Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
CASE PROPER
PARTIES Petitioners:
MMDA, DENR, DECS (DepEd), DOH, DA, DPWH, DBM, PCG, PNP-MG, DILG
Respondents:
Concerned Residents of Manila Bay (CRMB), represented and joined by 14 individuals
RTC DECISION: (September 13, 2002) Decision is made IN FAVOR of the respondents
ordering the petitioners to clean up and rehabilitate Manila Bay
- MWSS, LWUA and PPA appealed before the CA, the rest filed a petition for review on
certiorari directly to the SC
- SC sent the petition for review to the CA for consolidation with the appeals of the
other petitioners.
MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, G.R. No. 171947-48, December 18, 2008
o Cleaning of the Manila Bay is not a ministerial act which can be compelled by
mandamus.
CA DECISION: (September 28, 2005) DENIED petitioners’ appeal and AFFIRMED the RTC’s
decision in toto, stressing that the RTC’s decision did not require
petitioners to do task out of their usual basic functions under existing laws.
ISSUE (s) Following are the issues identified by the SC for resolution:
On issue No. 2:
YES, THE PETITIONERS CAN BE COMPELLED BY MANDAMUS TO CLEAN UP AND
REHABILITATE THE MANILA BAY.
Generally, the writ of mandamus lies to require the execution of ministerial duty.
A ministerial duty is one that “requires neither the exercise of official discretion
nor judgment”. It is a “simple definite duty arising under conditions admitted or
proved to exist and imposed by law”.
MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, G.R. No. 171947-48, December 18, 2008
Differentiate between:
a. Petitioners’ obligation to perform their duties (MINISTERIAL DUTY, therefore
can be compelled by mandamus); and
b. How they carry out such duties.
Differentiate between:
a. Ministerial Duty (see second bullet of Held on Issue No. 2)
b. Discretionary Duty (is one that allows a person to exercise judgment and
choose to perform or not to perform).
A review of MMDA and other petitioners’ respective charters or like enabling
statutes yielded the conclusion that these government agencies are enjoined, as a
matter of statutory obligation, to perform functions relating directly or indirectly
to the cleanup, rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of the Manila Bay. They
are precluded from choosing not to perform these ministerial duties and therefore
in case of refusal, can be compelled by mandamus to act.
SC DECISION: Petition is DENIED, the CA and RTC’s decision are AFFIRMED WITH
MODIFICATIONS in view of subsequent developments or supervening
events in the case.
MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, G.R. No. 171947-48, December 18, 2008