Writ of Kalikasan & First Writ of Kalikasan Against Meralco

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES
R E S O L U T I O N
Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson of the Sub-committee on the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases submitting for this Courts consideration and approval the
proposed Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the
same.
These Rules shall take effect within fifteen (15) days following its publication once in a
newspaper of general circulation.
April 13, 2010.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
RENATO C. CORONA
Associate Justice
(on leave)
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES
Associate Justice
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
Associate Justice
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA
Associate Justice
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE
CASTRO
Associate Justice
ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
Associate Justice
MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
Associate Justice
ROBERTO A. ABAD
Associate Justice
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
Associate Justice
JOSE P. PEREZ JOSE C. MENDOZA
Associate Justice Associate Justice

The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation

RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES
PART I
RULE 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Title. These Rules shall be known as "The Rules of Procedure for Environmental
Cases."
Section 2. Scope. These Rules shall govern the procedure in civil, criminal and special civil
actions before the Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in
Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts involving enforcement or
violations of environmental and other related laws, rules and regulations such as but not limited
to the following:
(a) Act No. 3572, Prohibition Against Cutting of Tindalo, Akli, and Molave Trees;
(b) P.D. No. 705, Revised Forestry Code;
(c) P.D. No. 856, Sanitation Code;
(d) P.D. No. 979, Marine Pollution Decree;
(e) P.D. No. 1067, Water Code;
(f) P.D. No. 1151, Philippine Environmental Policy of 1977;
(g) P.D. No. 1433, Plant Quarantine Law of 1978;
(h) P.D. No. 1586, Establishing an Environmental Impact Statement System Including
Other Environmental Management Related Measures and for Other Purposes;
(i) 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;
(j) R.A. No. 4850, Laguna Lake Development Authority Act;
(k) R.A. No. 6969, Toxic Substances and Hazardous Waste Act;
(l) R.A. No. 7076, Peoples Small-Scale Mining Act;
(m) R.A. No. 7586, National Integrated Protected Areas System Act including all laws,
decrees, orders, proclamations and issuances establishing protected areas;
(n) R.A. No. 7611, Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan Act;
(o) R.A. No. 7942, Philippine Mining Act;
(p) R.A. No. 8371, Indigenous Peoples Rights Act;
(q) R.A. No. 8550, Philippine Fisheries Code;
(r) R.A. No. 8749, Clean Air Act;
(s) R.A. No. 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act;
(t) R.A. No. 9072, National Caves and Cave Resource Management Act;
(u) R.A. No. 9147, Wildlife Conservation and Protection Act;
(v) R.A. No. 9175, Chainsaw Act;
(w) R.A. No. 9275, Clean Water Act;
(x) R.A. No. 9483, Oil Spill Compensation Act of 2007; and
(y) Provisions in C.A. No. 141, The Public Land Act; R.A. No. 6657, Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988; R.A. No. 7160, Local Government Code of 1991; R.A.
No. 7161, Tax Laws Incorporated in the Revised Forestry Code and Other Environmental
Laws (Amending the NIRC); R.A. No. 7308, Seed Industry Development Act of 1992;
R.A. No. 7900, High-Value Crops Development
Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases Act; R.A. No. 8048, Coconut Preservation Act;
R.A. No. 8435, Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997; R.A. No. 9522, The
Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law; R.A. No. 9593, Renewable Energy Act of 2008; R.A.
No. 9637, Philippine Biofuels Act; and other existing laws that relate to the conservation,
development, preservation, protection and utilization of the environment and natural resources.
Section 3. Objectives. - The objectives of these Rules are:
(a) To protect and advance the constitutional right of the people to a balanced and
healthful ecology;
(b) To provide a simplified, speedy and inexpensive procedure for the enforcement of
environmental rights and duties recognized under the Constitution, existing laws, rules
and regulations, and international agreements;
(c) To introduce and adopt innovations and best practices ensuring the effective
enforcement of remedies and redress for violation of environmental laws; and
(d) To enable the courts to monitor and exact compliance with orders and judgments in
environmental cases.
Section 4. Definition of Terms. -
(a) By-product or derivatives means any part taken or substance extracted from wildlife,
in raw or in processed form including stuffed animals and herbarium specimens.
1avvphi1
(b) Consent decree refers to a judicially-approved settlement between concerned parties
based on public interest and public policy to protect and preserve the environment.
(c) Continuing mandamus is a writ issued by a court in an environmental case directing
any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof to perform an act or
series of acts decreed by final judgment which shall remain effective until judgment is
fully satisfied.
(d) Environmental protection order (EPO) refers to an order issued by the court directing
or enjoining any person or government agency to perform or desist from performing an
act in order to protect, preserve or rehabilitate the environment.
(e) Mineral refers to all naturally occurring inorganic substance in solid, gas, liquid, or
any intermediate state excluding energy materials such as coal, petroleum, natural gas,
radioactive materials and geothermal energy.
(f) Precautionary principle states that when human activities may lead to threats of
serious and irreversible damage to the environment that is scientifically plausible but
uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that threat.
(g) Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) refers to an action whether
civil, criminal or administrative, brought against any person, institution or any
government agency or local government unit or its officials and employees, with the
intent to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that such person,
institution or government agency has taken or may take in the enforcement of
environmental laws, protection of the environment or assertion of environmental rights.
(h) Wildlife means wild forms and varieties of flora and fauna, in all developmental
stages including those which are in captivity or are being bred or propagated.
PART II
CIVIL PROCEDURE
RULE 2
PLEADINGS AND PARTIES
Section 1. Pleadings and motions allowed. The pleadings and motions that may be filed are
complaint, answer which may include compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim, motion for
intervention, motion for discovery and motion for reconsideration of the judgment.
Motion for postponement, motion for new trial and petition for relief from judgment shall be
allowed in highly meritorious cases or to prevent a manifest miscarriage of justice.
Section 2. Prohibited pleadings or motions. The following pleadings or motions shall not be
allowed:
(a) Motion to dismiss the complaint;
(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(c) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, except to file answer, the extension not
to exceed fifteen (15) days;
(d) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(e) Reply and rejoinder; and
(f) Third party complaint.
Section 3. Verified complaint. The verified complaint shall contain the names of the parties,
their addresses, the cause of action and the reliefs prayed for.
The plaintiff shall attach to the verified complaint all evidence proving or supporting the cause of
action consisting of the affidavits of witnesses, documentary evidence and if possible, object
evidence. The affidavits shall be in question and answer form and shall comply with the rules of
admissibility of evidence.
The complaint shall state that it is an environmental case and the law involved. The complaint
shall also include a certification against forum shopping. If the complaint is not an environmental
complaint, the presiding judge shall refer it to the executive judge for re-raffle.
Section 4. Who may file. Any real party in interest, including the government and juridical
entities authorized by law, may file a civil action involving the enforcement or violation of any
environmental law.
Section 5. Citizen suit. Any Filipino citizen in representation of others, including minors or
generations yet unborn, may file an action to enforce rights or obligations under environmental
laws. Upon the filing of a citizen suit, the court shall issue an order which shall contain a brief
description of the cause of action and the reliefs prayed for, requiring all interested parties to
manifest their interest to intervene in the case within fifteen (15) days from notice thereof. The
plaintiff may publish the order once in a newspaper of a general circulation in the Philippines or
furnish all affected barangays copies of said order.
Citizen suits filed under R.A. No. 8749 and R.A. No. 9003 shall be governed by their respective
provisions.
Section 6. Service of the complaint on the government or its agencies. - Upon the filing of the
complaint, the plaintiff is required to furnish the government or the appropriate agency, although
not a party, a copy of the complaint. Proof of service upon the government or the appropriate
agency shall be attached to the complaint.
Section 7. Assignment by raffle. - If there is only one (1) designated branch in a multiple-sala
court, the executive judge shall immediately refer the case to said branch. If there are two (2) or
more designated branches, the executive judge shall conduct a special raffle on the day the
complaint is filed.
Section 8. Issuance of Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO). - If it appears from
the verified complaint with a prayer for the issuance of an Environmental Protection Order
(EPO) that the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and
irreparable injury, the executive judge of the multiple-sala court before raffle or the presiding
judge of a single-sala court as the case may be, may issue ex parte a TEPO effective for only
seventy-two (72) hours from date of the receipt of the TEPO by the party or person enjoined.
Within said period, the court where the case is assigned, shall conduct a summary hearing to
determine whether the TEPO may be extended until the termination of the case.
The court where the case is assigned, shall periodically monitor the existence of acts that are the
subject matter of the TEPO even if issued by the executive judge, and may lift the same at any
time as circumstances may warrant.
The applicant shall be exempted from the posting of a bond for the issuance of a TEPO.
Section 9. Action on motion for dissolution of TEPO. - The grounds for motion to dissolve a
TEPO shall be supported by affidavits of the party or person enjoined which the applicant may
oppose, also by affidavits.
The TEPO may be dissolved if it appears after hearing that its issuance or continuance would
cause irreparable damage to the party or person enjoined while the applicant may be fully
compensated for such damages as he may suffer and subject to the posting of a sufficient bond
by the party or person enjoined.
Section 10. Prohibition against temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction. -
Except the Supreme Court, no court can issue a TRO or writ of preliminary injunction against
lawful actions of government agencies that enforce environmental laws or prevent violations
thereof.
Section 11. Report on TEPO, EPO, TRO or preliminary injunction. - The judge shall report any
action taken on a TEPO, EPO, TRO or a preliminary injunction, including its modification and
dissolution, to the Supreme Court, through the Office of the Court Administrator, within ten (10)
days from the action taken.
Section 12. Payment of filing and other legal fees. - The payment of filing and other legal fees
by the plaintiff shall be deferred until after judgment unless the plaintiff is allowed to litigate as
an indigent. It shall constitute a first lien on the judgment award.
