AAR LOOK DOCTRINE All clefsnle ists ice) enti lser erg) ey folie) [ou fovide a detailed environmental Statement (EIS). tS Should carefully check every EIS for oOmpleteness of information and detail, = soundness of analysis, thorough discussion of alternatives, and disclosure of sourcesProperty which belongs to all generations and therefore cannot be sold, disposed or destroyed.** 78. Allowing mineral tenements into their ancestral domain will, as @ necessary consequence destroy these places to the utter prejudice of future generations of Subanens. 79. Thus, whatever consent that was given by petitioner Subanens pseudo leaders must be deemed illegal for transgressing the preceding principle of inter- generational equity of IPs. 80. These NCIP certifications dangled by mining companies in these subject areas are invalid for these were issued by their pseudo leaders in direct contravention to their responsibility to maintain the ecological balance of their ancestral domain by protecting the flora and fauna, the watershed areas and other reserves therein.” VI. Respondents breached the Environmental Law Principle on Carrying Capacity Granthaminstitute > faqs.“g cave ie unquain at tea de ut bug hare trough tor pret, larg tae een peat n {irene apart he Sacrry of to ‘parmant at Env and Neu Resouces, Seeettigeeme eee ee Seeenteanenceat acca aioe satey sees nn bo eouima ments ere Sires ees Repeat Seb heceereere mean penne eae, Siaieahetehantaaeren ie ir have te aga stain te he abe? ‘Yes. The Supreme Coutn granting he pttin ruled Shced onthe caren of ergerarcoal {nod man coigeon's pose at ater ‘ecagod opal strange oso” Beha fate emt ous i aes theplxpower te sine te noes of ule Relevance ‘The cat of Oposa we Faetoran has bean wy ns wot re cenept of rgoerabona! ‘pny fray nce ae spy + pose vs Factorn's conceot ot ‘Steet sry na cnt na + Tho UntogNatons Envonmental Pregame LUNE) omar Opoua vs Faetoran's [Sr cage nc tna + Inte book Put Heat Law ag hes by {amy 6: Gotin, pose ve Factram tas Ssafcan expe oe jsbssy one ‘gnttbeatn = + Ietsbook The Low of grey Sustains ‘Bevan! by tha WEN Acar of Eraronmenal am Resoney Sao ty ‘ics Opose vs Factoron ss bass aseing {hate rato broabe portfolio ‘pos eta vFulgenco 8, Factoran J. etal (GR Wo. toss) Nature a te ase Gear mstatacentin re eho et ere Eee meee mee Schoneisemmocmeaes ieee gat Sn Fon No Summary ‘Sarpretsagnt he Deprun of acne nd Nault Resourses cao exing mba fosge Zjeoreres ha courry anda np ussane aw ‘Shen tae camaa atthe esa Stores ond ‘ges a bloncrd and hen cay ana heath (Sesione tara 18 hrc oft Coen)” The ing forte patna. ne Cout aed at ever ugh the igh i suse an nel ony Ur ne Galeton of rcp and Si Porc of tet that sss eon ana fe ahs Srumertedn no lator ft coco nnng es an Seiipeseraton an atiepetioon ae Scvancorat of whch moy ever bo et prod a ovement and constsons Te ati ner ‘fecanmonal itt tghaath, haart ‘irehsaraloed' wt ore ar uaa srircosbe” imposes he clare cy orokan {les st oor href tor generation ano Irtte esound enivoment cores, athe se Ste peraceanes ef bat atlas io are ba ronson oat gh fre genes cone, Signincance ofthe case This ase has been widely-cited in jurisprudence werd, pails in cases lating to foresttibarcensing. However, the approach of the Pippin Supreme Coot to ceonomi, soil ated calal ight has proved somevhat Inconsistent, with some judgments resting inthe nforcement of uch ighs (eg Dol Rosario Bangzo, 80 SCRA 821 (1989) Mam Prine Mot! \ Goverment Sence Isurance Stam, GR No 122156 (3 February, 1997) bata est one stance inwhich he Cour made statement that economic, Social and cultural rights ar not real ahs se, ‘pte Sinan v Carman an Maran gt, GR. No 100150, § Janey 1999),grounds 1. Plaintiffs have no cause of action against him; 2. The issues raised by the plaintiffs is a political question which properly pertains to the legislative or executive branches of the government. ISSUE: Do the petitioner-minors have a cause of action in filing a class suit to “prevent the misappropriation or impairment of Philippine rainforests: HELD: Yes. Petitioner-minors assert that they represent their generation as well as generations to come. The Supreme Court ruled that they can, for themselves, for others of their generation, and for the succeeding generation, file a class suit. Their personality to sue in behalf of succeeding generations is based on balanced and healthful ecology is eoncerned. Such a right considers the “rhythm and Harmony ofa TMaEpensably