Green Access Discussion Paper

DP-2015-008

The Right to Public Participation in Decisionmaking in the Implementation of Fisheries andother Environmental Laws in the Philippines

Gloria Estenzo Ramos
2015/3/3

4-4-13 ramos

International Workshop on "Participation Principle Indicators
under the Environmental Law: Towards Establishing
International Collaboration in Pursuit of Environmental Justice"
at 9th-10th March 2015
Organizers: GREEN ACCESS PROJECT II “Review of Legal Indicators for theParticipation Principle in Environmental Matters - Promotion of an International Cooperation
towards Strengthening the Environmental Democracy” (JSPS Grant-in-Aid), OSAKAUNIVERSITY, PROJECT TIGER “Policy decision-making and public participation onenergy, chemicals and water management: an international comparative study” (Global
Initiative Program), and MITSUI & CO., LTD., ENVIRONMENT FUND – Project“Proposing an Asian Version of the Aarhus Convention – Constitution of anInternational Cooperation for Implementing the Environmental Justice”

GREEN ACCESS PROJECT II
Osaka University

The Right to Public Participation in Decision-making in the Implementation of Fisheries andother Environmental Laws in the Philippines
Gloria Estenzo Ramos1

Introduction
A. The Empowering Story Must be Told
It was the turn of the affected stakeholders in Cebu to be surprised. They were invited, for the
first time, to participate in a public consultation by the coal power plant, KEPCO SPC
Power Corporation, in Naga City, province of Cebu, in the Philippines, for an update on the
Coal Ash Disposal Plan and “to hear out concerns from the stakeholders regarding theoperation of the power plant, particularly on the ash disposal.” (KPSC letter, May, 2013). In
said meeting, the management admitted that there was never a genuine multi-party
monitoring team to look onto the operations of the coal power plant that RA 8749, thePhilippine Clean Air Act of 1999, required to be created.
It has indeed been a long journey for the local residents and the concerned people in Cebu.
Their impassioned cry to be consulted and participate in decision-making process on projects
that affect them and their health and healthful and balanced ecology, constitutional rights
guaranteed by no less than the 1987 Philippines Constitution, seems to be bearing fruits, atlast.

For the past ten years, they have waged a seemingly fruitless and dragging struggle for thegovernment, the project proponent and the funding agency, the Asian Development Bank(“ADB”) to stop the construction of the second coal power plant in their community. Since
the first power plant became operational years back, their health had suffered. Asthma,
chronic cough, heart ailments, and cancer became commonplace. They still have to get used
to a house where the windows have to be closed because of dust. Their sources of water fromthe artesian well had been contaminated since tons of coal ash were dumped in theneighborhood, without their knowledge. Fishing as main livelihood had likewise been badly
affected. There has never been an active Metro Cebu Air Shed Management Board, thepolicy-making body for air quality management required by RA 8749, the Philippine Clean

1

Vice President-Oceana Philippines, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines, email:gramos@oceana.org. A
portion of this paper, now updated, was presented by the author during the 2013 IUCN Academy ofEnvironmental Law Colloquium in New Zealand.

1

Air Act of 1999, to be constituted. Nor, was said law implemented in their community or in
the Philippines.

The enlightened among them were certainly not remiss in vigorously asserting their concerns
for the adverse health and environmental impacts caused by the existing and the additional
power plant, and their illegal exclusion from participation in decision-making, but, to no avail.
Despite the clear provisions of the Constitution and environmental laws for their rights to life,
health, and healthy environment to be respected, including the requirement of social
acceptability for the environmental compliance certificate to be issued by the Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources, the government, the power plant company and the ADB
consistently turned a deaf ear to the constituents’ pleas. Then, to add salt to the festeringwounds of injustice, the President, Benigno Aquino III, even led officialdom and guests in
the inauguration of the second 200 megawatt coal-fired power plant on 100,000 square
meters of land in the barangay (district) of Colon, in 2011, and used the event to take potshotsagainst advocates and citizens who opposed the project.2

Undaunted, despite financial and human resources constraints, the citizens persisted, availingof tools and remedies granted them by the Constitution and environmental laws and evenunder the accountability mechanism of ADB.3 As a result, and in collaboration with nongovernment organizations, people’s organization and the academe, significant milestones had
been achieved. Their participation in the aforementioned public consultation is one such fruitof their relentless efforts.

The holding of said event was in compliance with the express instructions of the ADB Boardof Governors to the power plant company to “facilitate transparent and inclusive
communication and grievance redress,” among other conditions.4

The ADB action was an offshoot of the complaint filed in May, 2011 by the residents ofaffected villages in Naga City, Cebu together with the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) Cebu Chapter and NGO Forum on the ADB, with the ADB, alleging substantive and2

The Freeman (June 28, 2011) ‘PNoy lashes at anti-coal group’, www.philstar.com/cebunews/700284/inauguration-power-plant-pnoy-lashes-anti-coal-group, accessed 2 March 2015.
3
Asian Development Bank, www.adb.org/site/accountability-mechanism/main, accessed 2March 2015.
4
Compliance Review Panel, ‘Visayas Base-Load Power Development Project’,
http://compliance.adb.org/dir0035p.nsf/alldocs/RDIA-8HF6GG?OpenDocument, accessed 2 March 2015.

2

procedural lapses in the implementation of latter’s policies in financing the coal power plant,
including the exclusion of the stakeholders from decision-making process. This remedy isseparate from another court action filed in August, 2011 by environmental advocates andfisherfolk organizations with the environmental court in Mandaue City, province of Cebu, tostop the indiscriminate dumping of coal ash which has caused serious health andenvironmental impacts in coal communities in Cebu (PEJC V. Secretary of DENR,
Environmental Case No. MAN 6461).5

After the complaint was filed with the ADB, the latter, finding it eligible, directed aCompliance Review Panel (CRP) to be constituted and look into the stakeholders’declarations of violations involving the KEPCO-SPC coal power plant. The complainants
scored a major victory in April, 2012 when the Board of Directors of ADB, approved thefindings and recommendations of the CRP. The findings included the failure in complying
with the policy guidelines of ADB, which required genuine consultation with the community,
among others.
The CRP recommendations include (1) Undertaking “ a comprehensive air dispersion
modeling study that includes the key pollution sources in the project’s area of influence andvalidate its predictions with actual air emissions and ambient air quality monitoring data”, (2)Undertaking “a comprehensive study on ash utilization at cement plants and the ready-to-mix
concrete plant and implement plant-specific recommendations and EMPs. In addition,
prepare and implement EMPs for the existing ash ponds and historic ash disposal sites, (3)Expanding or complementing “the existing MMT (multi-sectoral monitoring team) to ensure
representation of all communities directly affected and all appropriate NGOs and to facilitatetransparent and inclusive communication and grievance redress”, and (4) Implementing “ acommunity outreach program focusing on preventing negative health impacts from air, water,and noise pollution and potentially negative impacts from exposure to unprotected coal ash
deposits.” The Board’s decision and the CRP Final Report are available in the CRP website.6

5The environmental court in Environmental Case MAN 6461 ordered, on 15 March 2011, the respondent
KEPCO-SPC to dispose of the coal ash waste in the ash ponds within the premises of the power plan during thependency of the case. The author was then the representative of the Phil. Earth Justice Center, Inc., as leadpetitioner in aforesaid case. The respondents in the case are inclined to settle the case, promising to comply
with all environmental laws.
6
See Footnote 4.