For a citizen suit, the court shall defer the payment of filing and other legal fees that shall serve
as first lien on the judgment award.
Section 13. Service of summons, orders and other court processes. - The summons, orders and
other court processes may be served by the sheriff, his deputy or other proper court officer or for
justifiable reasons, by the counsel or representative of the plaintiff or any suitable person
authorized or deputized by the court issuing the summons.
Any private person who is authorized or deputized by the court to serve summons, orders and
other court processes shall for that purpose be considered an officer of the court.
The summons shall be served on the defendant, together with a copy of an order informing all
parties that they have fifteen (15) days from the filing of an answer, within which to avail of
interrogatories to parties under Rule 25 of the Rules of Court and request for admission by
adverse party under Rule 26, or at their discretion, make use of depositions under Rule 23 or
other measures under Rules 27 and 28.
Should personal and substituted service fail, summons by publication shall be allowed. In the
case of juridical entities, summons by publication shall be done by indicating the names of the
officers or their duly authorized representatives.
Section 14. Verified answer. - Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of summons, the defendant
shall file a verified answer to the complaint and serve a copy thereof on the plaintiff. The
defendant shall attach affidavits of witnesses, reports, studies of experts and all evidence in
support of the defense.
Affirmative and special defenses not pleaded shall be deemed waived, except lack of
jurisdiction.
Cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims not asserted shall be considered barred. The answer
to counterclaims or cross-claims shall be filed and served within ten (10) days from service of
the answer in which they are pleaded.
Section 15. Effect of failure to answer. - Should the defendant fail to answer the complaint
within the period provided, the court shall declare defendant in default and upon motion of the
plaintiff, shall receive evidence ex parte and render judgment based thereon and the reliefs
prayed for.
RULE 3
PRE-TRIAL
Section 1. Notice of pre-trial. - Within two (2) days from the filing of the answer to the
counterclaim or cross-claim, if any, the branch clerk of court shall issue a notice of the pre-trial
to be held not later than one (1) month from the filing of the last pleading.
The court shall schedule the pre-trial and set as many pre-trial conferences as may be necessary
within a period of two (2) months counted from the date of the first pre-trial conference.
Section 2. Pre-trial brief. - At least three (3) days before the pretrial, the parties shall submit pre-
trial briefs containing the following:
(a) A statement of their willingness to enter into an amicable settlement indicating the
desired terms thereof or to submit the case to any of the alternative modes of dispute
resolution;
(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;
(c) The legal and factual issues to be tried or resolved. For each factual issue, the parties
shall state all evidence to support their positions thereon. For each legal issue, parties
shall state the applicable law and jurisprudence supporting their respective positions
thereon;
(d) The documents or exhibits to be presented, including depositions, answers to
interrogatories and answers to written request for admission by adverse party, stating the
purpose thereof;
(e) A manifestation of their having availed of discovery procedures or their intention to
avail themselves of referral to a commissioner or panel of experts;
(f) The number and names of the witnesses and the substance of their affidavits;
(g) Clarificatory questions from the parties; and
(h) List of cases arising out of the same facts pending before other courts or
administrative agencies. Failure to comply with the required contents of a pre-trial brief
may be a ground for contempt.
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial.
Section 3. Referral to mediation. - At the start of the pre-trial conference, the court shall inquire
from the parties if they have settled the dispute; otherwise, the court shall immediately refer the
parties or their counsel, if authorized by their clients, to the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC)
unit for purposes of mediation. If not available, the court shall refer the case to the clerk of court
or legal researcher for mediation.
Mediation must be conducted within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from receipt of
notice of referral to mediation.
The mediation report must be submitted within ten (10) days from the expiration of the 30-day
period.
Section 4. Preliminary conference. - If mediation fails, the court will schedule the continuance
of the pre-trial. Before the scheduled date of continuance, the court may refer the case to the
branch clerk of court for a preliminary conference for the following purposes:
(a) To assist the parties in reaching a settlement;
(b) To mark the documents or exhibits to be presented by the parties and copies thereof to
be attached to the records after comparison with the originals;
(c) To ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the genuineness
and due execution of the documents marked as exhibits;
(d) To require the parties to submit the depositions taken under Rule 23 of the Rules of
Court, the answers to written interrogatories under Rule 25, and the answers to request
for admissions by the adverse party under Rule 26;
(e) To require the production of documents or things requested by a party under Rule 27
and the results of the physical and mental examination of persons under Rule 28;
(f) To consider such other matters as may aid in its prompt disposition;
(g) To record the proceedings in the "Minutes of Preliminary Conference" to be signed by
both parties or their counsels;
(h) To mark the affidavits of witnesses which shall be in question and answer form and
shall constitute the direct examination of the witnesses; and
(i) To attach the minutes together with the marked exhibits before the pre-trial proper.
The parties or their counsel must submit to the branch clerk of court the names, addresses and
contact numbers of the affiants.
During the preliminary conference, the branch clerk of court shall also require the parties to
submit the depositions taken under Rule 23 of the Rules of Court, the answers to written
interrogatories under Rule 25 and the answers to request for admissions by the adverse party
under Rule 26. The branch clerk of court may also require the production of documents or things
requested by a party under Rule 27 and the results of the physical and mental examination of
persons under Rule 28.
Section 5. Pre-trial conference; consent decree. - The judge shall put the parties and their
counsels under oath, and they shall remain under oath in all pre-trial conferences.
The judge shall exert best efforts to persuade the parties to arrive at a settlement of the dispute.
The judge may issue a consent decree approving the agreement between the parties in
accordance with law, morals, public order and public policy to protect the right of the people to a
balanced and healthful ecology.
Evidence not presented during the pre-trial, except newly-discovered evidence, shall be deemed
waived.
Section 6. Failure to settle. - If there is no full settlement, the judge shall:
(a) Adopt the minutes of the preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial proceedings
and confirm the markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of documents;
(b) Determine if there are cases arising out of the same facts pending before other courts
and order its consolidation if warranted;
(c) Determine if the pleadings are in order and if not, order the amendments if necessary;
(d) Determine if interlocutory issues are involved and resolve the same;
(e) Consider the adding or dropping of parties;
(f) Scrutinize every single allegation of the complaint, answer and other pleadings and
attachments thereto, and the contents of documents and all other evidence identified and
pre-marked during pre-trial in determining further admissions;
(g) Obtain admissions based on the affidavits of witnesses and evidence attached to the
pleadings or submitted during pre-trial;
(h) Define and simplify the factual and legal issues arising from the pleadings and
evidence. Uncontroverted issues and frivolous claims or defenses should be eliminated;
(i) Discuss the propriety of rendering a summary judgment or a judgment based on the
pleadings, evidence and admissions made during pre-trial;
(j) Observe the Most Important Witness Rule in limiting the number of witnesses,
determining the facts to be proved by each witness and fixing the approximate number of
hours per witness;
(k) Encourage referral of the case to a trial by commissioner under Rule 32 of the Rules
of Court or to a mediator or arbitrator under any of the alternative modes of dispute
resolution governed by the Special Rules of Court on Alternative Dispute Resolution;
(l) Determine the necessity of engaging the services of a qualified expert as a friend of
the court (amicus curiae); and
(m) Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates for continuous trial, comply with the
one-day examination of witness rule, adhere to the case flow chart determined by the
court which shall contain the different stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation
of the decision and use the time frame for each stage in setting the trial dates.
Section 7. Effect of failure to appear at pre-trial. - The court shall not dismiss the complaint,
except upon repeated and unjustified failure of the plaintiff to appear. The dismissal shall be
without prejudice, and the court may proceed with the counterclaim.
If the defendant fails to appear at the pre-trial, the court shall receive evidence ex parte.
Section 8. Minutes of pre-trial. - The minutes of each pre-trial conference shall contain matters
taken up therein, more particularly admissions of facts and exhibits, and shall be signed by the
parties and their counsel.
Section 9. Pre-trial order. - Within ten (10) days after the termination of the pre-trial, the court
shall issue a pre-trial order setting forth the actions taken during the pre-trial conference, the
facts stipulated, the admissions made, the evidence marked, the number of witnesses to be
presented and the schedule of trial. Said order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not
disposed of and control the course of action during the trial.
Section 10. Efforts to settle. - The court shall endeavor to make the parties agree to compromise
or settle in accordance with law at any stage of the proceedings before rendition of judgment.
RULE 4
TRIAL
Section 1. Continuous trial. - The judge shall conduct continuous trial which shall not exceed
two (2) months from the date of the issuance of the pre-trial order.
Before the expiration of the two-month period, the judge may ask the Supreme Court for the
extension of the trial period for justifiable cause.
Section 2. Affidavits in lieu of direct examination. - In lieu of direct examination, affidavits
marked during the pre-trial shall be presented as direct examination of affiants subject to cross-
examination by the adverse party.
Section 3. One-day examination of witness rule. - The court shall strictly adhere to the rule that a
witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day, subject to the courts discretion of extending the
examination for justifiable reason. After the presentation of the last witness, only oral offer of
evidence shall be allowed, and the opposing party shall immediately interpose his objections.
The judge shall forthwith rule on the offer of evidence in open court.
Section 4. Submission of case for decision; filing of memoranda. - After the last party has rested
its case, the court shall issue an order submitting the case for decision.
The court may require the parties to submit their respective memoranda, if possible in electronic
form, within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from the date the case is submitted for
decision.
The court shall have a period of sixty (60) days to decide the case from the date the case is
submitted for decision.
Section 5. Period to try and decide. - The court shall have a period of one (1) year from the
filing of the complaint to try and decide the case. Before the expiration of the one-year period,
the court may petition the Supreme Court for the extension of the period for justifiable cause.
