Dane Pauline C.

Adora

TANO v. SOCRATES

Facts:

On December 15, 1992, the Sangguniang Panlungsod ng Puerto Princesa City enacted Ordinance No.
15-92 which took effect on January 1, 1993 banning the shipment of all live fish and lobster outside puerto
princesa city from january 1, 1993 to january 1, 1998. The purpose of the said Ordinance is to effectively
free the City Sea Waters from Cyanide and other Obnoxious substance[s], and shall cover all persons
and/or entities operating within and outside the City of Puerto Princesa who is are (sic) directly or
indirectly in the business or shipment of live fish and lobster outside the City.

To implement said city ordinance, then Acting City Mayor Amado L. Lucero issued the following:

a. Office Order No. 23, Series of 1993 dated January 22, 199 which requires any person engaged
or intending to engage in any business, trade, occupation, calling or profession or having in his
possession any of the articles for which a permit is required to be had, to obtain first a mayor's
permit; and
b. City Ordinance No. 15-92, An Ordinance Banning The Shipment Of All Live Fish And Lobster
Outside Puerto Princesa City From January 1, 1993 To January 1, 1998.

Mayor Lucero likewise ordered the conduct of necessary inspections on cargoes containing live fish and
lobster being shipped out from the Puerto Princesa Airport, Puerto Princesa Wharf or at any port within
the jurisdiction of the City to any point of destinations [sic] either via aircraft or seacraft. The purpose of
the inspection is to ascertain whether the shipper possessed the required Mayor's Permit issued by this
Office and the shipment is covered by invoice or clearance issued by the local office of the Bureau of
Fisheries and Aquatic Resources and as to compliance with all other existing rules and regulations on the
matter. Any cargo containing live fish and lobster without the required documents as stated herein must
be held for proper disposition.

On February 19, 1993, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Provincial Government of Palawan enacted
Resolution No. 33 which lead to the enactment of Ordinance No. 2 entitled an “Ordinance Prohibiting the
catching, gathering, possessing, buying, selling and shipment of live marine coral dwelling aquatic
organisms,and other fishes specified for a period of five years in and coming from Palawan Waters.

Charged for violating the above laws by the city and provincial governments were the petitioners Airline
Shippers Association of Palawan, together with several marine merchants. Petitioners filed a petition for
certiorari and prohibition assailing the constitutionality of:

(1) Ordinance No. 15-92 entitled: "AN ORDINANCE BANNING THE SHIPMENT OF ALL LIVE
FISH AND LOBSTER OUTSIDE PUERTO PRINCESA CITY FROM JANUARY 1, 1993 TO
JANUARY 1, 1998 AND PROVIDING EXEMPTIONS, PENALTIES AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES THEREOF"

(2) Office Order No. 23, requiring any person engaged or intending to engage in any business,
trade, occupation, calling or profession or having in his possession any of the articles for which a
permit is required to be had, to obtain first a Mayor’s and authorizing and directing to check or
conduct necessary inspections on cargoes containing live fish and lobster being shipped out from
Puerto Princesa and,

(3) Resolution No. 33, Ordinance No. 2 entitled: "A RESOLUTION PROHIBITING THE
CATCHING, GATHERING, POSSESSING, BUYING, SELLING AND SHIPMENT OF LIVE
MARINE CORAL DWELLING AQUATIC ORGANISMS”

The petitioners contend that the said Ordinances deprived them of due process of law, their
livelihood, and unduly restricted them from the practice of their trade, in violation of Section 2, Article XII
and Sections 2 and 7 of Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution and that the Mayor had the absolute authority
to determine whether or not to issue the permit.

They also claim that it took away their right to earn their livelihood in lawful ways; and insofar as
the Airline Shippers Association are concerned, they were unduly prevented from pursuing their vocation
and entering "into contracts which are proper, necessary, and essential to carry out their business
endeavors to a successful conclusion

Public respondents Governor Socrates and Members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of

Palawan defended the validity of Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1993, as a valid exercise of the Provincial
Dane Pauline C. Adora

Government's power under the general welfare clause; they likewise maintained that there was no
violation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution.

Issue:

a) Whether or not the challenged Ordinances are unconstitutional for being voilative of the
preferential rights of the fishermen.
b) Whether or not the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the City of Puerto Princesa and the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan of the Province of Palawan have the authority to enact the Ordinances,
respectively.

Ruling:

a) NO. The enacted resolution and ordinance of the LGU were not violative of their preferential
rights. The court recognized these laws as a valid exercise of the police power of the LGUs to
protect public interests.

More importantly, the right to a balanced and healthful ecology has been emphasized, as enshrined in
Section 16, Article II, 1987 Philippine Constitution, which states:

The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in
accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

The court decided that such right carries with it a correlative duty to refrain from impairing the
environment.

The rights and privileges invoked by the petitioners are not absolute. Though Congress may, by law,
allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming,
with priority to subsistence fishermen and fishworkers in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons (as stated in
Section 2, Article XII, 1987 Philippine Constitution), there has been absolutely no showing that any of the
petitioners qualifies as a subsistence or marginal fisherman (in the petition, one petitioner was even
described as a private association composed of Marine Merchants). The general welfare provisions in the
Local Government Code of 1991 shall be liberally interpreted to give more powers to local government
units in accelerating economic development and upgrading the quality of life for the people in the
community. Power is given to the LGUs to enact fishery laws in its municipal waters which necessarily
includes the enactment of ordinances in order to effectively carry out the enforcement of fishery laws in
their local community. The ordinances in question are meant precisely to protect and conserve marine
resources to the end that their enjoyment by the people may be guaranteed not only for the present
generation, but also for the generations to come, as what has been provided for in Section 7 of Article XIII
of the Constitution. Thus, aside from dismissing the petition for lack of merit, the court even commended
the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Puerto Princesa and Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan for
exercising the requisite political will to enact urgently needed legislation to protect and enhance the
marine environment.

b) Yes. In light then of the principles of decentralization and devolution enshrined in the LGC and the
powers granted therein to local government units under Section 16 (the General Welfare Clause), and
under Sections 149, 447(a) (1) (vi), 458 (a) (1) (vi) and 468 (a) (1) (vi), which unquestionably involve
the exercise of police power, the validity of the questioned Ordinances cannot be doubted.

***Sec. 16. General Welfare. — Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly
granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or
incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the
promotion of the general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government
units shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture,
promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and
support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities,
improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment
among their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of
their inhabitants. (emphasis supplied).

It is clear to the Court that both Ordinances have two principal objectives or purposes: (1) to establish a
"closed season" for the species of fish or aquatic animals covered therein for a period of five years; and
(2) to protect the coral in the marine waters of the City of Puerto Princesa and the Province of Palawan
from further destruction due to illegal fishing activities.
Dane Pauline C. Adora

It imposes upon the sangguniang bayan, the sangguniang panlungsod, and the sangguniang
panlalawigan the duty to enact ordinances to "[p]rotect the environment and impose appropriate penalties
for acts which endanger the environment such as dynamite fishing and other forms of destructive
fishing . . . and such other activities which result in pollution, acceleration of eutrophication of rivers and
lakes or of ecological imbalance."

The petition is dismissed.