University of Santo Tomas

Faculty of Civil Law

The Law on Natural Resources
and Rules of Procedure in Environmental Cases
2nd Semester, 2016-2017
by: Professor Victoria V. Loanzon

Part A: Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases effective April 29, 2010, A.M.
No. 09-6-8-SC (February 4, 2017)
I. Scope

II. Definition of Terms

1. By-product or derivatives
2. Consent decree
3. Continuing mandamus
4. Environmental protection order (EPO)
5. Mineral
6. Precautionary principle
7. Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP)
8. Wildlife

III. Civil Procedure

1. Allowed Pleadings and Motions
2. Prohibited Pleadings or Motions
3. Issuance of Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO)
4. Dissolution of Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO)
5. Pre-Trial
6. Trial
7. Judgment and Execution

IV. Special Civil Actions

1. Nature of Writ of Kalikasan (West Tower Condominium Corp. v. First
Philippine Industrial Corp. for the operation of leaking pipeline system,
November 19, 2010; Writ issued against construction of 45-hectare Obando,
Bulacan Landfill, February 21, 2012; Writ issued preventing the
implementation of a plan to reclaim land covering Las Pinas, Paranaque and
Bacoor in Cavite)
a. Venue
b. Filing Fees
2. Writ of Continuing Mandamus (Boracay Foundation, Inc. v. Province of Aklan,
et al.,; MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, G.R. Nos. 171947-48,
December 18, 2008)
a. Nature of Judgment
b. Execution

V. Criminal Procedure
1. Parties
2. Provisional Remedies
a. Attachments under Rule 127 of Rules of Court
b. Environmental Protection Order

1|Page
 c. Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO)
3. Trial
4. Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) as ground for Motion
to Dismiss

VI. Evidence
1. Applicability of Precautionary Principles
2. Documentary Evidence

Part B: General Principles, Constitutional Framework and Survey of Philippine

Environmental Laws

I. Law as a Tool for Environmental Advocacy: The role of the Legislative Branch, the
Executive Branch and the Judiciary; Pressing Environmental Concerns and the
Need to Address Environmental Issues

II. General Principles and Rules on the Protection of Natural Resources in

International Law

1. Sovereign Rights over Natural Resources and Responsibility not to cause

environmental damage
2. Principle of Preventive Action
3. Principle of Co-operation
4. Principle of Sustainable Development
5. Precautionary Principle
6. Polluter-Pays Principle
7. Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility

III. General Sources of International Environmental Law

Bilateral or multilateral treaties

Binding acts of international organizations
Rules of customary international law and
Judgments of international courts or tribunals

Major International Instruments on the Protection of the Environment

A. UN General Assembly Resolution No. 1803 on Permanent Sovereignty (December
14, 1962)
B. Stockholm Declaration
C. Brundtland Report
D. Vienna Convention (March 22, 1985)
E. Montreal Protocol (September 16, 1987)
F. Kyoto Protocol (December 11, 1992)

IV. Constitutional Framework (February 11, 2017)

A. Preamble

B. National Territory Article 1

Magallona, et al v. Ermita, et al., G.R. No. 147465, July 16, 2011: constitutionality of the
Philippine Baselines Law
The right of innocent passage to the territorial waters of States is customary
international law. In the absence of municipal legislation, international law norms, now