include, inter alia, the judicious disposition, utilization, management, renewal and conservation of the country’s forest, mineral, land, waters, fisheries, wildlife, offshore areas and other natural resources to the end that their exploration, development, and utilization be equitably accessible to the present as well as the future generations. Needless to say, every generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology. Put a little differently, the minor's assertion of their right to a sound environment constitutes at the same time, the performance of their obligation to ensure the protection of that right for the generations to come. at 7:34 AM M EO) co Labels: case digest, Constitutional Law, GR No, 101083, Intergenerational Responsibility, Natural Resources and Environmental Laws, Oposa vs Factoran No comments:Ee + Pollination + Waste assimilation + Nutrient recycling + Flood control Note: These services are used by or given to industries for free. But if quantified, the value is about 33 trillion US dollars!7 1. Formulate solid waste management program consistent with city/municipality SWM plan | 2. Responsible for the collection, segregation, _ recycling of biodegradable, recyclable, compostable and reusable wastes : 3. Establish materials recovery facilityECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS Regulation of atmospheric chemical composition. Regulation of global temperature, precipitation, and other biologically mediated climatic processes at global, regional, or local levels. Capacitance, damping and integrity of ecosystem response to environmental fluctuations. Regulation of hydrological flows. Storage and retention of water. Retention of soil within an ecosystem. Soil formation processes. ‘ion of nutrients. Storage, internal cycling, processing, and acquisi Recovery of mobile nutrients and removal or breakdown of excess or xenic nutrients and compounds. Movement of floral gametes. Trophic-dynamic regulations of populations. Habitat for resident and transient populations, That portion of gross primary production extractable as food. That portion of gross primary production extractable as raw materials. Sources of unique biological materials and products. Providing opportunities for recreational activities. Providing opportunities for non-commercial uses.Instead, this right allows otherkind to work out their own interactions and adaptations without unwarranted human protections and interventions. It includes the right to be free in natural settings, without unjustified domestica- tion or captivity. It implies the acceptance of nature’s wild, chaotic order, without moralistic diatribes against brutal carnivores or taming initiatives to organize ecosystems into kinder and gentler orders. The moral role of humans is not to protect otherkind from their natural foes, but rather to defend them from injustices, of which humans are the only perpetrators.” (2) The right to healthy and whole habitats. Habitats are the structures of existence in which species and their members can realize good for their kind and perform their ecosystemic functions for the ecological common good. The preservation of healthy habitats is generally the mnoct effective meane of nromotine the good of otherkind. because habitatsnti dll ci cians ic i es a ae roe a nonhuman. We cannot respect the rights of individuals and species without protecting their ecosystems. A rights view must think holistically and relationally. Indeed, ecosystemic responsibility is, in effect, respect for the rights of all creatures in ecosystemic interactions, as integrated wholes. At this point, a rights ethic most clearly intersects with a land ethic.” (3) The right to reproduce their own kind without chemical, radioactive, or bioengineered distortions. Genetic reproduction is the sine qua rion BF species’ preservation, and should be protected from the human community. The defense of biodiversity includes, for example, public regulation of biotechnology and the prevention of ozone depletion. (A) The right to fulfill their evolutionary potential with freedom from Iuman-induced extinctions. Extinctions occur naturally in the evolutionary process, but human-induced extinctions are an injustice. Extinctions are serious because they not only end regenerative potential, but also preclude new evolutionary emergences. (8) The right to freedom from human cruelty, flagrant abuse, or frivolous use. ‘This right suggests formal moral protection from blood-sports and wasteful consumption. It implies the ecological virtue of frugality. This right recognizes that kindness and gentleness to otherkind are not only matters of benevolence but also of justice. (©) The right to the restoration, through managerial interventions, of a semblance of the natural conditions disrupted by human abuse.