The court shall prioritize the adjudication of environmental cases.
RULE 5
JUDGMENT AND EXECUTION
Section 1. Reliefs in a citizen suit. - If warranted, the court may grant to the plaintiff proper
reliefs which shall include the protection, preservation or rehabilitation of the environment and
the payment of attorneys fees, costs of suit and other litigation expenses. It may also require the
violator to submit a program of rehabilitation or restoration of the environment, the costs of
which shall be borne by the violator, or to contribute to a special trust fund for that purpose
subject to the control of the court.
Section 2. Judgment not stayed by appeal. - Any judgment directing the performance of acts for
the protection, preservation or rehabilitation of the environment shall be executory pending
appeal unless restrained by the appellate court.
Section 3. Permanent EPO; writ of continuing mandamus. - In the judgment, the court may
convert the TEPO to a permanent EPO or issue a writ of continuing mandamus directing the
performance of acts which shall be effective until the judgment is fully satisfied.
The court may, by itself or through the appropriate government agency, monitor the execution of
the judgment and require the party concerned to submit written reports on a quarterly basis or
sooner as may be necessary, detailing the progress of the execution and satisfaction of the
judgment. The other party may, at its option, submit its comments or observations on the
execution of the judgment.
Section 4. Monitoring of compliance with judgment and orders of the court by a commissioner. -
The court may motu proprio, or upon motion of the prevailing party, order that the enforcement
of the judgment or order be referred to a commissioner to be appointed by the court. The
commissioner shall file with the court written progress reports on a quarterly basis or more
frequently when necessary.
Section 5. Return of writ of execution. - The process of execution shall terminate upon a
sufficient showing that the decision or order has been implemented to the satisfaction of the
court in accordance with Section 14, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.
RULE 6
STRATEGIC LAWSUIT AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Section 1. Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). - A legal action filed to
harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that any person, institution or the
government has taken or may take in the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the
environment or assertion of environmental rights shall be treated as a SLAPP and shall be
governed by these Rules.
Section 2. SLAPP as a defense; how alleged. - In a SLAPP filed against a person involved in the
enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the environment, or assertion of environmental
rights, the defendant may file an answer interposing as a defense that the case is a SLAPP and
shall be supported by documents, affidavits, papers and other evidence; and, by way of
counterclaim, pray for damages, attorneys fees and costs of suit.
The court shall direct the plaintiff or adverse party to file an opposition showing the suit is not a
SLAPP, attaching evidence in support thereof, within a non-extendible period of five (5) days
from receipt of notice that an answer has been filed.
The defense of a SLAPP shall be set for hearing by the court after issuance of the order to file an
opposition within fifteen (15) days from filing of the comment or the lapse of the period.
Section 3. Summary hearing. - The hearing on the defense of a SLAPP shall be summary in
nature. The parties must submit all available evidence in support of their respective positions.
The party seeking the dismissal of the case must prove by substantial evidence that his act for the
enforcement of environmental law is a legitimate action for the protection, preservation and
rehabilitation of the environment. The party filing the action assailed as a SLAPP shall prove by
preponderance of evidence that the action is not a SLAPP and is a valid claim.
Section 4. Resolution of the defense of a SLAPP. - The affirmative defense of a SLAPP shall be
resolved within thirty (30) days after the summary hearing. If the court dismisses the action, the
court may award damages, attorneys fees and costs of suit under a counterclaim if such has been
filed. The dismissal shall be with prejudice.
If the court rejects the defense of a SLAPP, the evidence adduced during the summary hearing
shall be treated as evidence of the parties on the merits of the case. The action shall proceed in
accordance with the Rules of Court.
PART III
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
RULE 7
WRIT OF KALIKASAN
Section 1. Nature of the writ. - The writ is a remedy available to a natural or juridical person,
entity authorized by law, peoples organization, non-governmental organization, or any public
interest group accredited by or registered with any government agency, on behalf of persons
whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated, or threatened with
violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or private individual or
entity, involving environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.
Section 2. Contents of the petition. - The verified petition shall contain the following:
(a) The personal circumstances of the petitioner;
(b) The name and personal circumstances of the respondent or if the name and personal
circumstances are unknown and uncertain, the respondent may be described by an
assumed appellation;
(c) The environmental law, rule or regulation violated or threatened to be violated, the act
or omission complained of, and the environmental damage of such magnitude as to
prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.
(d) All relevant and material evidence consisting of the affidavits of witnesses,
documentary evidence, scientific or other expert studies, and if possible, object evidence;
(e) The certification of petitioner under oath that: (1) petitioner has not commenced any
action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial
agency, and no such other action or claim is pending therein; (2) if there is such other
pending action or claim, a complete statement of its present status; (3) if petitioner should
learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, petitioner shall
report to the court that fact within five (5) days therefrom; and
(f) The reliefs prayed for which may include a prayer for the issuance of a TEPO.
Section 3. Where to file. - The petition shall be filed with the Supreme Court or with any of the
stations of the Court of Appeals.
Section 4. No docket fees. - The petitioner shall be exempt from the payment of docket
fees.
Section 5. Issuance of the writ. - Within three (3) days from the date of filing of the petition, if
the petition is sufficient in form and substance, the court shall give an order: (a) issuing the writ;
and (b) requiring the respondent to file a verified return as provided in Section 8 of this Rule.
The clerk of court shall forthwith issue the writ under the seal of the court including the issuance
of a cease and desist order and other temporary reliefs effective until further order.
Section 6. How the writ is served. - The writ shall be served upon the respondent by a court
officer or any person deputized by the court, who shall retain a copy on which to make a return
of service. In case the writ cannot be served personally, the rule on substituted service shall
apply.
Section 7. Penalty for refusing to issue or serve the writ. - A clerk of court who unduly delays or
refuses to issue the writ after its allowance or a court officer or deputized person who unduly
delays or refuses to serve the same shall be punished by the court for contempt without prejudice
to other civil, criminal or administrative actions.
Section 8. Return of respondent; contents. - Within a non-extendible period of ten (10) days after
service of the writ, the respondent shall file a verified return which shall contain all defenses to
show that respondent did not violate or threaten to violate, or allow the violation of any
environmental law, rule or regulation or commit any act resulting to environmental damage of
such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or
provinces.
All defenses not raised in the return shall be deemed waived.
The return shall include affidavits of witnesses, documentary evidence, scientific or other expert
studies, and if possible, object evidence, in support of the defense of the respondent.
A general denial of allegations in the petition shall be considered as an admission thereof.
Section 9. Prohibited pleadings and motions. - The following pleadings and motions are
prohibited:
(a) Motion to dismiss;
(b) Motion for extension of time to file return;
(c) Motion for postponement;
(d) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(e) Counterclaim or cross-claim;
(f) Third-party complaint;
(g) Reply; and
(h) Motion to declare respondent in default.
Section 10. Effect of failure to file return. - In case the respondent fails to file a return, the court
shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte.
Section 11. Hearing. - Upon receipt of the return of the respondent, the court may call a
preliminary conference to simplify the issues, determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations
or admissions from the parties, and set the petition for hearing.
The hearing including the preliminary conference shall not extend beyond sixty (60) days and
shall be given the same priority as petitions for the writs of habeas corpus, amparo and habeas
data.
Section 12. Discovery Measures. - A party may file a verified motion for the following reliefs:
(a) Ocular Inspection; order The motion must show that an ocular inspection order is
necessary to establish the magnitude of the violation or the threat as to prejudice the life,
health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces. It shall state in detail
the place or places to be inspected. It shall be supported by affidavits of witnesses having
personal knowledge of the violation or threatened violation of environmental law.
After hearing, the court may order any person in possession or control of a designated
land or other property to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting or
photographing the property or any relevant object or operation thereon.
The order shall specify the person or persons authorized to make the inspection and the
date, time, place and manner of making the inspection and may prescribe other conditions
to protect the constitutional rights of all parties.
(b) Production or inspection of documents or things; order The motion must show that
a production order is necessary to establish the magnitude of the violation or the threat as
to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.
After hearing, the court may order any person in possession, custody or control of any
designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible
things, or objects in digitized or electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence
relevant to the petition or the return, to produce and permit their inspection, copying or
photographing by or on behalf of the movant.
The production order shall specify the person or persons authorized to make the production and
the date, time, place and manner of making the inspection or production and may prescribe other
conditions to protect the constitutional rights of all parties.
Section 13. Contempt. - The court may after hearing punish the respondent who refuses or
unduly delays the filing of a return, or who makes a false return, or any person who disobeys or
resists a lawful process or order of the court for indirect contempt under Rule 71 of the Rules of
Court.
Section 14. Submission of case for decision; filing of memoranda. - After hearing, the court shall
issue an order submitting the case for decision. The court may require the filing of memoranda
and if possible, in its electronic form, within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from the
date the petition is submitted for decision.
Section 15. Judgment. - Within sixty (60) days from the time the petition is submitted for
decision, the court shall render judgment granting or denying the privilege of the writ of
kalikasan.
The reliefs that may be granted under the writ are the following:
(a) Directing respondent to permanently cease and desist from committing acts or
neglecting the performance of a duty in violation of environmental laws resulting in
environmental destruction or damage;
(b) Directing the respondent public official, government agency, private person or entity
to protect, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the environment;
(c) Directing the respondent public official, government agency, private person or entity
to monitor strict compliance with the decision and orders of the court;
(d) Directing the respondent public official, government agency, or private person or
entity to make periodic reports on the execution of the final judgment; and
(e) Such other reliefs which relate to the right of the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology or to the protection, preservation, rehabilitation or restoration of the
environment, except the award of damages to individual petitioners.
