Asian Judges Symposium on Environmental Decision-

Making

July 28-29, 2010, Asian Development Bank

Session 13: Asian Judges and the Environment: Capacity

Needs and Potential for a Network?

Talking Points - Chief Justice Renato Corona:

 Judicial institutions around the world are taking a

more proactive role in addressing environmental
issues, while the concept of environmental justice
steadily progresses.

 Due to this unified goal, there is great willingness to

create a regional network of judicial institutions for
capacity-building of its judges and officers, especially
since we share similar concerns and threats, the
elements of which are at times borderless and difficult
to address.

 The foundation for the further exchange of knowledge

is already established, as evident in:

o The Influence of Case Law or Jurisprudence

 Philippine jurisprudence has, for example,

provided a framework for the litigation and
enforcement of basic environmental rights.
In the famous Oposa v. Factoran1, the Court

1
224 SCRA 792 (1993).
 2

recognized the standing of representatives of

minors and generations yet unborn, who
sought the cancellation and non-issuance of
Timber License Agreements.

 On the other hand, Indian case law,

specifically M.C. Mehta v. Union of India2,
provided inspiration for the Philippine
Supreme Court to adopt the doctrine of
continuing mandamus in MMDA v.
Concerned Residents of Manila Bay , in order
3

to see through the complete execution of the

Court’s ruling by ordering and monitoring
government agencies to clean up our Manila
Bay. In furtherance of this, the Court
established the Manila Bay Advisory
Committee chaired by Justice Presbitero
Velasco, Jr., the ponente of the Manila Bay
decision.

o The Adoption of Best Practices

 Writ of Continuing Mandamus – Earlier this

year, the Philippine Supreme Court
promulgated the Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases. One of the innovative
features of these Rules is the Writ of
Continuing Mandamus, which is an offshoot
of the Manila Bay case, and as mentioned
earlier, the M.C. Mehta case of India.

2
4 SC 463 (1987).
3
574 SCRA 661 (2008).
 3

 Writ of Kalikasan – The Environmental Rules

also provide for an original, innovative
remedy in the form of the writ of kalikasan.
We hope that it would serve as a model for
other jurisdictions that are also looking to
address the complexities and delays
associated with environmental litigation.

 Other Foreign Best Practices – The

Environmental Rules have also adopted
foreign concepts to further facilitate the
environmental case, such as provisions
prohibiting Strategic Lawsuits Against Public
Participation, or SLAPP, and incorporation of
Precautionary Principle into our rules on
evidence for environmental cases where there
is a lack of scientific certainty between the
alleged activity and environmental harm. The
precautionary principle has been adopted as
a doctrine by many jurisdictions, whereas the
Philippine Supreme Court has directly
applied it in the Environmental Rules.

o Other avenues of exchange, such as judicial

education and other programs – Our Philippine
Judicial Academy has not only been very active in
educating our judges and court officers, but have
also facilitated and hosted programs and events
involving foreign experts, judicial officers and
academicians. We look to optimize PHILJA’s
broad-reaching capabilities in order to create
more knowledge exchange involving
environmental rights and the role of courts.
 4

 The issue of environmental justice involves several

stakeholders from different sectors. Thus, we can
leverage off the synergy created by the interaction
between the civil sector, other government agencies
and academe among others with regard to these
environmental issues. The knowledge from members
of other sectors about the on-the-ground realities of
environmental problems is valuable. Moreover,
international organizations and regional institutions
such as the ADB have played a significant role in
providing a venue for knowledge exchange.