3

The Secretary General of FDC-Cebu, Mr. Aaron Pedrosa, views the ADB Board decision as“a vindication for the affected people in Naga and a slap not only on ADB but also PNoy (thepopular name coined for the President) who inaugurated the project and defended it forcomplying with the Philippine Clean Air Act!”7

The affected constituents are fully aware that their struggle is not yet over. It is continuing.
But, steps being undertaken for their participation in the decision-making process is a big
boost in their lifelong pursuit of pathways to a sustainable future for them, their families andtheir community.

The empowering developments in Naga City, Cebu encapsulate the steadfast reliance on theLaw, challenges, creative strategies, unstinting courage and commitment of affectedstakeholders in their determination that their rights be equally valued by other key players ingovernance, especially by the government, which should have been its protector. Theirknowledge of their rights under the Law and use of the tools for accountability and, and theindispensable support of civil society organizations and institutions have enabled them toassert and claim them even against the powerful and influential sectors and officials of theland. They have realized that while the Law is intended to protect them, it remains empty andmeaningless unless implemented by government, or, as in their case, vigorously asserted by
the citizenry. For them, the Law adds more meaning to the people’s lives when they
themselves ensure that they are complied with by those tasked by the State to enforce them.

B. Ecological and Political Profile of the Philippines: Then and Now

The Philippines, an archipelago with 7,100 islands in the western side of the Pacific Ocean, istagged as having the fifth longest coastline in the world.8 Thus, “it has more water than it hasland. With a total territorial water of 2,200,000 km2, it only has 299,735 km2 of land area of
which 102,984 km2 or 34% is agricultural.”97

Ramos, G. (16 April 2012), ‘Not for the Faint-hearted’, Cebu Daily News,
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/177543/not-for-the-faint-hearted, Accessed on 2 March 2015.
8
Maps of the World, http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-longest-coastline-countriesmap.html
9
http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x6943e/x6943e05.htm

4Being such, it can be said that “Every Filipino lives within 45 miles of the coast.”10 The sea
holds a special meaning to the growing populace of over a hundred million, not just as asource of food, legends and fondest memories of the years past where families would
congregate in the beautiful beaches and then pristine seas and waterways, but as itself, fishingis a source of livelihood for many.
“With more than 20,000 endemic species of plants and animals, the Philippines is identified
as one of the world’s 17 “mega-diverse” countries, as has also been cited as the world’s“center of the center of marine shore fish biodiversity” (Carpenter and Springer, 2005). At theapex of the Coral Triangle, the Philippines’ marine resources are among the richest in theworld, while its terrestrial environments host five major and at least five minor centers ofendemism… whose natural resources are facing pressures brought about by weak land-use
planning, industrialization and unsustainable or destructive resource use practices.”11
The country’s environmental challenges ranged from “uncontrolled deforestation especiallyin watershed areas; soil erosion; air and water pollution in major urban centers; coral reef
degradation; increasing pollution of coastal mangrove swamps that are important fish
breeding grounds”12

The Philippines is a democracy, after having been under colonial rule under the Spaniards formore than three centuries and by the United States from 1898-1946. “Spanish and US
influences remain strong, especially in terms of language, religion and government. Self-rulein 1935 was followed by full independence in 1946 under a US-style constitution. The
Philippines was marked by rapid economic development and a flourishing democracy until
the rule of President Ferdinand Marcos, a close ally of the US, who imposed martial law inthe early 1970s.

His corrupt and repressive rule led to economic stagnation and growing public discontent,
culminating in mass demonstrations in 1986 that cost him the support of the armed forces.”13

10

Castro, Joan andhttp://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ECSP_Focus_Apr08Castro.pdf
Conservation International in the Philippines, ‘Cutting-edge conservation approaches for human well-being
benefits’, http://www.conservation.org/global/philippines/about/pages/about_us.aspx. Accessed 2 March
2015.
12
The World FactBook, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rp.html
13
Philippines profile, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-15521300, accessed on 2 March 2015.
11

5

The country’s existing fundamental law of the land is a visible output of the People Powerrevolution which deposed the Marcos regime. It is clearly a road map to avoid at all means
any possibility of reinstating any form of dictatorship which violated and suppressed humanrights in the Philippines for 14 years. Thus, measures to ensure that human rights areprotected are incorporated in the progressive environmental legislations and jurisprudence
that aim to protect the rights of the people to life, health, a healthful and balanced ecology .
These rights are specifically provided in the 1987 Constitution, the highest law of the land.
But, are these rights genuinely protected?
A writer14 posited that the Philippines has “a façade democracy” calling it an“oligarchipelago”, as political and economic elites have continued to dominate thegovernance landscape as they had been for centuries. Policies are largely the result of theinfluence of the powerful business community. The author adds that, “As a result of politicaland economic exclusion of the majority of the population, there is great wealth inequality andminimal economic growth”.
Thus, despite being a democracy and with a constitutional guarantees of the people’s right toaccess information, participate in decision-making and to due process of law, the justice andadministrative systems are still largely a work in progress.

This paper puts forth the view that the Philippines, although still saddled with a variety ofchallenges, there is emerging a growing number of vigorous community initiatives andmulti-stakeholder collaborations to protect the integrity of ecosystems and in building
capacity for engagement among the people amid the glaring failure of government to performthe mandate of protecting them and the degraded ecosystems. Active citizen engagement is
the key. However, as the author noted in her Cebu Daily News column, Mindfully Greenie,15“Our country will continue to be what Dr. Kent Carpenter describes as ‘the center of thecenter of marine biodiversity adversity’ if citizens allow the almost nil implementation oflaws, the pervasive state of ignorance of rights and responsibilities to protect Nature and thepeople by public officials and citizens, the appalling apathy by those vested with the14

Almeida, T. The Philippines: Oligarchipelago, 2012. http://prospectjournal.org/2012/04/11/the-philippinesoligarchipelago/, accessed on 2 March 2015.
15
See Footnote 7.

6

knowledge of law, science, economics and other fields, and the worsening anthropogenic
impacts inflicted upon our home planet, and of course, the shameless avarice by those who
worship money and the self above anything else.”

