 Feb 2017. BUT
instead of fully serving its purpose of ensuring proper disclosure ofinformation, it provided a list of exception which includes, among others,“any data in the course of applying for an Environmental Compliance
Certificate (ECC) pursuant to PD 1586.” This is inconsistent with andruns counter to the Memorandum of the Executive Order from the
Executive Secretary that provided the inventory of exceptions toExecutive Order 2.
Incoherent and inconsistent policies have limited access to official or
public records, which denigrates the rights to information and challenges
full public disclosure and transparency.

CHALLENGES
The designated environmental courts do not necessarily lose jurisdiction overother types of cases. These courts will continue to be courts of generaljurisdiction. While this addresses concerns of advancement of judges in the
judicial ladder, however, this places environmental cases at the same level ofpriority as any other cases Likewise, while this presents an opportunity forthe filing of more environmental cases, regular courts still tend to prioritize
criminal and civil cases over cases involving violations of environmental laws
Adherence to the strict rules imposed under the present rules of procedure
for environmental cases remain a challenge. Delay in the resolution ofenvironmental cases because of clogged court dockets as well as limited
awareness and capacity of court personnel especially on the new rules ofprocedure are some of these challenges.

CHALLENGES
In 2008, data from the Philippine Judicial Academy show that
3120 cases were filed in the various lower courts in relation toviolations of environmental laws.*
The Rules of Procedure provides that the judge shall conduct
continuous trial which shall not exceed two (2) months from thedate of the issuance of the pre-trial order. Further, the court
shall have a period of sixty (60) days to decide the case from thedate the case is submitted for decision. In total, the court shallhave a period of one (1) year from the filing of the complaint totry and decide the case*https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2008/01/14/38593/sc-approves-creation-117-environmental-courts

IN SUM
The Philippines have created environmental courts with specialized
functions and the rules of procedure for litigating environmental cases.
Likewise, rules for legal standing have been liberalized allowing for
citizens suits; and various remedies are now available to holdgovernment and violators responsible for causing environmental harm.
Although legal and institutional frameworks are in place, theimplementation of laws is replete with many challenges.
Government should review and come up with policies to ensure full
public disclosure, and strict adherence to the rules of procedure toensure access to justice in EIA matters.