2|Page
 codified in UNCLOS III, operate to grant innocent passage rights over the territorial sea
or archipelagic waters, subject to the treatys limitations and conditions for their exercise.
Significantly, the right of innocent passage is a customary international law, thus
automatically incorporated in the corpus of Philippine law. No modern State can validly
invoke its sovereignty to absolutely forbid innocent passage that is exercised in
accordance with customary international law without risking retaliatory measures from
the international community.
Nature of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. UNCLOS III has nothing
to do with the acquisition (or loss) of territory. It is a multilateral treaty regulating, among
others, sea-use rights over maritime zone (i.e., the territorial waters [12 nautical miles
from the baselines], contiguous zone [24 nautical miles from the baselines], exclusive
economic zone [200 nautical miles from the baselines], and continental shelves that
UNCLOS III delimits.
Modes of acquisition or loss of territory under international law. Under traditional
international law typology, States acquire (or conversely, loss) territory through
occupation, accretion, cession and prescription, not by executing multilateral treaties on
the regulations of sea-use rights or enacting statutes to comply with the treatys terms to
delimit maritime zones and continental shelves. Territorial claims to land features are
outside UNCLOS III and are instead governed by the rules on general international law.
Consequence of classifying the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal as Regimes of Islands.
Far from surrendering the Philippines claim over the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal,
Congress decision to classify the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal as Regime(s) of
Islands under the Republic of the Philippines consistent with Article 121 of UNCLOS III
manifests the Philippine States responsible observance of its pacta sunt servanda
obligation under UNCLOS III. Under Article 121 of UNCLOS III, any naturally formed
area of land, surrounded by water, which above water at high tide, such as portions of
the KIG, qualifies under the category of regime of islands, whose islands generate their
own baselines.
C. Declaration of Principles and State Policies Article II
Section 15 Right to Health
International Services for Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Inc. v.
Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Phil.), Dec.8, 2015: S.C. issued Writ of Kalikasan for BT
field trials for violation of constitutional right to health and balanced ecology;
Respondents raised the following objections: Petitioner did not obtain ECC; BT Talong is
presumed harmful, if consumed; has adverse and toxic effect on human health;
experiments showed adverse effect even on insects
Resident Mammals of Tanon Straits v. DENR Sec. Angelo Reyes, G.R. No. 180771,
April 21, 2015: Court recognized the protection of the resident mammals of Tanon Strait
through petitioners who are natural citizens acting as legal guardians, as friends and for
being stewards of creation. Under the Rules of Procedure in Environmental Cases. A
citizen suit is encouraged for the protection of the environment. This provision liberalizes
standing for all cases filed enforcing environmental laws and collapses the traditional
rule on personal and direct interest, on the principle that humans are stewards of
nature.
Most Rev. Pedro Arigo v. Scott H. Swift, et al., G.R. No. 206510, Sept. 16, 2014: The
Court held that the liberalization of standing first enunciated in Oposa, insofar as it
refers to minors and generations yet unborn, is now enshrined in the Rules which allows
the filing of a citizen suit in environmental cases. The provision on citizen suits in the
Rules collapses the traditional rule on personal and direct interest, on the principle that
humans are stewards of nature.
Henares, Jr. v. LTFRB and DOTC, G.R. No. 158290, October 23, 2006: Writ of
Mandamus will not lie where there is no law requiring PUVs to use Compressed Natural

3|Page
 Gas.

Section 16 Right to Balanced Ecology

Minors Oposa, et al. v. Factoran, G.R. 101083, July 30, 1993: Upheld the inter-
generational responsibility doctrine.
Ysmael, Jr. v. DENR Secretary, G.R. No. 79538, October 18, 1990: Grant of Timber
Licensing Agreement is not a right but only a privilege.
Hernandez et al. v. NAPOCOR, G.R.No. 145328, March 23, 2006: TRO can be issued
against a government project as a matter of exception because the protection of peoples
health enjoys a preferential treatment based on a constitutional mandate.

Section 22 Rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities

Carino v. Insular Government, 212 US 449, February 23, 1909: The U.S. Supreme
Court upheld the Igorot Law to recognize possession and ownership of lands.
La Bugal-BLaan Tribal Association, Inc. v. Ramos, G.R. No. 127882, December 1,
2004: Court upheld the constitutionality of the Philippine Mining Act. All mineral
resources are owned by the State. Their exploration, development and utilization (EDU)
must always be subject to the full control and supervision of the State. More specifically,
given the inadequacy of Filipino capital and technology in large-scale EDU activities,
the State may secure the help of foreign companies in all relevant matters -- especially
financial and technical assistance -- provided that, at all times, the State maintains its
right of full control. The foreign assistor or contractor assumes all financial, technical
and entrepreneurial risks in the EDU activities; hence, it may be given reasonable
management, operational, marketing, audit and other prerogatives to protect its
investments and to enable the business to succeed.
Province of North Cotabato v. Republic, G.R. Nos. 183591, 183752, 183893, 183951
and 183962, October 14, 2008: Recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples over
ancestral lands.