Section 16. Appeal. - Within fifteen (15) days from the date of notice of the adverse judgment or
denial of motion for reconsideration, any party may appeal to the Supreme Court under Rule 45
of the Rules of Court. The appeal may raise questions of fact.
Section 17. Institution of separate actions. - The filing of a petition for the issuance of the writ of
kalikasan shall not preclude the filing of separate civil, criminal or administrative actions.
RULE 8
WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS
Section 1. Petition for continuing mandamus. - When any agency or instrumentality of the
government or officer thereof unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law
specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station in connection with the
enforcement or violation of an environmental law rule or regulation or a right therein, or
unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of such right and there is no other plain,
speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved thereby may file
a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty, attaching thereto
supporting evidence, specifying that the petition concerns an environmental law, rule or
regulation, and praying that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to do an act or
series of acts until the judgment is fully satisfied, and to pay damages sustained by the petitioner
by reason of the malicious neglect to perform the duties of the respondent, under the law, rules or
regulations. The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
Section 2. Where to file the petition. - The petition shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court
exercising jurisdiction over the territory where the actionable neglect or omission occurred or
with the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.
Section 3. No docket fees. - The petitioner shall be exempt from the payment of docket fees.
Section 4. Order to comment. - If the petition is sufficient in form and substance, the court shall
issue the writ and require the respondent to comment on the petition within ten (10) days from
receipt of a copy thereof. Such order shall be served on the respondents in such manner as the
court may direct, together with a copy of the petition and any annexes thereto.
Section 5. Expediting proceedings; TEPO. - The court in which the petition is filed may issue
such orders to expedite the proceedings, and it may also grant a TEPO for the preservation of the
rights of the parties pending such proceedings.
Section 6. Proceedings after comment is filed. - After the comment is filed or the time for the
filing thereof has expired, the court may hear the case which shall be summary in nature or
require the parties to submit memoranda. The petition shall be resolved without delay within
sixty (60) days from the date of the submission of the petition for resolution.
Section 7. Judgment. - If warranted, the court shall grant the privilege of the writ of continuing
mandamus requiring respondent to perform an act or series of acts until the judgment is fully
satisfied and to grant such other reliefs as may be warranted resulting from the wrongful or
illegal acts of the respondent. The court shall require the respondent to submit periodic reports
detailing the progress and execution of the judgment, and the court may, by itself or through a
commissioner or the appropriate government agency, evaluate and monitor compliance. The
petitioner may submit its comments or observations on the execution of the judgment.
Section 8. Return of the writ. - The periodic reports submitted by the respondent detailing
compliance with the judgment shall be contained in partial returns of the writ.
Upon full satisfaction of the judgment, a final return of the writ shall be made to the court by the
respondent. If the court finds that the judgment has been fully implemented, the satisfaction of
judgment shall be entered in the court docket.
PART IV
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 9
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
Section 1. Who may file. - Any offended party, peace officer or any public officer charged with
the enforcement of an environmental law may file a complaint before the proper officer in
accordance with the Rules of Court.
Section 2. Filing of the information. - An information, charging a person with a violation of an
environmental law and subscribed by the prosecutor, shall be filed with the court.
Section 3. Special prosecutor. - In criminal cases, where there is no private offended party, a
counsel whose services are offered by any person or organization may be allowed by the court as
special prosecutor, with the consent of and subject to the control and supervision of the public
prosecutor.
RULE 10
PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTIONS
Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions. - When a criminal action is instituted, the
civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the offense charged, shall be deemed
instituted with the criminal action unless the complainant waives the civil action, reserves the
right to institute it separately or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
Unless the civil action has been instituted prior to the criminal action, the reservation of the right
to institute separately the civil action shall be made during arraignment.
In case civil liability is imposed or damages are awarded, the filing and other legal fees shall be
imposed on said award in accordance with Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, and the fees shall
constitute a first lien on the judgment award. The damages awarded in cases where there is no
private offended party, less the filing fees, shall accrue to the funds of the agency charged with
the implementation of the environmental law violated. The award shall be used for the
restoration and rehabilitation of the environment adversely affected.
RULE 11
ARREST
Section 1. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. - A peace officer or an individual deputized by
the proper government agency may, without a warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
committing or is attempting to commit an offense; or
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based
on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it. Individuals deputized by the proper government agency who are enforcing
environmental laws shall enjoy the presumption of regularity under Section 3(m), Rule
131 of the Rules of Court when effecting arrests for violations of environmental laws.
Section 2. Warrant of arrest. - All warrants of arrest issued by the court shall be accompanied by
a certified true copy of the information filed with the issuing court.
RULE 12
CUSTODY AND DISPOSITION OF SEIZED ITEMS, EQUIPMENT,
PARAPHERNALIA, CONVEYANCES AND INSTRUMENTS
Section 1. Custody and disposition of seized items. - The custody and disposition of seized items
shall be in accordance with the applicable laws or rules promulgated by the concerned
government agency.
Section 2. Procedure. - In the absence of applicable laws or rules promulgated by the concerned
government agency, the following procedure shall be observed:
(a) The apprehending officer having initial custody and control of the seized items,
equipment, paraphernalia, conveyances and instruments shall physically inventory and
whenever practicable, photograph the same in the presence of the person from whom
such items were seized.
(b) Thereafter, the apprehending officer shall submit to the issuing court the return of the
search warrant within five (5) days from date of seizure or in case of warrantless arrest,
submit within five (5) days from date of seizure, the inventory report, compliance report,
photographs, representative samples and other pertinent documents to the public
prosecutor for appropriate action.
(c) Upon motion by any interested party, the court may direct the auction sale of seized
items, equipment, paraphernalia, tools or instruments of the crime. The court shall, after
hearing, fix the minimum bid price based on the recommendation of the concerned
government agency. The sheriff shall conduct the auction.
(d) The auction sale shall be with notice to the accused, the person from whom the items
were seized, or the owner thereof and the concerned government agency.
(e) The notice of auction shall be posted in three conspicuous places in the city or
municipality where the items, equipment, paraphernalia, tools or instruments of the crime
were seized.
(f) The proceeds shall be held in trust and deposited with the government depository bank
for disposition according to the judgment.
RULE 13
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
Section 1. Attachment in environmental cases. - The provisional remedy of attachment under
Rule 127 of the Rules of Court may be availed of in environmental cases.
Section 2. Environmental Protection Order (EPO); Temporary Environmental Protection Order
(TEPO) in criminal cases. - The procedure for and issuance of EPO and TEPO shall be governed
by Rule 2 of these Rules.
RULE 14
BAIL
Section 1. Bail, where filed. - Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the court where the case
is pending, or in the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, with any regional trial judge,
metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge or municipal circuit trial judge in the province, city
or municipality. If the accused is arrested in a province, city or municipality other than where the
case is pending, bail may also be filed with any Regional Trial Court of said place, or if no judge
thereof is available, with any metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge or municipal circuit
trial judge therein. If the court grants bail, the court may issue a hold-departure order in
appropriate cases.
Section 2. Duties of the court. - Before granting the application for bail, the judge must read the
information in a language known to and understood by the accused and require the accused to
sign a written undertaking, as follows:
(a) To appear before the court that issued the warrant of arrest for arraignment purposes
on the date scheduled, and if the accused fails to appear without justification on the date
of arraignment, accused waives the reading of the information and authorizes the court to
enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of the accused and to set the case for trial;
(b) To appear whenever required by the court where the case is pending; and
(c) To waive the right of the accused to be present at the trial, and upon failure of the
accused to appear without justification and despite due notice, the trial may proceed in
absentia.
RULE 15
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Section 1. Arraignment. - The court shall set the arraignment of the accused within fifteen (15)
days from the time it acquires jurisdiction over the accused, with notice to the public prosecutor
and offended party or concerned government agency that it will entertain plea-bargaining on the
date of the arraignment.
Section 2. Plea-bargaining. - On the scheduled date of arraignment, the court shall consider
plea-bargaining arrangements. Where the prosecution and offended party or concerned
government agency agree to the plea offered by the accused, the court shall:
(a) Issue an order which contains the plea-bargaining arrived at;
(b) Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case, if any; and
(c) Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including the civil liability for
damages.
RULE 16
PRE-TRIAL
Section 1. Setting of pre-trial conference. - After the arraignment, the court shall set the pre-trial
conference within thirty (30) days. It may refer the case to the branch clerk of court, if warranted,
for a preliminary conference to be set at least three (3) days prior to the pre-trial.
Section 2. Preliminary conference. - The preliminary conference shall be for the following
purposes:
(a) To assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case;
(b) To mark the documents to be presented as exhibits;
(c) To attach copies thereof to the records after comparison with the originals;
(d) To ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the genuineness
and due execution of documents marked as exhibits;
(e) To consider such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the case;
(f) To record the proceedings during the preliminary conference in the Minutes of
Preliminary Conference to be signed by the parties and counsel;
(g) To mark the affidavits of witnesses which shall be in question and answer form and
shall constitute the direct examination of the witnesses; and
(h) To attach the Minutes and marked exhibits to the case record before the pre-trial
proper. The parties or their counsel must submit to the branch clerk of court the names,
addresses and contact numbers of the affiants.
Section 3. Pre-trial duty of the judge. - During the pre-trial, the court shall:
(a) Place the parties and their counsels under oath;
(b) Adopt the minutes of the preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial proceedings,
confirm markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of documents, and list object and testimonial evidence;
(c) Scrutinize the information and the statements in the affidavits and other documents
which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation together with other
documents identified and marked as exhibits to determine further admissions of facts as
to:
i. The courts territorial jurisdiction relative to the offense(s) charged;
ii. Qualification of expert witnesses; and
iii. Amount of damages;
(d) Define factual and legal issues;
(e) Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates and adhere to the flow chart determined
by the court which shall contain the time frames for the different stages of the proceeding
up to promulgation of decision;
(f) Require the parties to submit to the branch clerk of court the names, addresses and
contact numbers of witnesses that need to be summoned by subpoena; and
(g) Consider modification of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes
a lawful defense.
