You are on page 1of 8

Relevant Provisions of the HELD​:

1987 Constitution LLDA has jurisdiction over such matters

because the charter of the LLDA prevails
Sec. 16, Art. 2 over the Local Government Code of 1991.
The State shall protect and advance the The said charter constitutes a special law,
right of the people to a balanced and while the latter is a general law. It is basic
healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm in statutory construction that ​the
and harmony of nature. enactment of a later legislation which is a
general law, cannot be construed to have
SECTION 15, Art. 2. ​The State shall repealed a special law. The special law is to
protect and promote the right to health of be taken as an exception to the general law
the people and instill health consciousness in the absence of special circumstances
among them. forcing a contrary conclusion.
In addition, the charter of the LLDA
embodies a valid exercise of police power for
Laguna Lake Development Authority vs CA the purpose of protecting and developing
GR No. 120865-71; Dec. 7 1995 the Laguna Lake region, as opposed to the
Local Government Code, which grants
FACTS​: powers to municipalities to issue fishing
The Laguna Lake Development Authority permits for revenue purposes.
(LLDA) was created through Republic Act
No. 4850. It was granted, inter alia, Thus it has to be concluded that the charter
exclusive jurisdiction to issue permits for of the LLDA should prevail over the Local
the use of all surface water for any project or Government Code of 1991 on matters
activity in or affecting the said region affecting Laguna de Bay.
including navigation, construction, and
operation of fishpens, fish enclosures, fish
corrals and the like. Oposa vs Factoran
Then came RA 7160, the Local Government
Code of 1991. The municipalities in the GR No. 101083; July 30 1993
Laguna Lake region interpreted its
provisions to mean that the newly passed FACTS:
law gave municipal governments the A taxpayer’s class suit was filed by minors
exclusive jurisdiction to issue fishing Juan Antonio Oposa, et al., representing
privileges within their municipal waters. their generation and generations yet
unborn, and represented by their parents
ISSUE​: against Fulgencio Factoran Jr., Secretary of
Who should exercise jurisdiction over the DENR. They prayed that judgment be
Laguna Lake and its environs insofar as the rendered ordering the defendant, his agents,
issuance of permits for fishing privileges is representatives and other persons acting in
concerned, the LLDA or the towns and his behalf to:
municipalities comprising the region?
1. Cancel all existing Timber personality to sue in behalf of succeeding
Licensing Agreements (TLA) in the country; generations is based on the concept of
2. Cease and desist from receiving, intergenerational responsibility insofar as
accepting, processing, renewing, or the right to a balanced and healthful
appraising new TLAs; ecology is concerned​. Such a right considers
the “rhythm and harmony of nature” which
and granting the plaintiffs “such other indispensably include, inter alia, the
reliefs just and equitable under the judicious disposition, utilization,
premises.” They alleged that they have a management, renewal and conservation of
clear and constitutional right to a balanced the country’s forest, mineral, land, waters,
and healthful ecology and are entitled to fisheries, wildlife, offshore areas and other
protection by the State in its capacity as natural resources to the end that their
parens patriae​. ​Furthermore, they claim exploration, development, and utilization be
that the act of the defendant in allowing equitably accessible to the present as well as
TLA holders to cut and deforest the the future generations.
remaining forests constitutes a Needless to say, ​every generation has a
misappropriation and/or impairment of the responsibility to the next to preserve that
natural resources property he holds in trust rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment
for the benefit of the plaintiff minors and of a balanced and healthful ecology.​ Put a
succeeding generations. little differently, the minor’s assertion of
The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the their right to a sound environment
complaint on the following grounds: constitutes at the same time, the
performance of their obligation to ensure
1. Plaintiffs have no cause of action the protection of that right for the
against him; generations to come.
2. The issues raised by the
plaintiffs is a political question which -----------
properly pertains to the legislative or
executive branches of the government. RICARDO VALMONTE v. FELICIANO
Do the petitioner-minors have a cause of
Among the settled principles in
action in filing a class suit to “prevent the
administrative law is that ​before a party can
misappropriation or impairment of
be allowed to resort to the courts, he is
Philippine rainforests?”
expected to have exhausted all means of
administrative redress available under the
law. The courts for reasons of law, comity
Yes. Petitioner-minors assert that they
and convenience will not entertain a case
represent their generation as well as
unless the available administrative remedies
generations to come. The Supreme Court
have been resorted to and the appropriate
ruled that they can, for themselves, for
authorities have been given opportunity to
others of their generation, and for the
succeeding generation, file a class suit. Their
act and correct the errors committed in the Article 3, SECTION 7- Philippines
administrative forum.