1. Strong Legal Framework for Environmental Protection and Resources Conservation
But Nil Implementation
The triumph of the people for their rights to be protected, powerfully illustrated by the case,reveals how empowering the 1987 Constitution is, especially once people understand thesubstantive and procedural rights that they can, and must, vigorously demand from the duty
holder, the State.
The Philippines has a strong legal framework for the protection of the rights of its people,
ecosystems and species and the prevention of pollution. Its legal system is replete withemphasis for human rights protection, both on the procedural and substantive aspects, good
governance, environmental protection, resources conservation and promotion of social justice,especially for the most vulnerable sectors. According to environmental lawyer Jun Quicho,
the country has in fact “some of the best environmental laws in the world.”16 But, the biggest
problem is in the implementation.
No ‘big fish’ was ever held accountable for environmental violations. The Executive Branch
led by the President, and the citizenry, for that matter, except for a handful of courageousones, are still sorely lacking the much-needed political will to ensure that the laws are
implemented, and people’s quality of life, health and rights to a healthy environment arepromoted.
The author was quoted in saying that "Laws need to be implemented and there still seems to
be no political will to do so. There is a big gap between the policy and the implementation.”17

1.1. The Emerging Trends in Environmental Law Implementation in the Philippines
Environmental Law norm can only thrive if the Rule of Law is in place. An American lawyer,
Barrett Ristroph (Ristroph, 2012) put forth the concept of ‘environmental rule of law’ which
possesses certain attributes, as follows (1) there is a system of laws in place that regulate, to16

GMA News(23 April 2013)’Environmentalists lament govt's inability to fully implement green laws’,
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/305051/news/nation/environmentalists-lament-govt-s-inability-tofully-implement-green-laws. Accessed 2 March 2015.
17
Ibid.

7

the extent practicable, all human-induced actions that by themselves or collectively havesignificant impacts on the environment; (2) these laws will be consistently applied over timeand across the jurisdiction; and (3) effective and fair enforcement action, initiated by agovernment entity or citizen suit/complaint, will be taken against one who breaks the law,regardless of the offender’s socioeconomic or political status.”18
In regard to the Philippines, she concludes that “A quarter-century after the enactment of aconstitutional provision guaranteeing the right to a healthful and balanced ecology, there aremany environmental laws in place, but not the environmental rule of law.”19 Her conclusion
jives with the public assessment that there is almost nil implementation of environmental
laws in the Philippines.

A study on the developments in Environmental Law enforcement or the environmental ruleof law in the Philippines is timely as it offers crucial lessons to local, national and regional
stakeholders, and even to the emerging democracies and countries in transition, for thefollowing reasons:a. The country does not have a long history of Environmental Law codification,compared to the countries in the North. Environmental Law, as a field of Law, had its
beginnings ironically in the dark years of Martial Law, where human rights wherestifled. The Environment Code was promulgated under the Martial law powers of thenPresident Ferdinand E. Marcos, as Presidential Decree No. 1152 on January 6, 1977.
The Environmental Impact Statement System, Presidential Decree No. 1586 wasenacted also during Martial Law and is considered the oldest in Asia but ischaracterized as “exceedingly weak.”20

b. After the People Power revolution that toppled the dictator in 1986, the country has
managed to catch up and successfully churned a highly progressive Environmental
Law system and accountability tools under the Constitution, statutes and judicial
rulings and Rules and the various international conventions to which it is a signatory.
18

Ristroph, E. (9-2012) 42 ELR 10886 Environmental Law Reporter ‘The Role of Philippine Courts in Establishing
the Environmental Rule of Law’, p.2.
19
Ibid., pp. 19-20.
20
Briffett, C., J.P. Obbard, J. Mackee , ‘Towards SEA for the developing nations of Asia, Environmental Impact
Assessment Review,’ Volume 23, Issue 2, March 2003, Pages 171-196.

8

The Oposa v Factoran Ruling (G.R. 101083, (224 SCRA 792 [1993] is hailed
worldwide for mainstreaming the international environmental law principle ofintergenerational responsibility and the liberalized standing to sue, where minors can
sue for their future and for the generations yet unborn. In April, 13, 2010, theSupreme Court of the Philippines promulgated the first in the world, the Rules ofProcedure for Environmental Cases, with remedies intending environmental
proceedings to be resolved with dispatch.

c. The Philippine example shows that a strong legal framework for environmental
protection and resources conservation does not automatically guarantee that theecosystems are and remain healthy and not subjected to further pressures.
Government and citizenry need to work and collaborate together to implement the
Law and change behaviors of stakeholders.

d. With climate change posing a grave threat to the survival of species, including
humans, the Philippines is ranked among the most vulnerable, with devastatingconsequences. It is “fourth among more than 190 countries around the world that havesuffered the most extreme weather events such as flooding and storms over the past
20 years, according to the 2013 Global Climate Risk Index.”21
e. Social, governance and economic issues confront developing countries, with thePhilippines having its palpable share in high poverty incidence, highest birth rate in
Asia and persistent corruption issues.

(i)Poverty incidence among Filipinos, although has eased at 24.9% as of the firstsix months of 2013,22 remains high, estimated at 27.9 percent during the firstsemester of 2012, according to NSCB Secretary General Jose Ramon G.

21

Abano, I. InterAksyon (28 November 2012), ‘Philippines 4th most vulnerable to climate change over past 20
years, 5th in 2011’, http://www.interaksyon.com/article/49162/philippines-4th-most-vulnerable-to-climatechange-over-past-20-years-5th-in-2011, Accessed on 2 March 2015.
22
Torres, T. Poverty incidence eases to 24.9%. Philippine Star, July 5, 2014.
http://www.philstar.com/business/2014/07/05/1342488/poverty-incidence-eases-24.9. Accessed 2 March
2015.

9

Albert.23The fisherfolk and the farmers are the poorest of the poor, with 39.2
percent and 38.3 percent respectively in 2012.24(ii)

The Philippines has a population growth rate of 2.04%, one of the highest in
Asia.

(iii)

The Philippines has worrisome governance issues. The weak implementationof laws is an indication of its weak accountability mechanism. It is also “still
perceived as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, getting a score of
34 on a scale of 1 to 100 with 100 being very clean, according to the latest
Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International.”25 The
Philippines has since ranked 85th out of 175 countries in Germany-based
watchdog Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for
2014, up from 94 in 2013, and 105 in 2012.26

f. Its dynamic civil society sector, as so envisioned by the 1987 Constitution and the RA
7160, the Local Government Code, is a potent force in promoting environmental
governance, specifically in the delivery of services, in remote and vulnerable
communities. However, despite the preferential treatment accorded to civil society
organizations (CSOs) and their recognized right in participating in governance andmembership in local development councils and special bodies, governance andempowerment issues are continuing challenges that some CSOs have to hurdle. Thesediminish their capacity and potential to be the forceful and unifying mouthpiece of thevoiceless and marginalized sectors. Still, CSOs are proving to be an effective channel
for citizens to seek redress for grievances against the government and private sectors,
as in the cases described in this paper.