Section 25 Autonomy of Local Governments; Relate to Sections 4 General

Supervision of the President over Local Governments; Section 7 Equitable Share
of Local Governments in National Wealth; and Section 15 Creation of ARMM and
CAR
Republic v. City of Davao, (388 SCRA 691, September 12, 2002: The government is not
exempted from the requirements of securing Environmental Clearance Certificate.
Technology Developers, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 193 SCRA 147, G.R. No. 94759,
January 21, 1991: The exercise of police power of a mayor can be limited by a national
law.
MMDA v. JANCOM Environmental Corporation, G.R. No. 14746, January 30, 2002:
The contract between DENR and respondent is a valid contract which involves a waste
management program for Metro Manila.
Greater Metropolitan Manila Mayors v. JANCOM Environmental Corporation, G.R.
No. 161970, June 30, 2006: MMDA cannot bind the local governments without an
ordinance.
Province of Rizal v. Executive Secretary, et al., G.R. No. 129546, December 13, 2005:
National government must secure the consent of the local government in the
implementation of projects which may have adverse impact on the environment.
Boracay Foundation, Inc. v. Province of Aklan, Philippine Reclamation Authority and
DENR-EMB, G.R. No. 196870, June 26, 2012: Requirement of public hearing with
affected stakeholders is a prerequisite to grant of Environmental Clearance Certificate.

4|Page
 D. Bill of Rights Article III

Section 1 Right to Due Process of Law

Mathay v. Consolidated Bank, G.R. No. L-23136, August 26, 1974: Nature
and elements of class suits.
Mead v. Hon. Argel, G.R. No. L-41958, July 20, 1982: The Court upheld the
primary jurisdiction of the Pollution Adjudication Board.
Pollution Adjudication Board v. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 112, March
11, 1991: Cease and Desist Order can be issued without notice of hearing to
resolve an urgent environmental problem.

Section 2 Right to Privacy/Right to Life

Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 204819, April 8, 2014: Recognition of the right to
privacy of spouses on options available under the RH law.
When does human life begin. The Supreme Court said that the undeniable
conclusion, whether it be taken from a plain meaning, or understood under
medical parlance and more importantly, following the intention of the Framers
of the Constitution, is that a zygote is a human organism and that the life of a
new human being commences at a scientifically well-defined moment of
conception, that is, upon fertilization. The Court further said that the fertilized
ovum/zygote is not an inanimate object - it is a living human being complete
with DNA and 46 chromosomes. Implantation has been conceptualized only
for convenience by those who had population control in mind. To adopt it
would constitute textual infidelity not only to the RH Law but also to the
Constitution.

Section 7 Right of Access to Information

Province to North Cotabato v. Republic, supra: right to be consulted on matters
affecting the basic rights of peoples; right to self-determination (Policy of full
disclosure under Sec. 28, Article II of the Constitution)
Chavez v. Public Estates Authority and Amari Coastal Bay Development Corp.,
G.R. No. 133250, July 9, 2002: nature of reclaimed lands covering Manila Bay;
Right of the people to know parameters of public bidding

E. National Economy and Patrimony Article XII

Section 1 Efficient Use of Resources

Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, G.R. No. 122156, February 3, 1997): Application of
Filipino First Policy.
Mandatory nature of the Filipino first policy. Sec. 10, second par., Art. XII of the 1987
Constitution is a mandatory, positive command which is complete in itself and which
needs no further guidelines or implementing laws or rules for its enforcement. From its
very words the provision does not require any legislation to put it in operation. It is per se
judicially enforceable. When our Constitution mandates that (i)n the grant of rights,
privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, the State shall
give preference to qualified Filipinos, it means just thatqualified Filipinos shall be
preferred. And when our Constitution declares that a right exists in certain specified
circumstances an action may be maintained to enforce such right notwithstanding the
absence of any legislation on the subject; consequently, if there is no statute especially
enacted to enforce such constitutional right, such right enforces itself by its own inherent
potency and puissance, and from which all legislations must take their bearings. Where
there is a right there is a remedy. Ubi jus ibi remedium.