Section 4. Manner of questioning. - All questions or statements must be directed to the court.
Section 5. Agreements or admissions. - All agreements or admissions made or entered during the
pre-trial conference shall be reduced in writing and signed by the accused and counsel;
otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused. The agreements covering the matters referred
to in Section 1, Rule 118 of the Rules of Court shall be approved by the court.
Section 6. Record of proceedings. - All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be recorded, the
transcripts prepared and the minutes signed by the parties or their counsels.
Section 7. Pre-trial order. - The court shall issue a pre-trial order within ten (10) days after the
termination of the pre-trial, setting forth the actions taken during the pre-trial conference, the
facts stipulated, the admissions made, evidence marked, the number of witnesses to be presented
and the schedule of trial. The order shall bind the parties and control the course of action during
the trial.
RULE 17
TRIAL
Section 1. Continuous trial. - The court shall endeavor to conduct continuous trial which shall
not exceed three (3) months from the date of the issuance of the pre-trial order.
Section 2. Affidavit in lieu of direct examination. - Affidavit in lieu of direct examination shall
be used, subject to cross-examination and the right to object to inadmissible portions of the
affidavit.
Section 3. Submission of memoranda. - The court may require the parties to submit their
respective memoranda and if possible, in electronic form, within a non-extendible period of
thirty (30) days from the date the case is submitted for decision.
With or without any memoranda filed, the court shall have a period of sixty (60) days to decide
the case counted from the last day of the 30-day period to file the memoranda.
Section 4. Disposition period. - The court shall dispose the case within a period of ten (10)
months from the date of arraignment.
Section 5. Pro bono lawyers. - If the accused cannot afford the services of counsel or there is no
available public attorney, the court shall require the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to provide
pro bono lawyers for the accused.
RULE 18
SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY
Section 1. Subsidiary liability. - In case of conviction of the accused and subsidiary liability is
allowed by law, the court may, by motion of the person entitled to recover under judgment,
enforce such subsidiary liability against a person or corporation subsidiary liable under Article
102 and Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code.
RULE 19
STRATEGIC LAWSUIT AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL CASES
Section 1. Motion to dismiss. - Upon the filing of an information in court and before
arraignment, the accused may file a motion to dismiss on the ground that the criminal action is a
SLAPP.
Section 2. Summary hearing. - The hearing on the defense of a SLAPP shall be summary in
nature. The parties must submit all the available evidence in support of their respective positions.
The party seeking the dismissal of the case must prove by substantial evidence that his acts for
the enforcement of environmental law is a legitimate action for the protection, preservation and
rehabilitation of the environment. The party filing the action assailed as a SLAPP shall prove by
preponderance of evidence that the action is not a SLAPP.
Section 3. Resolution. - The court shall grant the motion if the accused establishes in the
summary hearing that the criminal case has been filed with intent to harass, vex, exert undue
pressure or stifle any legal recourse that any person, institution or the government has taken or
may take in the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the environment or assertion of
environmental rights.
If the court denies the motion, the court shall immediately proceed with the arraignment of the
accused.
PART V
EVIDENCE
RULE 20
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
Section 1. Applicability. - When there is a lack of full scientific certainty in establishing a causal
link between human activity and environmental effect, the court shall apply the precautionary
principle in resolving the case before it.
The constitutional right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology shall be given the
benefit of the doubt.
Section 2. Standards for application. - In applying the precautionary principle, the following
factors, among others, may be considered: (1) threats to human life or health; (2) inequity to
present or future generations; or (3) prejudice to the environment without legal consideration of
the environmental rights of those affected.
RULE 21
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Section 1. Photographic, video and similar evidence. - Photographs, videos and similar evidence
of events, acts, transactions of wildlife, wildlife by-products or derivatives, forest products or
mineral resources subject of a case shall be admissible when authenticated by the person who
took the same, by some other person present when said evidence was taken, or by any other
person competent to testify on the accuracy thereof.
Section 2. Entries in official records. - Entries in official records made in the performance of his
duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a person in performance of a duty specially
enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
RULE 22
FINAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Effectivity. - These Rules shall take effect within fifteen (15) days following
publication once in a newspaper of general circulation.
Section 2. Application of the Rules of Court. - The Rules of Court shall apply in a suppletory
manner, except as otherwise provided herein.
SUB-COMMITTEE ON
THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES
Chairperson
CHIEF JUSTICE REYNATO S. PUNO
Members
JUSTICE PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
JUSTICE DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
JUSTICE LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
JUSTICE MA. ALICIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ (RET.)
COMMISSIONER MARY ANN LUCILLE L. SERING
JUDGE MYRNA LIM-VERANO
ATTY. ASIS G. PEREZ
Secretary
ATTY. ABEGAIL T. SZE
Asst. Secretary
ATTY. FERMIN NESTOR A. GADRINAB
Secretariat
ATTY. MARIA CAMILLE G. LANTION
JAMES CHRISTIAN A. BITANGA, ESQ.
MS. LIDA A. PILAPIL
MS. CLARITA T. ESCARDA

FIRST WRIT OF KALIKASAN PETITION
In the first ever case for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan, residents of Pasay and Makati are
seeking the dismantling of electricity transmission poles and lines near their houses.
The residents of Barangay 183 in Villamor, Pasay City and Magallanes Village in Makati City
filed their petition before the Court of Appeals, arguing that the erection of electricity poles
carrying 115-kilovolt transmission lines near their residences was cleared by their barangay
officials without consulting them and without studying the possible adverse effects of the lines to
their health.
The petitioners are citing scientific studies that have shown that the energy produced by the
electricity running through the lines will bring hazardous effects to the health and safety of the
people living nearby.
Atty. Harry Roque, counsel for the petitioners, said that the local government officials failed to
comply with the legal requirements in the construction and installation of these structures.
Under Article II, Section 15 and 16 of the Constitution, they have a duty to protect and promote
the right of the people to good health and balanced ecology, said Roque. He added that the
failure to conduct prior public consultation is a violation of Section 27 of the Local Government
Code.
As an injunctive measure, the petitioners have asked the Court of Appeals to issue a Temporary
Environmental Protection Order (TEPO), which is a feature introduced by the new Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases (AM No. 09-6-8-SC), under which their petition was filed. A
TEPO will prohibit the further installation of new poles and transmission lines while the case is
pending with the court.
AM No. 09-6-8-SC, which governs the issuance of the writ of kalikasan, was promulgated early
this year to hasten the resolution of environmental cases. #
HERES the text of the Petition:
Republic of the Philippines
COURT OF APPEALS
Manila
GEMMA C. DELA CRUZ, FIDEL E. AMOYO, VIOLETA M. CRUZ, ZENAIDA C.
MANGUNDAYAO, ANDRES M. COMIA, MARJORIE N. PABLO, MARIA TERESITA R.
CANON, JOEL JULIUS A. MARASIGAN, GINALYN V. CACALDA, BABY LYNN E.
TAGUPA, LYDIA B. RAYOS, JESUS R. PUENTE, JACINTO R. RICAPLAZA, ARMANDO
P. PADILLA, FLORENTINO MARTINEZ, MARIE AMELITA R. MICIANO, LYDIA R.
MICIANO, MA. LOURDES U. LACSON, JUAN CARLOS C. GAON, MA. BLEZIE C.
GAON, AUREA A. PARAS, REMEDIOS Z. MORENO, MARIA JUANA N. CARRION,
ALICIA K. KATIGBAK, JEDEDIA M. TUMALE, VICENTA M. MORALES, REYNALDO
G. MARQUEZ, MARIA LUISA V. GORDON, NOEMI M. GOMEZ, MARIA CHRISTINA D.
RIVERA, CATHERINE D. ROMERO-SALAS, MERCEDITA O. BELGADO, REV. FR.
EDWIN EUGENIO MERCADO, MA. CONCEPCION M. YABUT, REYNALDO Z.
SANTAYANA, ANGELO D. SULIT, ALFREDO A. GLORIA, JR., MICHAEL L. DE JESUS,
JUSTIN MARC CHIPECO, KAREN HAZEL GANZON and JIMMY FAMARANCO,
Petitioners,
- versus CA-G.R. SP. NO. ________________
(Petition for Writ of Kalikasan with prayer for Temporary Environmental Protection Order
[TEPO])
MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY (MERALCO), BARANGAY CHAIRMAN CESAR S.
TOLEDANES, in his capacity as Barangay Chairman of Barangay 183, Zone 20, Villamor,
Pasay City, BARANGAY COUNCIL OF BARANGAY 183, ZONE 20, VILLAMOR AIR
BASE, PASAY CITY, RUTH M. CORTEZ, RICARDO R. DIMAANO, LEONARDO A.
ABAD, NORMITA CASTILLO and AMANTE C. CACACHO, in their capacity as Members of
the Barangay Council of Barangay 183, Zone 20, Villamor, Pasay City and MANILA
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (MIAA),
Respondents.
xx
PETITION FOR WRIT OF KALIKASAN
WITH PRAYER FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION ORDER (TEPO)
Petitioners, through the undersigned counsel, and to this Honorable Court, respectfully state that:
PREFATORY STATEMENT
1. What use will modernization serve if it proves to be a scourge on an individuals fundamental
right, not just to health and safety, but, ostensibly, to life preservation itself, in all of its desired
quality?[1]
NATURE OF THE PETITION
2. This is a petition for the issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan, filed with this Honorable Court
pursuant to Rule 7 of A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC, otherwise known as the Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases, concerning as it is the violation of the constitutional rights of the residents
of the Cities of Pasay and Makati to a balanced and healthful ecology.