Exceptions to the Doctrine of Exhaustion of

The right of the people to information on
Administrative Remedies: (QL, VDP, LEJ,
matters of public concern shall be
UNJI, UD/OF, NPSA, Estoppel, GID, NC,
recognized. Access to official records, and to
documents and papers pertaining to official
● when the issue involved is a acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to
pure question of law government research data used as basis for
● when the due process is clearly policy development, shall be afforded the
violated citizen, subject to such limitations as may be
● when the administrative action is provided by law.
patently illegal amounting to lack
or excess of jurisdiction
● when there is urgent need for
judicial intervention Legaspi vs. CSC
● when there is unreasonable G.R. No. L-72119, May 29, 1987
delay or official inaction
● when there is no other plain, Facts: ​The respondent CSC had denied
speedy or adequate remedy petitioner Valentin Legaspi’s request for
provided by law information on the civil service eligibilities
● when there is estoppel on the of Julian Sibonghanoy and Mariano Agas
part of the agency concerned who were employed as sanitarians in the
● when there is great and Health Department of Cebu City.
irreparable damage which can Sibonghanoy and Agas had allegedly
only be prevented by court represented themselves as civil service
eligibles who passed the civil service
● when the resort to administrative
examinations for sanitarians.
remedy will amount to the
nullification of a claim Claiming that his right to be informed of the
● when the law specifically eligibilities of Sibonghanoy and Agas is
provides that the issue shall be guaranteed by the Constitution, and that he
brought up to the court has no other plain, speedy and adequate
○ when the subject remedy to acquire the information,
matter is private petitioner prays for the issuance of the
land in land case extraordinary writ of mandamus to compel
the respondent CSC to disclose said

The respondent CSC takes issue on the
personality of the petitioner to bring the
suit. It is asserted that the petition is bereft
of any allegation of Legaspi’s actual interest Tano vs Socrates
in the civil service eligibilities of GR No. 110249; August 21, 1997
Sibonghanoy and Agas.
Issue: Whether or not the petitioner has
legal standing to bring the suit On Dec 15, 1992, the Sangguniang
Held: ​The petitioner has firmly anchored Panglungsod ng Puerto Princesa enacted an
his case upon the right of the people to ordinance banning the shipment of all live
information on matters of public concern, fish and lobster outside Puerto Princesa City
which, by its very nature, is a public right. It
from January 1, 1993 to January 1, 1998.
has been held in the case of Tanada vs.
Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27, that ​when the Subsequently the Sangguniang
question is one of public right and the object Panlalawigan, Provincial Government of
of the mandamus is to procure the Palawan enacted a resolution prohibiting
enforcement of a public duty, the people are
the catching , gathering, possessing, buying,
regarded as the real party in interest​, and
the person at whose instigation the selling, and shipment of a several species of
proceedings are instituted need not show live marine coral dwelling aquatic
that he has any legal or special interest in organisms for 5 years, in and coming from
the result, it being sufficient to show that he
Palawan waters.
is a citizen and as such interested in the
execution of the laws. Petitioners filed a special civil action for
It becomes apparent that ​when a mandamus certiorari and prohibition, praying that the
proceeding involves the assertion of a public court declare the said ordinances and
right, the requirement of personal interest is
resolutions as unconstitutional on the
satisfied by the mere fact that the petitioner
is a citizen, and therefore, part of the ground that the said ordinances deprived
general public which possesses the right. them of the due process of law, their

The petitioner, being a citizen who as such, livelihood, and unduly restricted them from
is clothed with personality to seek redress the practice of their trade, in violation of
for the alleged obstruction of the exercise of Section 2, Article XII and Sections 2 and 7
the public right.
of Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution.