1.2. Barriers to effective implementation of Environmental Law and a sustainable
future23

Poverty incidence unchanged, as of first semester 2012—NSCB,
http://www.nscb.gov.ph/poverty/defaultnew.asp, Accessed 2 March 2015.
24
See Footnote 22.
25
Philippine Daily Inquirer (5 December 2012) ‘Philippines remains one of most corrupt countries—survey’,
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/58823/philippines-remains-one-of-most-corrupt-countries-survey, Accessedon 2 March 2015.
26
Casauay, A. PH perceived to be less corrupt – 2014 global survey. Rappler, December 3, 2014.
http://www.rappler.com/nation/76856-philippines-corruption-perceptions-index-2014. Accessed on 2 March
2015.

10

Strong legal framework for environment protection is never a guarantee for the laws’
effective implementation and enforcement, as the Philippine experience has shown. It isessential however, to ask why, despite the State’s adherence to the Rule of Law andcommitment to democratic principles such as public participation in governance,
environmental laws in the Philippine are not given the reverence that they should have been
accorded to.

The reasons are as varied as the 7,100 islands that make up the archipelago. Among theobvious factors are:a. Lack of political will to implement the Law, due perhaps to any or a combinationof the following considerations:
1. Patronage politics – With an electoral and political system characterized as
weak and favors the elite, the moneyed and the powerful, it is inevitablethat officials through dummy corporations or supporters with vested
interests are favored with contracts and concessions from government.
Many of these projects impact the environment and the livelihood of thepeople in the communities.
2. Political dynasties – Family affairs and politics are intertwined in thePhilippines. The expressive Senator Miriam Santiago quipped that it is"the world capital of political dynasties".27 Political dynasties areprohibited by the Constitution but Congress, largely made up of thepolitical elites in the country, chose not to enact the required implementing
law to stop them. Thus, political dynasty has proliferated. There are “178dynasties ruling 73 of the 80 provinces in the Philippines. Half come fromthe old landed elites, while the rest turned up after the 1986 popular revoltthat ousted dictator Ferdinand Marcos.”28

27

Mendez, C. Miriam: Philippines is world's political dynasty capital. Philippine Star, March 1, 2013.
http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/03/01/914637/miriam-philippines-worlds-political-dynasty-capital.
Accessed on 2 March 2015.
28
Regencia, T. Family affair: Philippine political dynasties. Aljazeera, 11 May 2013.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/05/2013511104835690790.html, Accessed 2 March 2015.

11

Environmental protection is a devolved service of the local government
units. But, with families holding a tight grip on the political landscape, is it
any wonder that these laws are not seriously enforced, at the expense of
the environmental rights of the constituents?
3. Lack of coherence in policies and planning – In addition to the various
laws, rulings, rules and action plans that push for an ecologicallysustainable present and future, the Philippine Development Plan, as theofficial roadmap of the present Aquino administration, envisions asustainable and inclusive growth. But, the phrase ” sustainable growth”
becomes a mere play of words considering that extractive and polluting
industries such as mining, reclamation and coal power plant operation, areclearly prioritized by the administration, with stakeholders excluded fromparticipation in decision-making.
(b) Cultural Barrier – Being direct and straightforward is unfortunately not a distinct
cultural attribute of many Filipinos. Respect for authority and elders is deeply
embedded in both personal and societal values. Thus, when it comes to pressuring
for accountability from political authorities, despite an explicit guarantee by theConstitution of the right of the people, people’s organizations (POs) and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to participate at all levels of decision-making
process (Art. XIII, sec.16), the right to access public information and the declared
State policy of full disclosure, only a handful of citizens and even NGOs and POs
are asserting actively these procedural rights. Nor are state institutions, evenindependent ones, bold enough to file cases against the “big fish” or influential
persons in government.
© Poverty, high population growth and unique State-Church relationship – Poverty
incidence is likewise very high at 26.5%. The Philippines has one of the highest
birth rates in Southeast Asia at 3.3%.The larger the family size, the higher the12

poverty incidence is.29 Of the total population, 62.7% live in urban areas (2005)
with an urban annual growth rate of 3.45%, much higher than the annual
population growth rate of 2.28%.(National Framework Strategy for Climate
Change, p.15).

The influential Catholic Church does not hesitate to articulate its stance against
reproductive health. RA 10354 the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive
Health (RH) Act of 2012, became a law after going through very contentious
decades of lobbying that pitted pro-RH advocates and the Catholic Church. It was
subsequently declared as “not unconstitutional” by the Supreme Court in April 9,2014 but it struck down eight provisions.30

In a position paper, professors of the School of Economics of the University of
the Philippines articulated the distinct Church-State relationship and observedthat “The Catholic Church hierarchy has maintained its traditional stance against
modern family planning (FP) methods, particularly modern (also referred to as“artificial”) contraceptives. On the other hand, the State acknowledges thedifficulties posed for development by rapid population growth, especially among
the poorest Filipinos. But it has been immobilized from effectively addressing theissue by the Catholic hierarchy’s hard-line position, as well as the tendency ofsome politicians to cater to the demands of well-organized and impassioned
single-issue groups for the sake of expediency. Caught between a hard Church anda soft State are the overwhelming majority of Filipinos who affirm the importanceof helping women and couples control the size of their families and the
responsibility of the government to provide budgetary support for modern FP
services.”31

29

Pernia, E. et.al. (29 July 2012), ‘Population, Poverty, Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill’,
http://rhbillresourcepage.wordpress.com/2012/07/29/population-poverty-politics-and-the-reproductivehealth-bill/#more-844, Accessed on 2 March 2015.
30
Cebu Daily News, SC declares RH law ‘not unconstitutional’, April 9, 2014.
http://cebudailynews.inquirer.net/26407/sc-declares-rh-law-not-unconstitutional. Accessed on 2 March 2015.
31
UP School Of Economics : Population, Poverty, Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill, 11 August 2008.
https://2010presidentiables.wordpress.com/reproductive-health-bill-5043/population-poverty-politics-andthe-reproductive-health-bill-up-school-of-economics/. Accessed on 2 March 2015.

13

More than ever, faced with the extreme vulnerability of the marginalized sectors of thePhilippines, amid the undeniable climate and governance crisis, and the continuingdegradation of the environment, CSOs need to work together and with the enlightenedchampions from the public and other sectors to push for stronger actions to implement thelong-languishing Environmental Laws.