PARTIES
3. Petitioners are residents and inhabitants of Barangay 183-Villamor, Zone 20, Pasay City
andMagallanes Village, Makati City, all of legal age, Filipinos, with capacity to sue, and
residents of the following addresses, respectively:
Name
Address
GEMMA C. DELA CRUZ
40 Mata St. cor. Manlunas Extension, Barangay Villamor, Pasay City
FIDEL E. AMOYO
P 36-08 9th cor. 2nd Sts., Barangay Villamor, Pasay City
VIOLETA M. CRUZ
Barangay Villamor, Pasay City
ZENAIDA C. MANGUNDAYAO
F11 4th 21st St., Villamor Air Base,Pasay City
ANDRES M. COMIA
P36-10 9th St., Villamor Air Base,Pasay City
MARJORIE N. PABLO
B85 L9, 12-27th St., Villamor Air Base,Pasay City
MARIA TERESITA R. CANON
P-11-24 3rd St., Villamor Air Base,Pasay City
JOEL JULIUS A. MARASIGAN
U203 EAM Apratments 6th St., Villamor Air Base, Pasay City
GINALYN V. CACALDA
P57-05 17th St., Villamor Air Base,Pasay City
BABY LYNN E. TAGUPA
F1 4th St., Barangay Villamor, PasayCity
LYDIA B. RAYOS
P18-03 7th-12th St., AMs Village, Barangay Villamor, Pasay City
JESUS R. PUENTE
P35-09 9th St., Airmens Village, Barangay Villamor, Pasay City
JACINTO R. RICAPLAZA
Block 72 Lot 25, 17th St., Villamor Air Base, Pasay City
ARMANDO P. PADILLA
18 Sta. Rosa St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
FLORENTINO L. MARTINEZ
20 Magdalena Circle, MagallanesVillage, Makati City
MARIE AMELITA R. MICIANO
23 Humabon St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
LYDIA R. MICIANO
MA. LOURDES U. LACSON
JUAN CARLOS C. GAON
AA 428 Galeria de Magallanes,Magallanes Village, Makati City
MA. BLEZIE C. GAON
AA 428 Galeria de Magallanes,Magallanes Village, Makati City
AUREA G. PARAS
16 Encarnacion St., MagallanesVillage, Makati City
REMEDIOS Z. MORENO
14 Socorro St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
MARIA JUANA N. CARRION
AB 105 Galeria de Magallanes,Magallanes Village, Makati City
ALICIA K. KATIGBAK
35 Limasawa St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
JEDEDIA M. TUMALE
38 Trinidad St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
VICENTA M. MORALES
43 Magdalena St., MagallanesVillage, Makati City
REYNALDO G. MARQUEZ
B102 Galeria de Magallanes,Magallanes Village, Makati City
MARIA LUISA V. GORDON
60 San Gregorio St., MagallanesVillage, Makati City
NOEMI M. GOMEZ
MARIA CHRISTINA D. RIVERA
18 Homonhon St., MagallanesVillage, Makati City
CATHERINE D. ROMERO-SALAS
4 San Pablo St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
MERCEDITA O. BELGADO
REV. FR. EDWIN E. MERCADO
St. Alphonsus Mary de Ligouri Church, Humabon St., MagallanesVillage, Makati City
MA. CONCEPCION M. YABUT,
Magallanes Village, Makati City
REYNALDO Z. SANTAYANA,
20 Limasawa St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
ANGELO D. SULIT
37 Homonhon St., MagallanesVillage, Makati City
ALFREDO A. GLORIA, JR.
24 Mactan St., Magallanes Village,Makati City
MICHAEL L. DE JESUS
Asia Pacific College, Humabon St.,Magallanes Village, Makati City
JUSTIN MARC CHIPECO
KAREN HAZEL GANZON
JIMMY FAMARANCO
Magallanes Village, Makati City
Petitioners may be served with the orders, resolutions, notices and processes of this Honorable
Court through their counsel of record, Atty. H. Harry L. Roque, Jr., at Roque and Butuyan Law
Offices, 1904 Antel Corporate Centre, 121 Valero Street, Salcedo Village, 1227 Makati City,
Philippines.
4. Respondent MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY (MERALCO) is a domestic corporation
created and organized pursuant to the laws of the Republic of the Philippines with principal
office address atMERALCO Building, Ortigas Avenue, Pasig City, where it may be served with
summons and other processes of this Honorable Court.
5. Respondent BARANGAY CHAIRMAN CESAR S. TOLEDANES is the Barangay Chairman
of Bgy. 183, Zone 20, Villamor, Pasay City where he may be served with summons and other
processes of the Honorable Court.
6. Respondent BARANGAY COUNCIL OF BARANGAY 183, ZONE 20, VILLAMOR,
PASAYCITY, composed of:
a. Respondent RUTH M. CORTEZ, of legal age, Filipino;
b. Respondent RICARDO R. DIMAANO, of legal age, Filipino;
c. Respondent LEONARDO A. ABAD, of legal age, Filipino;
d. Respondent NORMITA CASTILLO, of legal age, Filipino; and
e. Respondent AMANTE C. CACACHO, of legal age, Filipino,
are holding office at the Barangay Hall of Barangay 183 located at Barangay 183, Zone 20,
Villamor, PasayCity, where they may be served with summons and other processes of this
Honorable Court.
7. Respondent MANILA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (MIAA) is a
government agency created and organized pursuant to the laws of the Republic of the
Philippines, vested with the power to administer and operate the Ninoy Aquino International
Airport III (NAIA 3), and with principal office address at MIAA Administration Building, NAIA
Complex Pasay City, where it may be served with summons and other processes of the
Honorable Court.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
8. Barangay 183 Zone 20, Villamor, Pasay City (hereinafter referred to as Barangay 183, for
brevity) used to be part of the Villamor Air Base. It was thereafter converted into a private
residential land pursuant to Republic Act No. 7227, otherwise known as An Act Accelerating
the Conversion of Military Reservations Into Other Productive Uses, Creating the Bases
Conversion And Development Authority For This Purpose, Providing Funds Therefor And For
Other Purposes. As such, the said parcel of land was subdivided and afterwards sold and
awarded to its inhabitants, including herein Petitioners.
9. Magallanes Village (hereinafter referred to as Magallanes Village, for brevity) is a
residential area located in Makati City adjacent to Barangay 183.
10. The Petitioners are existing residents and inhabitants of Barangay 183 and Magallanes
Village. Some of them have likewise established their respective businesses and livelihood
therein.
11. On 13 July 2009, without the prior authority from and approval by Respondent Barangay
Council of Barangay 183, Zone 20, Villamor Air Base, Pasay City (hereinafter referred to as
Respondent Barangay Council) and without the prior consultation with the constituents of the
barangay, Respondent Barangay Chairman Cesar S. Toledanes (hereinafter referred to as
Respondent Toledanes) issued a Barangay Working Permit Clearance for the installation of
115 KV sub-transmission lines and poles at the10th and 12th Streets of Barangay 183.[2]
12. Belatedly, however, on 02 September 2009, Respondent Barangay Council, composed of
Respondents Cesar Toledanes, Ruth Cortez, Ricardo Dimaano, Leonardo Abad, Normita Castillo
and Amante C. Cacho, passed Barangay Resolution No. 40-S-2009, authorizing Respondent
Toledanes to issue a Barangay Permit authorizing respondent MERALCO to install high voltage
power lines and poles at the 10thand 27th Streets of Barangay 183.[3] Similar to the Working
Permit Clearance issued, Barangay Resolution No. 40-S-2009 was issued without a prior
consultation with the constituents of the barangay.
13. Also, despite the close proximity of the installation of the high tension wires and poles to the
nearby Magallanes Village in Makati City, the residents and inhabitants of the same were not
notified or consulted with respect to such plans.
14. Thus, sometime in August 2010, Respondent MERALCO began erecting towering posts
along the 10th, 12th and 27th streets of Barangay 183 and lining the perimeter wall between
Barangay 183 andMagallanes Village.[4] The thirty (30) foot-high poles will hold the
transmission lines that will supply more or less one hundred fifteen (115) Kilovolts (KV) of
electricity to the Ninoy Aquino International Airport III (NAIA 3).
15. Petitioners were not informed that Respondent MERALCO was going to erect such posts in
Barangay 183 either by Respondent MERALCO, Respondent MIAA, who administers and
operates the Ninoy Aquino International Airport III (NAIA 3), and Respondents Toledanes, Ruth
Cortez, Ricardo Dimaano, Leonardo Abad, Normita Castillo and Amante C. Cacacho, who are
the barangay officials of Barangay 183. As such, Petitioners were surprised to find out
Respondent MERALCO had already begun erecting the said posts without their knowledge and
without public discussion.
16. The high tension transmission lines shall traverse the entire 10th and 12th streets of Bgy.
183, and shall pass along the concrete wall separating Barangay 183 of Pasay City and
Magallanes Village of Makati City.
17. On 18 October 2010, Petitioner Gemma dela Cruz, on behalf of the other Petitioners, sent a
letter to Respondents Toledanes, Cortez, Dimaano, Abad, Castillo and Cacacho, appealing for
the recall of the Barangay Working Permit and Resolution No. 40-S-2009 earlier issued by
them.[5] This, however, proved futile.
