Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
Third Regular Session

HOUSE BILL N

9181

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE
ROSE MARIE BABY J. ARENAS

AN ACT DECLARING MANILA BAY AS HERITAGE ASSET FREE FROM ANY AND
ALL FORMS OF FURTHER RECLAMATION AND PROVIDING PENALTIES
THEREFOR

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:

SECTION I. Heritage Site. The entire Manila Bay area, covering its waterfront and sea waters
are hereby declared as a heritage site. Any and all forms of further reclamation activities that will
affect a portion or the entire Manila Bay Area, as delineated in the next section, are hereby
prohibited

SECTION 2. Manila Bay Area delineated. The Manila Bay Area is the portion of the Luzon
coast stretching One Hundred Ninety kilometers (190 kms) and covering a total area of One
Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-Four square kilometers (1,994 sq.km), bounded in the east by
Sierra Madre, Caraballo in the north, Zambales in the northwest, Bataan in the West, Batangas in
the south and the West Philippines Sea in the southwest, located between 120 8” 14” and 121 24”
E and 13 58’ and 16 8” N, including its waters located between 120 28” E and 121 15° and 14 16°
Nand ISN.

SECTION 3. Coverage. The prohibited acts mentioned in Section | hereof includes all activities
that seek to fill, cover or overlay the sea waters of the Manila Bay Area with soil, gravel, stones
or other similar materials to create artificial land space beginning from the coast; or any activity
that will construct artificial islands or floating structures, build overhand infrastructure above the
sea waters or will result in the receding of the sea waters and the surfacing of the soil beneath the
sea waters.


SECTION 4. Nullification of all planned reclamation projects. All projects approved and all
plans for reclamation projects pending with the Office of the Philippine Reclamation Authority
under the Office of the President or any government agency or local government units are hereby
nullified and disapproved.

SECTION 5. Revocation of issued ECCs and reclamation related permits. All Environmental
Clearance Certificates issues by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and all
other applications for Manila Bay Area reclamation related permits to any government agency or
local government units are hereby revoked.

SECTION 6. Disapproval of pending applications for ECCs and reclamation related
permits. All applications for Environmental Clearance Certificate pending with the DENR and
all other Manila Bay Area reclamation related permits pending with any government agency or
LGU are hereby disapproved by operation of this Act

SECTION 7. Penal provisions. Any, person, natural or juridical, or any public officer who
violates the provisions of this Act shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less than six (6)
years but not more than twelve (12) years and a fine of not less than Five Million pesos
(P5,000,000.00) but not more than Fifteen Million pesos (P15,000,000.00).

Any public officer who violates this Act shall also be dismissed from public service with accessory
penalties.

If the violator is a juridical entity, the highest ranking official and the members of its board of
directors or trustees who authorized the violation shall suffer the penalty imposed under this Act.

The operator or owner thereof shall not be allowed to operate similar establishment or enterprise
in a different name or style or in different location,

SECTION 8. Implementing Rules and Regulations.- Within sixty (60) days from the passage
of this AT, the DENR with the participation of stakeholders shall promulgate the necessary rules
and regulations for its effective implementation.

SECTION 9. Separability clause. If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional or
invalid, other parts hereof not affected shall continue and effective.

SECTION 10. Repealing clause. Any law, presidential decree or issuance, executive order, letter
of instruction, administrative order, rule or regulation contrary to or inconsistent with any
provision of this Act is hereby amended or modified accordingly.

SECTION 11. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the
Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.

Approved.


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

Third Regula Session
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE ROSE MARIE BABY J. ARENAS

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The Manila Bay is a heritage asset for the Filipino people. It has contributed to the
historical, political, economic and cultural development of the country. The concept of heritage is
strongly, rooted in the legacy of those who went ahead of us, but what we do about their tangible
and intangible legacies have strong implications for our future as well as the future of the
succeeding generations. Millions of Filipinos embrace the heritage of Manila Bay Area, not only
because of its historical significance and cultural importance, but also because of the
environmental costs that come with massive reclamation.

The main geophysical hazards of reclamation, identified by Kelvin Rodolfo are: land
subsidence; storm surge and storm waves caused by typhoons; and seismically induced
liquefaction, causing epic disasters. coastal communities around Manila Bay are already exposed
to numerous natural hazards, particularly those related to earthquakes (e.g. liquefaction, tsunamis)
and hydro-meteorological phenomena (e.g. floods, storm surges). Reclaimed land are susceptible
to liquefaction. Structures built on top of liquefied land are likely to collapse and kill people. The
effects of these hazards are exacerbated by accelerated land subsidence due to over-extraction of
groundwater.

The low cost of reclamation per square meter for developers, is a miniscule percentage of
the exorbitant prices that these reclaimed lands are sold in the market, the profit of which goes
directly into private hands. Urban expansion which is the main goal of the proposed land
reclamation projects puts more people in areas susceptible to natural hazards, which translates to
greater risk. ‘The plan and its implementation are not transparent, grossly inadequate in terms of
genuine consultation with the people, and are lacking of appropriate assessment of environmental
risks and impacts.