* ‘Under optimum conditions of wildness, it is best to adopt a laissez faire ‘eeatnae: ty lek santas tiles les cena Wick Can tablets lait Ol tenaBF AEE ANGE DE JON SHALE CY He gO0as necessary for the sustatnabiity of one’s species. Distributive justice requires this right. A fair share, of course, is a very vague criterion, but it is one that the human community must struggle to define in order to stifle human imperialism over the rest of nature — evident particularly in human overpopulation and overdevelopment. The moral goal should not be the preservation of remnant populations of threatened species, but rather the coexistence of humans with viable populations of humanly unthreatened species until the end of their evolutionary time.the other party. Nonetheless, it has to be repeated that although the contract is @ perfected one, itis still ineffective or unimplementable Until and unless it is approved by the President. Moreover, if after a perfected and binding contract has been executed between the parties, it occurs to one of them to allege some defect therein as reason for annulling it, the alleged defect must be conclusively proven, since the validity and the fulfilment of contracts cannot be left to the will of one of the contracting parties. In the case at bar, the reasons cited by MMDA for not pushing through with the subject contract were: 1) the passage of the Clean Air Act, which allegedly bans incineration; 2) the closure of the San Mateo landfill site; and 3) the costly tipping fee. These reasons are bereft of merit Once again, we make reference to the insightful declarations of the Court of Appeals: See, 20 of the Clean Air Act pertinently reads: SECTION 20. Ban on Incineration. Incineration, hereby defined as the burning of municipal, bio-chemical and hazardous wastes, which process ‘mits poisonous and toxic fumes. is hereby prohibited: x x x. Section 20 does not absolutely prohibit incineration as a mode of waste disposal; rather only those burning processes which emit poisonous and toxic fumes are banned. ‘As regards the projected closure of the San Mateo landfill vis cnt project Site i. not delivered xx x, the Presidential ask Force on Solid Waste Management (PTFSWM) and the tsazonabl period o ime, a suitable aernatveascelabl (othe BOT COMPANY. With respect to the alleged financial non-viability of the project because the MMDA and the local government units eannot afford the tipping fees ‘under the contract, this citcumstance cannot, by itself, abrogate the entire agreement, vis the implementability of the contract, Art. 2.3 thereof expressly states that (iJn the ent, shall provide within a Doctrinal is the rule that neither the law nor the courts will extricate a party from an unwise or undesirable contract, or stipulation for that matte, he ‘or she entered into with full awareness of its consequences (Opulencia vs. CA, 293 SCRA 385). Indeed, the terms and conditions of the subject ‘contract were arrived at after due negotiations between the partis thereto, Rollo, p. $4.) WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit and the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-GR. SP No. 59021 dated November 13, 2001 AFFIRMED. No costs. SO ORDERED. Vitug, Panganiban, and Sandoval-Gutierrez, JJ., concur. Carpio, J., no part. | was former counsel to a foreign partner of Jancom Environmental Corporation.B wry <9 Resident Marine x” 3) www [] Deforestation Fa M © & < © wwwnationalgeographic.com ment/gk we urban sprawl as land is developed for dwellings. Not all deforestation is intentional. Some is caused by a combination of human and natural factors like wildfires and subsequent overgrazing, which may prevent the growth of young trees. EFFECTS OF DEFORESTATION Deforestation can have a negative impact on the environment. The most dramatic impact is a loss of habitat for millions of species. Eighty percent of Earth's land animals and plants live in forests, and many cannot survive the deforestation that destroys their homes. Deforestation also drives climate change, Forest soils are moist, but without protection from sun-blocking tree