18. The alarming presence of the towering posts being erected in close proximity tothat is, as
near as one (1) meter fromthe respective properties of Petitioners-Residents of Bgy. 183 and
less than ten (10) meters from the respective properties of Petitioners-Residents of Magallanes
Village, and the hazardous effects of the high tension wires to their health and safety, bring
Petitioners to seek the intervention of this Honorable Court.
19. Due to the urgency of the situation, as the installation and energizing of the high tension
wires will be completed by December 2010, there is a need to protect the Petitioners from the
hazardous and ill effects of the same.
GROUNDS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF THE PETITION
I -
THE INSTALLATION OF THE HIGH TENSION WIRES POSES DANGER TO THE LIVES,
HEALTH AND PROPERTY OF THE RESIDENTS OF BARANGAY 183, PASAY CITY
AND MAGALLANES VILLAGE, MAKATI CITY, INCLUDING HEREIN PETITIONERS;
- II -
THE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE THAT WILL BE CAUSED BY THE INSTALLATION
OF SAID HIGH TENSION WIRES WILL AFFECT THE RESIDENTS OF BARANGAY 183,
PASAY CITY ANDMAGALLANES VILLAGE, MAKATI CITY;
- III -
THE INSTALLATION OF THE SAID HIGH TENSION WIRES VIOLATES PETITIONERS
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A BALANCED AND HEALTHFUL ECOLOGY AS WELL
AS ESTABLISHED ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS.
- IV -
THE ISSUANCE OF THE BARANGAY WORKING PERMIT CLEARANCE AND
RESOLUTION NO. 40-S-2009 WAS TAINTED WITH IRREGULARITIES
- V -
THERE IS ANOTHER SUITABLE AND SAFER ROUTE FOR RESPONDENT MERALCOS
POWER TRANSMISSION PROJECT
DISCUSSION
I- THE INSTALLATION OF THE HIGH TENSION WIRES POSES DANGER TO THE
LIVES, HEALTH AND PROPERTY OF THE RESIDENTS OF BARANGAY 183, PASAY
CITY AND MAGALLANESVILLAGE, MAKATI CITY, INCLUDING HEREIN
PETITIONERS
================================
20. Scientific studies and research have revealed that there are health risks involved in prolonged
exposure to electromagnetic field or radiation. The risks include cancer, leukemia in children,
Alzheimers disease, depression, miscarriages, headaches, memory loss and insomnia, to name a
few.[6]
21. Alasdair and Jean Philips, in their book, The Powerwatch Handbook, published in 2006,
noted that there are links between disease such as leukaemia and electromagnetic fields
(EMFs) and cites several instances of such, thus:
In Abergavenny, in Wales, 4 neighbors living near powerlines developed brain tumours over a
period of 18 months.
In the 8 houses closest to powerlines in Kilmarnock, Scotland, 9 people have died of cancer over
the last 15 years.
In Dalmally, also in Scotland, in a small estate of 36 houses under a 275,000-volt powerline, 8
people died of cancer in 5 years, and 3 of motor neurone disease (MND).
A street in Exeter, Devon, where a 132,000-volt electricity pylon looms outside the homes of
some of the residents has been dubbed Death Road. In 28 houses, 23 people havedied from
heart disease or cancer. In fact, the number of cancer deaths on the road is five times higher than
the norm for Devon and Cornwall. Residents also complain of depression, headaches and
memory loss.
x x x x x x x x x
In 1989, the Studholme family bought a bungalow in Great Manchester. An electricity meter in a
cupboard in the hallway emitted a strong electromagnetic field through the wall into the front
bedroom. Their son Simon slept with his head less than a yard from this meter. He started to
complain of pains, but the doctors found nothing wrong. Within 18 months he had developed
acute lymphatic leukaemia. He died in 1992 at the age of 13. Subsequent tests revealed that
Simon had been sleeping in an electromagnetic field over 2.5 microtesla (a measurement of
electromagnetic field strength), more than sixty times the average exposure level in UK homes. x
x x[7]
22. Moreover, there are also a good number of evidence that electromagnetic fields play a role
not only in the development of brain and breast cancers but also of Alzheimers disease,
depression and suicide, ALS or the Lou Gehrigs disease which is a form of motor-neurone
disease, incidents of miscarriages, and the development of the condition, known variously as
electrosensitivity or electromagnetic hypersensitivity.[8]
23. Another concern that should be raised is the inevitable devaluation of the properties exposed
to these high powered transmission lines. Because of their close proximity to the properties of
Petitioners, the high voltage transmission lines would certainly restrict the height of the
buildings, houses and structures that could be built on Petitioners properties. The presence itself
of these gigantic steel posts, with huge cables strung to them, towering over Petitioners
properties would surely scare away prospective buyers in case Petitioners decide to sell their
properties. Undoubtedly, these circumstances mean a diminution of the value of their properties
and loss of possible income and business opportunities.
24. Also, these high tension transmission lines shall transmit one hundred fifteen (115) Kilovolts
of electricity to NAIA 3. However, the actual voltage may turn out to be higher considering the
thirty (30) Megavolt (or 30,000 Kilovolt) requirement for the full operation of the NAIA 3. This
increased electric currents passing through these high tension transmission lines would
concomitantly result in the increased risk that the Petitioners and the other inhabitants of
Barangay 183 and Magallanes Village are faced with.
25. Granting that the voltage that would be transmitted by these powerlines is only equivalent to
115KV, still the required distance for the electromagnetic field level to be within safe limits is
around eighty seven (87) meters away.[9] In the instant case, the high tension transmission lines
being erected by Respondent MERALCO are being constructed within a distance of less than
one (1) meter from the houses and properties of the Petitioners-residents of Barangay 183 and
less than ten (10) meters from the houses and properties of Petitioners-residents of Magallanes
Village. Worse, there are two rows of these MERALCO posts holding the high tension wires and
they are installed within close distance from each other, flanking residential houses, which will
unfortunately absorb the concentrated EMFs that will be emitted by the transmission lines from
both sides.
26. Sadly, if this kind of power transmission project is not immediately aborted, Barangay 183
and Magallanes Village, will one day have their own versions of the so-called death roads with
their inhabitants as the guinea pigs in this great electro-magnetic experiment.[10]
27. The health risks linked to exposure to electromagnetic fields were raised by the residents
ofDasmarias Village, Makati as their battlecry in seeking an injunctive relief against the Power
Transmission Project of the National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR) within the said Village in
the case of Eduardo F. Hernandez, et al. v. National Power Corporation.[11]
28. In the aforementioned case, NAPOCORs 230 Kilovolt Sucat-Araneta-Balintawak Power
Transmission Project was supposed to pass through the Sergio Osmea, Sr. Highway (South
Superhighway), the perimeter of Fort Bonifacio, and Dasmarias Village proximate to Tamarind
Road, where the Dasmarias villagers homes are. Recognizing the health and safety risks posed
by the high voltage transmission lines, the Supreme Court enjoined the NAPOCOR from further
preparing and installing high voltage cables to the steel pylons erected near the villagers homes
and from energizing and transmitting high voltage electric current through said cables.
29. Living up to its reputation as the ultimate guardian and defender of the rights of the people,
the Supreme Court, in all its wisdom and good judgment, declared:
In the present case, the far-reaching irreversible effects to human safety should be the
primordial concern over presumed economic benefits per se as alleged by the NAPOCOR.[12]
(emphasis, supplied)
30. In another case, the Supreme Court even observed that construction of residential structures
in areas where there are high tension transmission lines, was declared to be unsafe and
prohibited. Said the Supreme Court
It is not safely habitable. It is built in a subdivision area where there is an existing 30-meter
right of way of the Manila Electric Company (Meralco) with high-tension wires over the
property, posing a danger to life and property. The construction of houses underneath the high
tension wires is prohibited as hazardous to life and property because the line carries 115,000
volts of electricity, generates tremendous static electricity and produces electric sparks whenever
it rained.[13] (Emphasis supplied.)
31. If because of the danger and hazard that high tension transmission lines pose, construction of
residential houses is prohibited in areas where said transmission lines exist, then why allow the
same hazardous transmission lines to be installed in established residential areas? Clearly, for
health and safety reasons, high-voltage transmission lines and residential areas should never co-
exist in the same place. By logical inference, high voltage transmission lines, which are
hazardous to life and property, should be prohibited and should never be allowed in residential
areas, especially in densely populated ones like the herein residences of Petitioners.
32. These health hazards linked to exposure to EMFs are not the only matters which cause alarm
to the Petitioners.
33. Some of the posts which will carry the tremendous amount of electricity have not been
erected properly. Thus, some of the posts are tilting in an apparently unstable position.[14] Thus,
not only are the lives, health and property of the residents of Barangay 183 and Magallanes
Village at risk of EMF radiation but also run the risk of being physically tumbled upon should
these unstable and tilting posts give way.
34. Moreover, most if not all of the said posts erected by Respondent MERALCO encroach into
the drainage canals of Barangay 183.[15] In case of heavy rains and typhoons, dangers of
flooding will have to be expected in Barangay 183 which will certainly affect adjacent areas,
including Magallanes Village. As a matter of fact, some areas of Barangay 183 which do not
usually experience flooding caused by moderate rainfall are now experiencing slight inundation
in their area.
35. By way of example, attached herewith as Annex E to E-1, are photographs of the effects
of Typhoon Ondoy in Barangay 183.
II- THE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE THAT WILL BE CAUSED BY THE
INSTALLATION OF SAID HIGH TENSION WIRES WILL AFFECT THE RESIDENTS OF
BARANGAY 183, PASAY CITY ANDMAGALLANES VILLAGE, MAKATI CITY
================================
36. Considering the high voltage that will run through the subject high tension wires, the
environmental damage is expected to have adverse effects to the inhabitants of two (2) cities,
Barangay 183 of Pasay City and Magallanes Village of Makati City. The construction of these
posts by Respondent MERALCO transcends the boundaries of Barangay 183 in Pasay City and
extends to Magallanes Village of Makati City. Presently, a 115KV a couple of electricity pylons
have already been constructed very near the wall separating the two cities.[16] The distance
separating these posts and the residential area of MagallanesVillage is only about four (4) to five
(5) meters, which undoubtedly does not comply with the safe-distance requirement of at least 87
meters.