Sec. 2, Art. 12 of the 1987 Constitution

All lands of the public domain and other
natural resources belong to the State. Are the challenged ordinances
HELD​: unquestionably involve the exercise of
police power, the validity of the questioned
No. The Supreme Court found the
ordinances cannot be doubted.
petitioners contentions baseless and held
that the challenged ordinances did not --------
suffer from any infirmity, both under the Presidential Proclamation No. 2146
Constitution and applicable laws. There is
Proclaiming Certain Areas and Types of
absolutely no showing that any of the Projects as Environmentally Critical and
petitioners qualifies as a subsistence or within the Scope of Environmental Impact
marginal fisherman. Besides, Section 2 of Statement System
Article XII aims primarily not to bestow any
right to subsistence fishermen, but to lay
A. Environmentally Critical Projects
stress on the duty of the State to protect the
I. Heavy Industries (NIPS)
nation’s marine wealth. The so-called
a. Non-ferrous metal industries
“preferential right” of subsistence or b. Iron and steel mills
marginal fishermen to the use of marine c. Petroleum and petro-chemical industries
including oil and gas
resources is not at all absolute. d. Smelting plants

In accordance with the Regalian Doctrine, II. Resource Extractive Industries (Maj, FP
marine resources belong to the state and (LIMFEG)
pursuant to the first paragraph of Section 2, a. Major mining and quarrying projects
Article XII of the Constitution, their
“exploration, development and b. Forestry projects
utilization...shall be under the full control 1. Logging
2. Major wood processing projects
and supervision of the State. 3. Introduction of fauna (exotic-animals) in
public/private forests
4. Forest occupancy
In addition, one of the devolved powers of 5. Extraction of mangrove products
6. Grazing
the LCG on devolution is the enforcement of
fishery laws in municipal waters including c. Fishery Projects
1. Dikes fishpond development projects
the conservation of mangroves. This
necessarily includes the enactment of III. Infrastructure Projects (DPRR)

ordinances to effectively carry out such a. Major dams

b.Major power plants (fossil-fueled, nuclear
fishery laws within the municipal waters. In fueled, hydroelectric or geothermal)
light of the principles of decentralization c. Major reclamation projects
d. Major roads and bridges
and devolution enshrined in the LGC and
the powers granted therein to LGUs which IV. Golf-course projects
b. Spawning and nursery grounds for fish;

B. Environmentally Critical Areas c. which act as natural breakwater of coastlines.

1. All areas declared by law as national parks,

watershed reserves, wildlife preserves and
sanctuaries; DENR DAO 2003-30

2. Areas set aside as aesthetic potential tourist -​Certificate of non-coverage- ​certificate

spots; issued by EMB certifying that, based on
submitted project description, the project is
3. Areas which constitute the habitat for any
endangered or threatened species of indigenous
not covered by the EIS System and is not
Philippine Wildlife (flora and fauna); required to secure an ECC.

4. Areas of unique historic, archaeological, or -​Environmental Compliance

scientific interests; Certificate- document issued by EMB
after the positive review of the ECC
5. Areas which are traditionally occupied by
application, certifying that based on the
cultural communities or tribes;
representations of the proponent, the
6. Areas frequently visited and/or hard-hit by proposed project or undertaking will not
natural calamities (geologic hazards, floods, cause significant negative environmental
typhoons, volcanic activity, etc.);
7. Areas with critical slopes;
-​Environmental Impact Assessment-
8. Areas classified as prime agricultural lands; process of evaluating the likely impacts of a
project on the environment.
9. Recharged areas of aquifers;

10. Water bodies characterized by one or any

- ​Environmental Impact Statement- ​A
combination of the following conditions; comprehensive study of the significant
a. tapped for domestic purposes impact of a project on the environment,
b. within the controlled and/or protected areas prepared and submitted by the project
declared by appropriate authorities
c. which support wildlife and fishery activities