2. The Role of Environmental Law in Promoting Mindsets of Respect for Human
Rights, Public Participation, Ecological Integrity and Sustainability
One of the reasons why Environmental Rule of Law is still a work in progress in thePhilippines may be attributed to the fact that the field of Environmental Law is still in its
infancy stage. Of the more than 50,000 or so members of the Philippine Bar, only a handful
have devoted their focus, energy and time to practice Environmental Law and engage with
communities on issues affecting their rights to life, health and a healthy environment. A
nationwide network of environmental lawyers still has to be constituted as there are only
patches of CSOs devoted to environmental law advocacy. As a course in the law curriculum,
it was only in 2012, that the then newly-constituted Legal Education Board required it as amandatory subject among law schools.

While Environmental Law system is considered advanced and progressive, there is acompelling need to build the capacity, knowledge and skills of the key stakeholders,
including those in the judiciary and prosecution arm of the government and the members of
the Bar, and law students. It is perhaps this vacuum that fostered the culture of impunity that
disregards the Rule of Law in the Philippines.

It is a cause for celebration that, despite the dearth of environmental law specialists, successes
had been savored in growing number of not just court rulings that prioritize the health of thepeople, their right to access information and participate in decision-making and a balanced
natural world but also active engagement from the citizenry. The convergence of forcesamong champions in the CSOS and Public and Private Sectors, and the gradual greening of
the Judiciary, with the support of media, helped clinched these victories.

2.1 Case studies of CSO initiated actions for effective Environmental Law
implementation
14

Considering the foregoing gigantic challenges, a study of the strides taken by determined
citizenry and evaluation of the impacts of their initiatives who would no longer tolerate the“learned helplessness” syndrome of the past, are most helpful. The citizens have begun toassert their rights through creative and collaborative strategies among various stakeholders,against government and officials who disregard the laws and promote destructive project.

The demand for public participation in governance created palpable changes in policymaking, which coincide significantly in the averred policies of accountability, transparency
and open governance of the Aquino administration.
‘There is a bigger ‘space’ for civil society engagement with Government, a fact that mostcivil society members acknowledge.’32 Even in budgeting, state agencies are required toinvite the participation of the various stakeholders through the bottom-up budgeting (BUB)
policy of the Department of Budget and Management and the Department of Interior andLocal Government (DILG).33 The BUB policy has since been known as the Grassroots
Participatory Budgeting through a Joint Memorandum Circular No. 4 (November 26, 2013)
issued by the DBM, DILG, Department of Social Welfare and the National Anti-Poverty
Commission.34
As DILG Secretary Mar Roxas himself admitted that “For a government to be successful, we
should harness the power of the people and encourage partnership with the citizenry.”iSome of the examples of creative strategies and the learning from the citizens-led initiatives
for the protection of the people and the planet, include the following engagements:
2.1.1 Stoppage of the Offshore Drilling Project in Tanon Strait Protected Seascape(TSPS)
Facts: TSPS is one of the richest fishing grounds in the Philippines, covering the provincesof Cebu, Negros Oriental and Negros Occidental. It is also the migratory pathway of 14 out
32

Ramos. G. IUCN Academy of Environmental Law (2012) ‘Country Report: Philippines Climate Change,
Sustainability and Resilience’, p. 9.
33
Gonzales, I. The Philippine Star (25 November 2012) ‘Gov’t to implement bottom-up budget process in pilot
municipalities’, http://www.philstar.com/business/2012/11/25/872793/gov%E2%80%99t-implement-bottombudget-process-pilot-municipalities, Accessed 2 March 2015.
34
http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2013/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular/JMC4.pdf. Accessed on 2 March 22015.

15

of 26 species of whales and dolphins in the country. The former President, Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo, with the participation of then DENR Secretary, the Department of Energy Secretary
and then Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia, with two mayors from the Cebu municipalities
of Pinamungahan and Alegria, approved the offshore drilling project in the protected area
undertaken by the Japanese company, Japan Petroleum Exploration Co. Ltd. (JAPEX). Apartfrom the affected fisherfolk, the members of the Philippine Association of Marine Scientists
objected to the project, followed by the academe, environmental lawyers, NGOs and POs andeven the Cebu Chamber of Commerce officials who cautioned the authorities fromundertaking such harmful activity and instead pushed for sustainable projects. The lawyers
pointed to the laws violated which included the Constitution, the National Integrated
Protected Area System (there were and still are no protected area management board andmanagement plan), the Fisheries Code and the EIS Law. But, the public officials were deadset in implementing it. In gross violation of the social justice provision of the Constitution
and the Fisheries Code that subsistence fisherfolk have preferential access to their traditional
fishing grounds, they were displaced and the number of species of cetaceans dwindled. The
lawyers sent a letter to the Japanese Ambassador to the Philippines detailing the violations of
the Philippine Government. In 2007, two cases were filed in the Supreme Court to stop the
project, one filed by the fisherfolk and the other by the residents, whales and dolphins of
TSPS, represented by two environmental lady lawyers and mothers. The case is still pending.
In 2008, JAPEX withdrew from the Project. But, DOE declared it will continue to invite
proponents for drilling in TSPS. There has been no such activity conducted since then.

As a strange but much-welcome twist and postscript to the Tanon Strait saga, under adifferent administration, some of the parties to the case,35 and after seven years since theoffshore drilling controversy erupted, agreed to partner and co-organize the Tanon Strait
stakeholders’ summit and the convening for the first time the Tanon Strait Protected Area
Management Board, the policy-making body of the TSPS. The events held from February 1012, 2015 in Cebu were participated in by almost 400 participants, including local government
executives, NGOs and POs and private sector and highly respected resource speakers, given

35

Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Region 7, Oceana Philippines International represented
by the author and Rare, Inc. entered into a Memorandum of Agreement for the convening of the two TSPS
events.

16

wide media mileage36 and triggered inspiring feedback from the community. A TSPS
website37 was created where the DENR undertook to have a Comment Period of 30 days forstakeholders for the TSPS Management Plan.

Strategies:(i)

Raising the awareness of the constituents were crucial to action. Thus, naturaland behavioral science and the Law were merged and popularized in themodules prepared for both formal and informal courses. Concepts related tohuman rights, environmental law, science, ethics, patriotism, governancethrough active citizen engagement, were simplified to reach the cross sectionof constituents. Teachers and students from different universities conductedteach-ins in and out of the university, with fisherfolk, scientists andenvironmental lawyers as speakers.

(ii)

Law students visited the communities and shared their knowledge with thepeople. Some were inspired to write songs and poems which were publicized.

(iii)

Champions from the public and private sectors who supported the cause were
given public recognition.

(iv)

Peer review of the two petitions was done in collaboration with the Universityof the Philippines International Legal Studies.