5|Page
 Section 2 State Ownership of Natural Resources
Aranda v. Republic, G.R. No. 172331, August 24, 2011: To prove that the land subject
of an application for registration is alienable, an applicant must establish the existence
of a positive act of the government such as a presidential proclamation or an executive
order; an administrative action; investigation reports of Bureau of Lands investigators;
and a legislative act or a statute. The applicant may also secure a certification from the
Government that the lands applied for are alienable and disposable.

Section 3 Land of Public Domain and Classification

Republic v. Naguiat, G.R. No. 134209, January 24, 2006: Naguiat had the right to
apply for registration owing to the continuous possession by her and her predecessors-in-
interest of the land since 1945. Although tax declarations and realty tax payment of
property are not conclusive evidence of ownership, nevertheless, they are good indicia of
the possession in the concept of owner for no one in his right mind would be paying taxes
for a property that is not in his actual or at least constructive possession. They constitute
at least proof that the holder has a claim of title over the property.
Carino v. Insular Government, supra: right over ancestral land of indigenous peoples

Protection of Forest Trees

Mustang Lumber v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104988, June 18, 1996: The DENR has
the power to impound the vehicle and all the logs which are subject of a complaint for
illegal logging.
PAAT v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 111107, January 10, 1997: Replevin will not lie
until the DENR completes its administrative investigation.

Section 4 Limits of Forest Lands and National Parks

Secretary of DENR v. Yap et al., G.R. No. 167707, October 8, 2008: The classification of
certain parts of Boracay Islands as forest lands will not allow private persons to apply
for registration of lands included in the Presidential Proclamation.
Spouses Palomo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 95608, January 21, 1997: Prolonged
possession of land of public domain will not mature to ownership. Tiwi Hot Springs Park
is a national park and is considered land of public domain.

Section 5 Indigenous Cultural Communities

Isagani Cruz and Europa v. Secretary of DENR, G.R. No. 135385, December 6, 2000:
The IPRA law which recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples over ancestral lands is
constitutional.

Section 6 Social Function and Property

Other rights/properties subject to protection and preservation
Joya v. PCGG, G.R. No. 96541, August 24, 1993: Silverware not crafted by Filipinos
and works of art done by foreign artists do not form part the cultural heritage of the
country.
Army and Navy Club v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110223, April 8, 1997: The site of
the Army and Navy Club belongs to the City of Manila. To enjoy continued use, the
Petitioner must pay rent to the city government.
Manosca v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 106440, January 29, 1996: The size of the
property and the alleged fact that only a limited sector of the society will benefit from the
expropriation of the property will not defeat public purpose.

6|Page
F. Social Justice and Human Rights Article XIII
Section 4 Ecological Considerations in Agrarian Reform
Section 7 Preferential Use of Marine Resources for Subsistence Fishermen
Sections 11 and 12 Health Care and Regulation
Section 14 Rights of Women
Section 15 and 16 Role and Rights of Peoples Organizations