‘The United Nations Environment under the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration declared
the importance of protecting of the marine environment from land-based activities to assure food
security by preserving the ecological balance of food chains. Reclamation will alter the coastline,
the circulation of the water, leading to reduction in water quality and increased pollution. The
destruction of Manila Bay’s marine ecosystem threatens the stability of our food supply. Once a
productive fishing area, destructive fishing practices, massive pollution, and unmitigated land
conversion of wetlands and coastal areas have contributed to the marine ecosystem’s deterioration


On February 1, 2019, President Rodrigo Duterte signed Executive Order (EO) No. 74
which transferred the power to approve reclamation projects from the National Economic and
Development Authority (NEDA) to the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA), which he placed
directly under the Office of the President. Likewise, in January, as a response to the President
Duterte’s 7-year plan worth PhP47 Billion to clean up Manila Bay, the Supreme Court (SC)
created an advisory committee to monitor and verify the compliance by government agencies in
its 2008 writ of continuing mandamus ordering 13 government agencies to clean and protect
Manila Bay. The committee is headed by the now retired Justice Presbitero J. Velasco Jr., the same
justice who authored the writ in 2008. In this continuing mandamus, the SC states in unequivocal
terms that these agencies should “clean up, rehabilitate, and preserve Manila Bay, and restore
and maintain its waters to SB level to make them fit for swimming, skin diving, and other forms of
contact recreation.

As early as 1954, or sixty five years ago, the goal to protect Manila bay has been enshrined
in our laws as shown by Proclamation No. 41 by President Ramon Magsaysay reserved Manila
Bay as a national park for the people. However, it was Republic Act 7586 of 1992, enacted by
President Fidel Ramos, which included Manila Bay in the National Integrated Protected Areas
System Act of 1992. In 1993, Manila City Ordinance 7777 passed by the City Council banned
any form of reclamation along Manila Bay from the US embassy to the Cultural Center of the
Philippines. In 2012, the National Historical Commission of the Philippines, by virtue of the
NCHP Resolution No. 19 S/ 2012, as mandated by Republic Act 10066, the Cultural Heritage
Act of 2009 and Republic Act 10086, the Philippine History Act, declared Manila Bay and its
waterfront a "National Historical Landmark.” In effect, this recognized Manila Bay as a
“cultural property” which by law, must be protected by the government, making it unlawful to
undertake reclamation projects which will alter or affect its appearance, among other
considerations. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) identified
Manila Bay as a Key Biodiversity Area in 2006 recognizing Manila Bay as a critically important
biodiversity area. Along with reclamation, DENR lists pollution, conversion to fishponds, salt
pans, industrial and domestic wastes, and road construction as threats to Manila Bay’s ecosystem
In September 2008, the SC issued the writ of continuing mandamus with a clear directive to
rehabilitate and preserve Manila

However, it was the mere City Ordinance 8233 of Manila passed on June 6, 2011,
amending Ordinance 7777, prohibiting any form of reclamation along certain areas of Manila
Bay, that lifted the ban on reclamation, making the City of Manila a party to the Contractual
Consortium Agreement and owner of certain portions of the reclamation project.

Given the recent actions of President Duterte, as Chief Executive and of the SC, as the
judiciary branch of government, to step up its drive to protect Manila Bay, it is imperative that the
Congress, as the legislative branch of government does the same, and further empower these other
branches to implement such mandate. It is high time for Congress to pass a law that will
specifically ban, in no uncertain terms, and make it a serious criminal violation to allow, further
reclamation in Manila Bay.


We have a constitutional right to a “a balanced and healthful ecology with the rhythm and
harmony of nature” enshrined under Section 16 Article 2 of the Philippine Constitution, but neither
this constitutional guarantee nor any of these prohibitions have been heeded. We have witnessed
the unbridled destruction and unconscionable desecration of this “cultural property” at the cost of
the physical safety, economic security and social development of communities affected.

As a matter of record, the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA)has already entered into
some formal understanding or agreement with the cities of Manila, Pasay, Paranaque, Las Pinas
and Bacoor to reclaim 1,440 hectares along Manila Bay covering the area between the Cultural
Center Complex to Las Pinas-Paranaque coast. The alarming “National Reclamation Plan” of the
PRA aims to reclaim about 38,000 hectares all over the country, involving 102 projects, seventy
percent (70%) or about 26,234 hectares of water, which is along the coast of Manila Bay, thereby
expanding Metro Manila by more than a third its size of about 63,843 hectares!

This Bill seeks to recognize and declare Manila Bay, in its entirety, not only a national
historical landmark, but a heritage site that is protected, fully owned by the government, with
‘management policies based on the preservation of an ecosystem and rights-based, people centered
development framework.

Manila Bay Area belongs to the Filipino people and must remain in public hands

The approval of this bill is both critical and urgent.

Y J. ARENAS
ict of Pangasinan