(v)

The first citizen movement for the protection of the environment in Cebu was
launched named ‘Save Tanon Strait Citizens Movement’ (STSCM) made up
largely of CSOs and the youth. Online petitions and Multiply website of
STSCM were created.

(vi)

The inspiring story of collaboration and partnership that stopped a destructive
project in the protected seascape led to the investigation and publication of

36

Gitgano, F. Sunstar.Cebu, February 1, 2015. http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/localnews/2015/02/11/need-address-threats-tanon-strait-tackled-three-day-summit-391445. Accessed on 2 March2015.
37
http://www.tanonstrait.org/.

17‘Hunger and Plunder in the Seas’ by Food Coalition for Food Sovereignty and
Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific (2008), 38 ‘When Dolphins
Went to Court’ and the ‘Tanon Saga’ by Pesticide Action Network Asia andthe Pacific and Central Visayas Fisherfolk Development Center (2013).39(vii)

The 2015 TSPS Summit and convening of the TSPS management body
showed that persistence and dedication among stakeholders can result in a
successful collaboration, the benefits of which will be felt in the generations tocome.

Lessons Learned: The realization of the empowering Law and human rights formed theanchor and the focal point in which multi-stakeholders engaged and collaborated at the local,
national and international arena. Media from print, broadcast and television played key rolein highlighting the issues and influencing policy and action from some local government
units in Negros and Cebu, some of whose officials became more courageous and articulated
against the project. Online petitions and creation of website where legal documents were also
uploaded cascaded the issue and the learning in various geographical jurisdictions both in andout of the affected provinces. The series of engagements with the communities and public
officials were continuing even after the drilling company decided to withdraw from the areain 2008, as the DOE expressed its desire to continue to open the protected seascape for future
oil drillings.40

On a personal note, the surge of hope that grew among the affected fisherfolk whom ourgroup helped remains embedded in the memory. The author’s heart-warming personalencounter with a group of displaced fisherfolk cannot be forgotten. A fisherfolk commented“ Attorney, now we believe that the Law can also work on our side.” To him, I said “Yes,Manong (“Sir”), the Law works, and we have to constantly make sure that it does.”
2.1.2 Stoppage of the Coal Ash Dumping in Coal Communities and the filing of the
ADB Complaint on violations of the latter’s policy
38

Quijano, I. Hunger and Plunder in the Seas (2008), http://www.panap.net/en/fs/post/food-sovereignty/266,
accessed on 2 March 2015.
39
When Dolphins Went to Court, http://www.panap.net/en/fs/post/food-sovereignty/1509 and Tanon Saga,
http://www.panap.net/sites/default/files/tanon-saga.pdf, Accessed on 2 March 2015.
40
GMA Network, Tañon Strait in Cebu still open to oil explorers – DOE, May 7, 2008.
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/95807/news/regions/ta-on-strait-in-cebu-still-open-to-oilexplorers-doe. Accessed on 2 March 2015.

18

Facts: As illustrated in this paper’s Introduction, the knowledge of their human rights under
the Constitution and the various environmental laws, together with the active support andengagement of stakeholders contributed in empowering the residents to demand respect of
their rights, environmental protection and participatory and transparent governance, from thegovernment and even from the funding agency. The stories of their struggle and theassistance rendered by scientists and lawyers are highlighted by media and helped indisseminating information about their plight and the hazardous impacts of coal.41

The announcement by the former Cebu Governor that the province would earn from the coalash and build a coal ash disposal facility for the power plant, in a controversial Balili
beachfront property, triggered the demand from environmental lawyers from her and Cebu
provincial officials for the release of the documents involved in the sale and agreement withthe coal power plant. Notice to Sue was sent to government officials and the coal power plantfor violation of rights and the two laws -Solid Waste Management Law and the Clean Air
Act and the lack of the required public consultation.42 This led eventually to the filing of theadministrative and criminal cases in the Office of the Ombudsman, when the Governor
refused to release the document,43 and an environmental case in the green court of Mandaue
City, Cebu, to stop the pervasive dumping of coal ash, the testing of the samples of whichshowed the presence of mercury, cadmium and arsenic.

The green court judge, after conducting ocular inspection where she also took pictures, andeven noted the presence of mangroves in Naga, stopped the hazardous practice for theduration of the case.44

When the ecology advocates again filed another administrative case against the Governor andthe Cordova Mayor for illegal reclamation, the Governor, the latter, five days after said filing,also filed a malicious prosecution case against the author of this paper, for an earlier
41

Salgado, R. Bulatlat. (10 August 2009) ‘Coal-Fired Power Plant Contaminates Air in Naga City, Cebu’
http://bulatlat.com/main/2009/08/10/coal-fired-power-plant-contaminates-air-in-naga-city-cebu/, Accessedon 2 March 2015.
42
Freeman (2009)’ Environmentalists issue notice to sue to officials’, http://www.philstar.com/cebunews/499405/environmentalists-issue-notice-sue-officials. Accessed on 2 March, 2015.
43
Balita, Environment group sues Cebu Capitol officials for ‘not responding’ to requests on power plant
operation, August 18, 2009. http://balita.ph/2009/08/18/environment-group-sues-cebu-capitol-officials-fornot-responding-to-requests-on-power-plant-operation/ Accessed on 2 March 2015.
44
See Footnote No. 5.

19administrative case the latter filed regarding the coal ash disposal facility, which however the
Ombudsman dismissed.45 On the defense that the case is a SLAPP and should be dismissed,
the issue has not been resolved, three years after the criminal case was filed. Yet, it is anothercase for possible violation of the accused’s right to due process of law and a speedy
disposition of the case, as well as period required by the Supreme Court in hearing defense of
SLAPP specifically provided under the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases and twolaws, RA 9003 and RA 8749.

Meanwhile, the Governor was charged by the Sandiganbayan for criminal violations of theAnti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act as a result of the purchase of the Balili property. She
faced additional criminal and administrative charges when she covered the area for dumping,without any authorization from the local lawmaking body or the Philippine Reclamation
Authority.

Strategies:

1. Environmental lawyers and constituents utilized not just the provisions ofEnvironmental Laws but also Accountability Laws such as RA 9485, the Anti-Red
Tape Act, for the release of the requested public documents from public officials andcivil servants.

2. Media presence was and is visible in almost all activities of the stakeholders.

(a) Obtaining the samples of coal ash for testing was conducted by a known
toxicologist, Dr. Romeo Quijano, done in the presence of stakeholders, including
representatives of local government units, and media, and the result of the testing
were publicly released and given media mileage46 which added to the education of
the public and public authorities hopefully on the hazards of coal.