cover, they quickly dry out. Trees also help perpetuate the water eycle by returning water vapor to the atmosphere. Without trees to fill these roles, many former forest lands can quickly become barren deserts. Removing trees deprives the forest of portions of its canopy, which blocks the sun’s rays during the day, and holds in heat at night. This disruption leads to more extreme temperature swings that can be harmful to plants and animals. ‘Trees also play a critical role in absorbing the greenhouse gases that fuel global warming. forests means larger amounts of greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere—and inereased speed and severity of global warming, ‘The most feasible solution to deforestation is to carefully manage forest resources by climinating clear-cutting to make sure forest environments remain intact. The cutting that does ‘occur should be balanced by planting young trees to replace older trees felled. The number of new tree plantations is growing each year, but their total still equals a tiny fraction of the Earth's forested land.12:03 AM se 4 Means the burning of municipal, bio-medical and hazardous wastes which process emits toxic and poisonous fumes (?) . Case: MMDA V. JANCOM, G.R. 147465, Jan. 30, 2002 . Ruling: Sec. 20 does not absolutely prohibit incineration as a mode of waste disposal; rather only those burning processes which emit poisonous and toxic fumes are banned. Be reconmenenarion . Only those processes that emit poisonous and toxic fumes + Exceptions (Even if emitting poisonous and toxic fumes): - Traditional small-scale method of community/neighborhood sanitation “siga” NG Ay - Traditional agricultural, cultural, health and food preparation Cc PietnateiPad = 12:03 AM sm < Back REPUBLIC ACT 8749 LECTURE.ppt a NORMAL CUBIC METER (NCM) + Means the volume of dry gas which occupies a cubic meter measured at 25°C at an absolute pressure equivalent to 760 mm Hg. NATIONAL MOTOR VEHICLE 4 INSPECTION PROGRAM Activities/efforts designed to reduce the damaging impact of air pollution and unsafe vehicles on health and safety of the people, thru adoption of standards for emission and vehicle safety, and series of measures to ensure compliance.iPad = 12:04 AM sk IN CASE OF ABSENCE OF EMISSION of STANDARD . Catch-all provision under Sec. 3, Rule XXV, IRR. + Requirement if no emission/ambient standard for a specific air pollutant: BEST PRACTICABLE MEANS to prevent/minimize pollution thru use of cleaner production technology and sound environmental management practices. DUTIES OF PERSON IN-CHARGE OF SFBE + Owner/Operator of Stationary Fuel-Burning Equipment (SFBE) must provide means so that the person-in-charge Se ; ischarg (without leaving the boiler room, ana room, or control room). + Thru: Installing an opening for unobstructed view of the top of the stack; rear-view mirror; smoke-density indicator; closed-circuit TV; etc. 7 All oil-burning equipment must have heatersiPad 12:06 AM < Back REPUBLIC ACT 8749 LECTURE.ppt a 4 Concept of Citizen Suit (Cont.) + Thirty-day notice rule . Exemption from Filing Fees, Injunction Bond + Speedy disposition of the case within 30 days + Independence of Action — Filing of administrative case does not preclude filing of criminal or civil action; such civil action shall proceed independently se INDEPENDENCE OF ACTION (Sec. 42) . Filing of Admin Case does not preclude filing of Criminal or Civil ActioniPad = 12:06 AM sk CONCEPT OF SLAPPS (Sec. 43) . Suits and Strategic Legal Action Against Public Participation (SLAPPS) to be dismissed + Concept: Where a suit is brought against a person who filed a Citizen Suit against any person or agency, the Investigating Prosecutor or the Court, shall immediately make a determination whether said legal action has been filed to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle such legal recourse of Concept of SLAPPS (Cont.) + Determination to be made not exceeding 30 days . Upon positive determination, the Court to dismiss the case and award attorney’s fees and DOUBLE DAMAGES to the defendantiPad 1212 AM 3K < Back ENVIRONMENTAL & NATURAL RESOURCES LAW.ppt oO Principle 14 — State cooperation to prevent environmental harm Principle 15 — Precautionary principle should be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, | 1 not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation Principle 16 — Polluter pays principle. National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade and investment