III- THE INSTALLATION OF SAID HIGH TENSION WIRES VIOLATES PETITIONERS
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A BALANCED AND HEALTHFUL ECOLOGY AS WELL
AS ESTABLISHED ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS
================================
37. As shown hereinabove, the implementation of Respondent MERALCOs project violates
Petitioners right to health as enshrined in Section 15, Article II of the 1987 Constitution, viz.:
ARTICLE II
Declaration of Principles and State Policies
Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill
health consciousness among them. (Emphasis supplied.)
38. In the same manner, Presidential Decree No. 856, otherwise known as the Code of Sanitation
of the Philippines, categorically prohibits the installation of high tension transmission lines in
residential areas. Its Implementing Rules, issued on 16 April 1998, in fact, provides in no
uncertain terms that
7.3 Electric and Electronic Industries
7.3.1 High-tension transmission lines shall never pass overhead or underground ofresidential
areas. (emphasis, added)
39. P.D. No. 856 is cited in the recent Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases (A.M. No.
09-6-8-SC), promulgated on 29 April 2010, as one of the bases for filing cases involving
enforcement or violations of environmental and other related laws, rules and regulations. On the
basis of the above-quoted implementing rules of P.D. No. 856 alone, it follows that the
implementiation of Respondent MERALCOs high power transmission project in Barangay 183,
a residential area, is illegal and should never be allowed.
40. Also, the fact that these MERALCO posts obstruct the drainage system of Barangay 183, is a
clear violation of Commonwealth Act No. 548 otherwise known as the Regulation and Control
of the Use of and Traffic on National Roads and Constructions, which effectively provides that
SECTION 2. It shall be unlawful for any person to convert any part of any national road to his
private use or in any manner to obstruct or damage the same or any bridge, culvert, drainage
ditch, road sign, or other appurtenance pertaining thereto. (Emphasis supplied.)
41. Finally, as mentioned above, the distances alone at which these high tension transmission
lines and posts are being constructed alongside the properties and homes of Petitioners and the
inhabitants of Barangay 183 and Magallanes Village, do not pass the standards required therefor.
Thus, the high tension transmission lines being erected by Respondent MERALCO are being
constructed within a distance of less than one (1) meter from the houses and properties of the
residents of said barangay contrary to the required distance for the electromagnetic field level to
be within safe limits, which is around eighty seven (87) meters.
IV- THE ISSUANCE OF THE BARANGAY WORKING PERMIT CLEARANCE AND
RESOLUTION NO. 40-S-2009 WAS TAINTED WITH IRREGULARITIES
===========================
42. Section 27 of the Local Government Code[17] was also breached when Respondent
MERALCO and Respondent MIAA failed to comply with the requirements of prior consultation
with the residents of Barangay 183 and Magallanes Village as regards the implementation of its
project. As held in the similar case of Hernadez, et. al. vs. NAPOCOR (supra.)
To boot, petitioners, moreover, harp on respondents failure to conduct prior consultation with
them, as the community affected by the project, in stark violation of Section 27 of the Local
Government Code which provides: no project or program shall be implemented by government
authorities unless the consultations mentioned are complied with, and prior approval of the
Sanggunian concerned is observed.
x x x x x x x x x
Moreover, the Local Government Code, requires conference with the affected communities of a
government project. NAPOCOR, palpably, made a shortcut to this requirement. In fact, there
appears a lack of exhaustive feasibility studies on NAPOCORs part before making a go with the
project on hand; otherwise, it should have anticipated the legal labyrinth it is now caught in.
43. In the same vein, the Barangay Working Permit Clearance issued by Respondent Toledanes
to Respondent MERALCO obviously suffers from patent irregularities.
44. First, the Barangay Working Permit Clearance was issued without the authority of the
Respondent Barangay Council. The Respondent Barangay Council only approved Barangay
Resolution No. 40-S-2009 on 02 September 2009 while the Barangay Working Permit was
issued on 13 July 2009.
45. Second, the Working Permit issued by Respondent Toledanes allowed the installation of the
high voltage wires power lines and poles at the 10th and 12th Streets of Barangay 183, while the
Resolution of the Respondent Barangay Council only authorized the construction of power lines
along 10th and 27thStreets, excluding 12th St.
46. Indubitably, Respondent Toledanes, in a series of meetings requested by Petitioners, admitted
that he and the Respondent Barangay Council did not conduct any consultation with the affected
constituents before they issued the subject permit. Thus, the Barangay Working Permit which
actually gave life to the power transmission project of MERALCO should be struck down as
illegal, issued in grave abuse of discretion and in excess of or without authority on the part of
Respondent Toledanes.
V- THERE IS ANOTHER SUITABLE AND SAFER ROUTE FOR RESPONDENT
MERALCOS POWER TRANSMISSION PROJECT.
================================
47. Respondent MERALCO may very well install the subject transmission lines along Sales
Street, Villamor Air Base, Pasay City, where there are no residential houses or buildings and
which provides a shorter distance from Respondent MERALCOs source of electricity as
compared to the circuitous route along the 10th and 12th Streets of Barangay 183.
48. Thus, it makes no sense that the said high tension transmission lines are being erected in an
inhabited and populous area, endangering the lives of the people therein, when it may be erected
in an alternative location, which would result in a negligible effect on the Petitioners and the
inhabitants of Barangay 183 and Magallanes Village.
ALLEGATIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ORDER (TEPO)
49. For reference, Petitioners replead all the foregoing allegations in support of their prayer for a
Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO);
50. The foregoing allegations undoubtedly demonstrate Petitioners clear and unmistakable right
to a healthful ecology and to be protected against any unlawful acts involving environmental
damage that tend to endanger their life, health and property;
51. Respondents MERALCO and MIAA are poised to continue with and complete the
installation of the high tension wires along the entire stretch of 10th, 12th and 27th of Barangay
183 the soonest time possible as in fact Respondent MERALCO has been working almost
twenty-four (24) hours within the said areas of Barangay 183 to hasten the completion of the acts
complained of;
52. The acts complained of, aside from being unconstitutional, illegal and contrary to established
environmental rules and regulations, are clearly in violation of the foregoing rights of the
Petitioners;
53. The matter is thus of extreme urgency that, unless immediately restrained, will inevitably
cause damage to the environment, the inhabitants of Magallanes Village of Makati City and of
Barangay 183, Zone 20, Villamor of Pasay City, including the herein Petitioners who will all
suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury;
54. If not curtailed, the continuous commission by the Respondents of the acts complained of
might also render the final judgment granting the reliefs sought in the instant petition ineffectual.
55. An Affidavit of Merit in support of Petitioners application for the issuance of a Temporary
Environmental Protection Order is hereto attached as Annex F.
EPILOGUE
56. Progress is desirable. The operation of the NAIA represents economic advancement. It
promises convenience to international travelers. A way to attract foreign investors and bring
more income for the government. The purpose is admirable, but to attain it at all costs, even at
the expense of lives and well-being of people, for whom the desired economic development is
intended in the first place, is unacceptable if not immoral. For then, the way of accomplishing it
altogether defeats its purpose. Economic gain has never been more important than a persons
right to life and well-being.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of the Honorable Court that:
1. Immediately upon the filing of this petition, a Temporary Environmental Protection Order
(TEPO) and or a Writ of Kalikasan be issued, ordering Respondents and any person acting on
their behalf, to cease and desist from conducting excavation works, installing poles and
transmission lines along the entire stretch of 10th, 12th and 27th Streets of Barangay 183, Zone
20, Villamor, Pasay City and from energizing and transmitting high voltage electric current
through the said powerlines.
2. After a summary hearing, issue a Resolution, extending the effectivity of the TEPO until the
termination of this case; and
3. After due proceedings, a Decision be rendered
(a) Making the TEPO and/or Writ of Kalikasan permanent, directing Respondents and any
person acting on their behalf, to cease and desist from conducting excavation works, installing
poles and transmission lines along the entire stretch of 10th, 12th and 27th Streets of Barangay
183, Zone 20, Villamor, Pasay City and from energizing and transmitting high voltage electric
current through the said powerlines;
(b) Nullifying the Barangay Working Permit Clearance dated 13 July 2009 issued by Barangay
183 Respondent Chairman Cesar S. Toledanes in favor of Respondent MERALCO, for being
unconstitutional, illegal and for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction or authority;
(c) Nullifying Resolution No. 40, S-2009 date 2 September 2009 issued by the Barangay Council
of Barangay 183, authorizing its Respondent Barangay Chairman Cesar S. Toledanes, to issue a
clearance/permit to Respondent MERALCO to construct/install the high tension transmission
lines that will traverse the entire stretch of 10th and 27th Streets, for being unconstitutional,
illegal and for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction or authority; and
(d) Directing the Respondents MIAA and MERALCO to remove or cause the removal of the
installed MERALCO posts and transmission lines along 10th, 12th and 27th Streets of Barangay
183, Zone 20, Villamor, Pasay City, at the expense of said Respondents.
Petitioners pray for such other reliefs as are just and equitable under the premises.
Makati City for the City of Manila, 11 November 2010.

Writ of Kalikasan & First Writ of Kalikasan Against Meralco

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writ of Kalikasan & First Writ of Kalikasan Against Meralco

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writ of Kalikasan & First Writ of Kalikasan Against Meralco

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

You might also like