45

Cebu Daily News, Gwen Fights Back as Siitoy Hurts, March 14, 2012,https://cebudailynews.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/gwen-fights-back-as-sitoy-hurts/ Accessed 2 March 2015.
46
Parco, B. Cebu Daily News (2010) ‘Tests Show Toxic Ash Naga City’s coal ash dumps have arsenic, mercury’
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/20100416-264565/Naga-Citys--coal-ash-dumpshave-arsenic-mercury, Accessed 2 March 201520

(b) Media persons were likewise invited to and reported on the assessment of theailments in the coal community done by a team of doctors, from both the private
and public sectors.47(c) It helped that environmental lawyers also expanded their platforms, not just in
courts and lectures, but even spaces in print and air time on radio. The author is aweekly columnist for environment and governance in print media, which is
published online. She hosted a radio program devoted likewise to environmental
stewardship, where various specialists in environment related fields are invited toshare their knowledge with the listeners.

3. Multi-stakeholder collaboration among members of the academe, NGOs, POs, churchand some supportive officials from the local government units strengthened theengagement and added pressure to government to comply with the mandates of theLaw.

Lessons Learned: The collaboration among stakeholders and the greening of the judiciary
because of the promulgation of the first of its kind in the world, the Rules of Procedure forEnvironmental Cases (A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC) helped tremendously in the stoppage of thehazardous activity and in institutionalizing public participation in decision-making.

The filing of harassment suit by the governor against the author of this paper, and thecountersuit by the coal power plant against petitioners in the petition to stop theindiscriminate coal ash dumping were publicized and led to debates and the education of the
public on strategic legal action against public participation (SLAPP), meriting even an
Editorial in a local daily on the matter.

The most visible lesson learned from this case and the anti- offshore drilling engagements
was the increased surge of the feeling of hope, among the most affected stakeholders, themarginal fisherfolk, that the Law is potent in protecting human rights.

47

Parco, B. Cebu Daily News (13 December 2009) ‘Experts check effects of coal ash in Naga’
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/20091213-241755/Experts-check--effects-of-coalash-in-Naga, Accessed on 2 March 2015.

21

2.1.3 Stoppage of the Two Flyover Projects Worth P600 Million In Cebu City
Facts: Cebu City is the oldest city in the Philippines. It has been the center of trade andcommerce, even during the Spanish era. It was declared a City of Culture by the Associationof Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 2011 during the 12th ASEAN Summit.

The residents of Cebu City woke up, one day, and read in the newspapers that the pet projectof a Congresswoman, Cutie del Mar, involved the construction of two flyovers worth almost
P600M in two places with heritage rich landmarks. As was usual in the Philippines, theprojects were concocted without public participation, out of the desire of the official and herfather, the former Congressman, to solve the traffic congestion in the metropolis.

The usually reticent residents largely from the middle and upper class, business sector,
church and NGOs swung into action and consulted advocates and experts in the field of law,engineering, transport, heritage and other discipline. They wrote the officialdom from the
President down to the barangay officials and declared their consternation at being excluded
from the process. They opposed the flyovers projects because there was no Comprehensive
Master Plan, and the projects were a “Band-Aid solution”, with flawed design as “Single
lane flyovers constrict the road from two lanes per direction into a single lane. This design is
not used anywhere else in the world” and destroys urban core. They proposed alternatives to“Transform the Urban Core, by providing viable urban mobility alternatives via Mass Transit(land & water), True & Useable Sidewalks, Dedicated Bike Lanes, Parks & Green Public
Spaces & Green Corridors. The citizens found an ally in the city Mayor, Michael Rama, andthe traffic management body, Cebu City Traffic Operations Management (Citom).

A Stop Cebu Flyovers Movement was established. A Facebook account created, which
garnered over 3,000 members in a matter of days. Tarpaulins saying “No to Flyovers’
mushroomed in the city. Media highlighted the brewing controversy that pitted citizens
against political giants. A petition to stop the case in the Supreme Court was prepared. Twodays before its filing, the key leaders were given an opportunity to meet the Secretary of theimplementing agency, Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) in Manila.

To the shock and consternation of the Congresswoman and politician who backed her,Congressman and former Mayor Tomas Osmena, DPWH stopped the projects and other22

flyover projects in the plantilla and has been on hold since October, 2011, pending acomprehensive master plan.

The citizens’ movement has since evolved and now known as the Movement for a Livable
Cebu. It is in the frontline of initiatives promoting activities to make the city sustainable andthe people healthy. The Youth for Livable Cebu was likewise established made up of the
youth and young professionals.
The citizens’ fight to stop the flyovers was another David-Goliath fight, with very inspiring
results to citizens who believed, and rightly so, in the cause they were fighting for.

Strategies: Strategies utilized were similar in the TSPS and the coal campaign. Appraisal ofand exercise of the citizens’ rights under the Law, multi-stakeholder collaboration, consistentand regular media coverage, and citizen led initiatives promoting sustainability.

Lessons Learned: The significant lessons learned are best summed up by Mr. Rudy Alix, in
his speech before the members of the Philippine Bar during the Continuing Legal Education
Seminar in March, 2013 at the University of Cebu. He said:“We sooner realized we had to fight the flyover proponents but not with the usual weapons,
and not in their arena.

1. The arena of traditional politics involves lies, illusions, name calling, and then threats. The
politicians are monsters in the field in there, and we stand no chance at all. We were branded"vested interests out to protect our businesses', and the "alter ego of Mike Rama"…

We knew that if we focused on answering accusations, on showing physical numbers, we will
be forever on the defensive, we will need huge sums of money, and so we will lose.
Politicians have the money, can mobilize the numbers, and have a whole stockyard of lies.
We will lose in their arena.

2. We had to bring them to the arena of Law, Logic and Truth. Atty. Golly Ramos pointed out
The Local Government Code and some sections of the Philippine Constitution which we canuse as weapons in this fight. We had two arenas before us: Public debate and the Courts.
23

These are forbidden lands for them. Lies will be exposed by Truth. The Law and theConstitution are clear in regard to requiring prior consultation with stakeholders for projects,
processes which were not done. The courts, if ever resorted to, will always reach a resolution
for conflicts, and the Law will always be the basis for the decision. There is no room foropen-ended discussions, there is no room for lies and deception. Our Urban Planners andheritage advocates presented clear professionally done opinions about the uselessness of
flyovers, and offered technically and socially sound solutions. Until now, those politicians
cannot defend their proposals with sound data.

Those politicians were in strange territory, possibly frightening for them. They avoided
public debate, would not answer our questions and challenges. They continued to workaround the legally prescribed processes, but at every step of the way, they were exposed.
Enlightened citizens made sure of that.

Not seeing any decent response from the flyover proponents, we later explained our advocacy
to the decision makers in Government: the Cabinet Secretaries, Regional Directors ofGovernment agencies, and to the President himself. We got the responses we needed from the
known decent officials. I can't name names, but these officials simply made sure the Law and
the Constitution are followed.