11. Mangrove areas characterized by one or any

combination of the following conditions: -ECC Application:
a. with primary pristine and dense young growth;
- Scope: Only projects that pose
b. adjoining mouth of major river systems;
c. near or adjacent to traditional productive fry or potential significant impact to the
fishing grounds; environment.
d. which act as natural buffers against shore
erosion, strong winds and storm floods; - Public consultations initiated by
e. on which people are dependent for their proponents to ensure that environmentally
livelihood. relevant concerns of stakeholders are taken
12. Coral reefs characterized by one or any into consideration in the EIA study and the
combinations of the following conditions: formulation of the management plan.

a. With 50% and above live coralline cover;

- Project proponents are responsible
for determining and disclosing all
relevant information necessary for a
No.Section 4 of PD 1586 provides that "no
methodical assessment of the
person​, partnership or corporation shall
environmental impacts of their
undertake or operate any such declared
environmentally critical project or area
- Grounds for appeal of any party
without first securing an Environmental
aggrieved by the final decision on
Compliance Certificate issued by the
President or his duly authorized
- Grave abuse of discretion on
representative." ​We note that LGU’s are
the deciding authority; and
juridical persons.
- Serious errors in the review
HOWEVER, after consideration of the
evidence finding Artica Sports Dome is not
Cases: within an environmentally critical area
neither being a critical project. ​The said
Republic of the Philippines v.
project is not classified as environmentally
The City of Davao
critical, or within an environmentally
critical area. ​Consequently, the DENR has
no choice but to issue the Certificate of
Respondent filed an application for a Non-Coverage. It becomes its ministerial
Certificate of Non-Coverage (CNC) for its duty, the performance of which can be
proposed project, the Davao City Artica compelled by writ of ​mandamus​, such as
Sports Dome, with the Environmental that issued by the trial court in the case at
Management Bureau however, was denied bar.
on the ground that the proposed project was
within an environmentally critical area; that
the City of Davao must first undergo the
PD 705 Revised Forestry Code
environmental impact assessment (EIA)
process to secure an Environmental
-​License- ​privilege granted by the State to
Compliance Certificate (ECC). Respondent
a person to utilize forest resources without
then filed a petition for ​mandamus with the
any right of possession and occupation over
Regional Trial Court (RTC), and the latter
the same.
ruled in favor of respondent.
-​License Agreement- ​A privilege granted
by the State to a person to utilize forest
ISSUE: resources with the right of possession and
WON the LGU’s are excluded from the occupation.
coverage of PD 1586, one which requires an
environmental impact assessment (EIA) -​Doctrine of res judicata​- Decisions and
process to secure an Environmental orders of administrative agencies have,
Compliance Certificate (ECC) upon their finality, the force and binding
effect of a final judgment.
-​Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction- conveyance may be seized again either by
Courts cannot take cognizance of cases filing a motion for reinvestigation and
pending before administrative agencies of motion to include the truck owner/driver as
special competence. co accused. The confiscation proceedings
under Administrative Order No. 59 is
different from the confiscation under the
Cases: RPC.
-Reservation of land, covered by a timber
concession. The right of petitioner as a
timber licensee must not be affected,
impaired or diminished but must be
respected until it expires. The forest charges
or royalties must be paid to new owner.

-Criminal Offenses:
Section 68, PD 705:
Cutting, gathering and/or collecting timber,
or other forest products without license. -
Punishable under Arts. 309 and 310 of RPC.

Possession of timber or other forest

products without the legal documents
required under existing forest laws and

Section 68-A, PD 705:

The Department Head or his duly
authorized representative may order the
confiscation of any forest products illegally
cut, gathered, removed or possessed or
abandoned, and all conveyances used in the
commission of the offense, and dispose of
the same in accordance with pertinent laws.

-While lumber is not specifically mentioned
in Sec. 68, the Court held that it is
nevertheless included in the term timber.

-Order of release of the conveyance by the

Judge does not render nugatory the
administrative authority of the DENR
Secretary. Despite the order of release, the