V. Administrative and Legal Remedies

A. Administrative Agencies implementing Environmental Laws

(1) Department of Environmental and Natural Resources(Environmental
Management Bureau- formerly the National Pollution Commission;, Mines
and Geosciences Bureau, Parks and Wildlife Bureau, Land Management
Bureau) including its attached agencies: NAMRIA, NRDC, LLDA)
(2) Department of Agriculture
Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
(3) Department of Energy
(4) Department of Transportation and Communication
(5) Department of Health (BFAD)
(6) National Commission on Indigenous People
(7) LGUs (Sec. 25, Act II, State Policies and Sec. 7 Act. V, Local Government of
1987 Constitution)
(8) Pollution Adjudication Board
Principle of Primary Jurisdiction: Shell Philippines v. Efren Jalos, et al., G.R.
No. 179918, September 8, 2010

B. Administrative Agencies involved in the Prosecution and Enforcement of

Environmental Laws
(1) Department of Justice
- National Bureau of Investigation
- Land Registration Authority
- Bureau of Immigration
(2) Department of Interior and Local Governments
- Local Government Units
- Philippine National Police
(3) Philippine Coast Guard
(4) Philippine Navy

VI. Survey of Philippine Environmental Laws

A. Overall Policy: (1 Group with at least 2 members) (February 18, 2017)

1. P.D. 1151, Philippine Environmental Policy of 1977
2. P.D. 1586 Establishing an Environmental Impact Statement System

B. Laws related to Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Protected Areas, Wildlife and

Biodiversity Conservation (3 Groups with at a total of at least 8 members)
(February 18/ March 4, 2017)
1. R.A. No. 8371, Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
2. R.A. No. 7586, National Integrated Protected Areas System Act including all
laws, decrees, orders, proclamations, and issuances establishing protected areas.
3. R.A. No. 9072, National Caves and Cave Resources Management Act
4. R.A. No. 9147, Wildlife Conservation and Protection Act

7|Page
 C. Laws related to Mineral Extraction and Sources of Alternative Energy (2
Groups with a total of at least 6 members) (March 11/18, 2017)
1. R.A. No. 7076, Peoples Small-Scale Mining Act
2. R.A. No. 7942, Philippine Mining Act
3. R.A. No. 9593, Renewable Energy Act of 2008
4. R.A. No. 9637, Philippine Biofuels Act

D. Laws related to Waste Management, Air Pollution and Climate Change (3

Groups with a total of at least 9 members) (April 1 , 2017)
1. R.A. 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act
2. R.A. 6969, Toxic and Hazardous Waste Act
3. R.A. 8749, Clean Air Act
4. P.D. No. 856, Sanitation Code
5. R.A. No. 9729 The Climate Change Act of 2005

F. Laws related to Marine Resources and Protection of Water Sources (3 Groups

with a total of at least 8 members) (April 22, 2017)
1. R.A. No. 9522, Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law (exclude in the reports)
2. R.A. No. 4850, Laguna Lake Development Authority Act (excluded in the
reports)
3. P.D. No. 1067, Water Code
4. R.A. No. 8550, Philippine Fisheries Code (report on Amended Law)
5. P.D. No. 979, Marine Pollution Decree
6. R.A. No. 9483, Oil Spill Compensation Act of 2007
7. R.A. No. 9275, Clean Water Act

E. Laws related to Forests and Forest Management (1 Group with at least 2

members) (April 28, 2017)
1. P.D. No. 705, Revised Forestry Code (report on the Amended Law)
2. P.D. No. 1433, Plant Quarantine Law of 1978 (exclude in the reports)
3. Act No. 3572, Prohibition Against Cutting of Tindalo, Akli, and Molave
Trees (exclude in the reports)
4. R.A. No. 3571, Prohibition Against the Cutting, Destroying or Injuring of
Planted or Growing Trees, Flowering Plants and Shrubs or Plants of Scenic
Value along Public Roads, in Plazas, Parks, School Premises or in any Other
Public Ground (exclude in the reports)
5. R.A. No. 9175, Chainsaw Act

F. Other Laws
1. Local Governance
2. Economics of Ecology
3. Health, Food and Drugs
4. Government Accountability
5. Remedial Laws

Bases of Computation of Final Grade: Class Participation (recitation, reports and

attendance): 25%; preliminary exams: 35% and final exams: 40%)

8|Page