Now, we have bottom to top budgeting as a policy, flyover projects were deferred pending amaster plan, and it is now the policy in DPWH to involve Civil Society Organizations in its
planning activities.

3. Our premier strategy, however, was, and continues to be, Prayer. We were heard. If yourcause is honorable, you will never be alone.”

It has to be mentioned that in the anti-flyover campaign, unlike in the two cases above
discussed, environmental lawyers stayed in the background. Their role was to render legal
advice as may be needed, prepare the petition and speak in forums and programs. The nowvisibly empowered citizens were and remain in the forefront of numerous activities which
they themselves planned, strategized and implemented. One visible factor would be that theleaders in the MLC, with their financial and educational background, are not hampered bysurvival needs and have choices, unlike the residents in the affected communities in Tanon
24

Strait Protected Seascape and the coal communities, many of whom are not even aware thatthey are vested human rights to life and health and to participate in governance.

2.2

Common elements of the three successful cases/campaigns were the use of creative

strategies by “unflinching” citizenry demanding accountability from government – youth,
artists, students, professionals, NGOs and POs, Collaboration with various sectors andcitizens, Extensive media coverage and indispensable presence of environmental lawyers andspecialists, with varying degrees of involvement
3. Emerging Trends in Accessing Green Justice in the Philippines
The promulgation of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases have “triggered arenewed sense of hope, especially on the part of the most vulnerable sectors, that the law can
work in their favour after all. In the short time since the Rules came into force, there is a
growing realization that the right to a healthy environment can now be effectively asserted
and claimed even against influential stakeholders, through environmental suits. The Rules
have become the State’s response to Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration, to the effect that‘effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy,
shall be provided’. It is not wishful thinking to state at this stage that perhaps, in the future,
the trust in the efficacy of the law, institutions and legal processes will be restored. These are
essential prerequisites for the rights to life and a healthy environment to be protected.”48

3.1 Gradual Greening of the Courts
One of the victories for the environment and the people’s right to life and health involve themuch-lauded ruling of the Court of Appeals which ordered the issuance of the writ ofkalikasan (nature), ordering the stoppage of the BT Talong (Eggplant) field trial, in the caseof Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines) et al v. Environment Management Bureau of the
DENR (CA GR SP No. 00013, May 17, 2013). The Court based its judgment, among others,on the constitutional rights to health and to ‘a healthful and balanced ecology’ and theprecautionary principle, as specifically provided for by Rule 20 of the Rules.

48

Ramos, G. IUCN Academy of Environmental Law e-Journal Issue 2011(1), Innovative Procedural Rules on
Environmental Cases in the Philippines: Ushering In a Golden Era for Environmental Rights Protection‘ pp. 189190.

25

It declared that “It bears stressing that our Constitutional right to a balanced and healthfulecology is a compound right which consists of (1) the right to one’s health which should not
be put to risk by a willful disturbance of the ecological balance, and (2) the right to live in anenvironment of balanced ecological relations. The former speaks of threats to human healthwhich, in the case of bt talon field trials, had not yet been assessed and categorically declared
as safe for humans. On the other hand, the latter concerns the people’s right to a balanced
ecology which presupposes that all living things, as they are naturally ordained, are equallynecessary to maintain the aforementioned balance. In the instant case, the field trials of bt
talon involve the willful and deliberate alteration of the genetic traits of a living element of
the ecosystem and the relationship of living organisms that depend one other for theirsurvival. Consequently, the field trials of bt talon could not be declared by this Court as safe
to human health and to our ecology, with full scientific certainty, being an alteration of anotherwise natural state of affairs in our ecology.”

While there had been more judgments favoring petitioners in environmental cases, after theRules were promulgated, there had been setbacks as well. One court in an environmental caserequired all mining companies to be impleaded. This action would tend to defeat the purposeof the writ of kalikasan, which is to expedite the process where “proceedings terminate withinsixty days from submission of the original application” (Rule 7, Rules).
As author Ristroph declares, “Knowledge of the rules is key. Where judges and litigants
understand the Environmental Rules, cases have been resolved more quickly—often in favorof the environmental litigants.”49

3.2 Growing National Coalition to Stop Ecologically Destructive Projects and Demand for
Government to Prioritize People’s Safety and Health

Recent developments include the forging of national coalition among various NGOs and POs
and even business and public sectors to stop destructive projects such as reclamation, coaland Mining. The Road Revolution, softened as a Road Sharing movement, “calls for thePhilippine Government to transform the road and transportation system from the present car-49

See Footnote 18, p. 21.

26

based system to one that is more fair and more people-friendly.”50 It has since beentransformed into a Bayanihan sa Daan (Heroism in the Streets).51

Another influential ecological vanguard, the Eco-waste Coalition, has successfully pursued acontinuing series of exposures of the presence of harmful level of lead and hazardous
substances in consumer products which are well-publicized and considerably increased thelevel of awareness of the stakeholders. But, government response is not as fast as hoped for.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The heroic struggle put up by various enlightened constituents and sectors to defend thepeople and the planet and promote green justice will be bolstered, as it has been, by thecontinuing assistance emanating from the academe and specialists in the field ofEnvironmental Law to attain the twin objectives of incessantly capacitating stakeholders tosustain the momentum of vigorous engagement for environmental rights to be protected andmainstreaming the mindset of conserving and nurturing our natural environment.

These trainings can include environmental education through participatory, creative and outof-the-box approaches, and which, in addition to Environmental Law, touch upon andconnect with Human Rights, Participatory Governance and Ethics, among other areas;
Enhancing Advocacy Skills and Research Capability to Influence Policy; Increased Capacity
to connect with Media, and Strengthening the skillful use of social networks in promoting the
advocacy and the necessary engagement tools.

There should be more innovations in implementation, including new approaches tocommunity engagement and community partnerships, or actions by concerned communities
through Popularizing Environmental Law - not just for lawyers and law students but for all
sectors, and citizens – to encourage strong sense of responsibility and stewardship..

50

Oposa, A. Cebu Daily News (21 April 2013)‘Road-sharing: Time for Talk is over’.
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/394785/road-sharing-time-for-talk-is-over, Accessed 2 March 2015.
51
Codilla, M. Road sharing pioneers honored in Malacañang, Cebu Daily News, November 29, 2014.
http://cebudailynews.inquirer.net/47306/road-sharing-pioneers-honored-in-malacanang, Accessed on 2
March 2015.

27

Research, or research collaborations, that should be tackled for behavioral change andeffective implementation of environmental law may include mainstreaming the right to ahealthy environment as a human right, Environmental Law Interlinked with other disciplines
and practitioners and Environmental Law and Good Governance.

28