1

Cultural Rights
- Rights that ensure the well-being of the individual and foster the preservation, enrichment, and
dynamic evolution of national culture based on the principle of unity in diversity in a climate of free
artistic and intellectual expression.
Human Rights Law

- Is the branch of public law that deal with the body of laws, rules, procedures, and institutions
designed to respect, promote, and protect human rights at the national, regional and international
levels.
- It also deals with the decisions of the SC, ICC and writings of advocates of human rights.
- The basic source of human rights is the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights that has
profoundly shaped and influenced local and international landscapes. – [ by: Carlos P. Romulo]

Internatiornal Human Rights Law

- Lays down the obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in
order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups.
-
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Is a milestone document in the history of human rights? Drafted by representatives with different
legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world,

Human Rights

- Are the aggregate of privileges, claims benefits, entitlements, and moral guarantees that pertain to
man because of his humanity.
- Also defined as legal and moral entitlements that have evolved as a basis for constructing how state
power is used and particularly to limit its use against the rights of citizens.

Human Person

- Possesses rights because of the very fact that it is a person, a whole, master itself and of its acts.

Jose Diokno – no cause is more worthy that the cause of human rights and they are what make man human.

Kinds of Human Rights by Karel Vasak, classified into 3 generations:

a. First generation of civil and political rights (“liberty of rights”) – it evolved during the long
development of democratic society and serve as protection of the individuals from the arbitrary
exercise of police power.
- They are individual rights against the state and are partly seen as negative rights because they
prevent the state from the performance of certain things that are considered harmful.

[ex. Right to life, liberty and security of person, right against torture, right to equal protection against
any discrimination, right against arbitrary arrest and detention, right to a fair and public hearing by
independent and impartial tribunal, right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, right to
privacy, freedom of opinion and expression]

b. Second generation of economic, social and cultural rights (“equality rights”) – started to be
recognized when people realized that possession of the first generation of liberty right would be
valueless w/o enjoyment of this rights.

[ex. Right to work, right to social security, right to form and to join trade unions, right to education,
right to rest and leisure, right to health, right to shelter.
 2

c. Third generation of solidarity rights or collective rights (“solidarity rights”) – intended to benefit the
individuals, groups and people and its realization will need global cooperation based on international
solidarity.

[ex. Right to peace, right to development, environmental rights, right to self-determination, right to
food, rights of women, rights of children, and right to humanitarian disaster relief. The latest right is
the right to water.

Karel Vasak’s 3 divisions follow the French Revolution’s three slogans: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.

3 Principles of Human Rights:

a. Universality – the rights belongs to and are to be enjoyed by all human beings w/o distraction of any
kind, such as race, color, sex or language, religion, political and other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other stature. In other words, human rights belong to everyone wherever they are
because they are human beings endowed with dignity.

- Also means as the basic core minimum to be observed everywhere w/o regional differences. It
belongs to everyone, everywhere by virtue of being human.

[ NOTE: indivisibility and interdependence mean that liberty of rights and equality rights are inter-
related and are co-equal in importance. They form an indivisible whole and only if these rights are
guaranteed that an individual can live decently and in dignity.

b. Indivisibility – (unable to be divided or separated) Whether they relate to civil, cultural, economic,
political or social issues, human rights are inherent to the dignity of every human person. Consequently, all
human rights have equal status, and cannot be positioned in a hierarchical order. 

c. Interdependence (dependence of 2 or more people) - Each one contributes to the realization of a

person’s human dignity through the satisfaction of his or her developmental, physical, psychological and
spiritual needs. The fulfilment of one right often depends, wholly or in part, upon the fulfilment of others.
For instance, fulfilment of the right to health may depend, in certain circumstances, on fulfilment of the
right to development, to education or to information.

NOTE: this 3 principles are enunciated in the agreement through numerous rights like, right to people to
oppose oppression and tyranny, rights of the victims and their families to adequate compensation and
indemnification, restitution and rehabilitation, summary executions, mental torture, sexual abuse, rape
and etc.

Repudiate – refuse or accept

Waive - right to claim

Endowed - give

Characteristics of Human Rights:

a. Inherent – means that the rights are the birthright of all human beings, existing independently of the
will of either an individual human being or group. It cannot be separated or detached.

b. Inalienable – (unable to be taken away) no person can deprive any person these rights and no person
can repudiate these rights by himself. Rights cannot be subject to the “commerce of man”[capable of
being owned, possessed or acquired].

c. Universal – right belong to every human being no matter what he or she is like. Because rights are
universal its promotion and protection are the duty of all states regardless of cultural, economic or
political systems.
 3

Components of Human Rights:

a. A subject or a rights-holder – is an individual or a non-governmental organization entitled to the

rights under the law and can take legal action to protect or to promote those rights.

b. A duty holder – is an entity, normally a state that is obliged to respect, to ensure and protect the
subject rights or demands.

c. Object – content of any given right and any duty of the holder of the right and the holder of the
obligation. This right and duty are the human values and needs which are found in the human rights
rules and norms.

d. Implementation – set of measures, approaches and initiatives designed to realize the right
concerned. These includes administrative measures, legal writs and mechanisms adopted by the three
branches of the Government: Congress, Executive and Judiciary.

[ex. Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution: any person under investigation for the commission of
an offense shall have the rights to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own choice.] Subject or rights holder and Object.

Stage of Human Rights:

a. Idealization – notions of human rights have started in the realm of ideas that reflect a consciousness
against oppression (cruel or unjust) , dehumanization or inadequate performance by the state.

b. Positivization – second stage where the support of the ideas become strong and the stage is set to
incorporate them into some legal instruments, whether domestic law or international law.

c. Realization – last stage where these rights are enjoyed by the citizens of the state by the
transformation of the social, economic, and political order.

Three obligations of the state parties:

a. Article 2(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [obligation to respect], it
indicates the negative character of civil and political rights, commanding the state parties to refrain
from restricting the exercise of these rights where such is not expressly allowed.

[ex. Prohibition of torture, it is absolute, the state must refrain from practicing torture under all
circumstances]

Civil rights individuals for the purpose of securing themselves by enjoyment for their means of
hapiness

Political rights enable us to participate directly or indirectly in the affairs in the government

b. Article 2(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [obligation to ensure],
indicates the positive character of the civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights.
State parties must be proactive to enable individuals to enjoy their rights. The state parties has the
obligation to adopt executive, judicial and legislative measures to provide an effective remedy to
victims of human rights by means of procedural guarantees and legal institutions.

c. Obligation to protect – preventing private individuals, groups or entities from interfering with the
individual’s civil and political rights.

[ex. Prohibition on slavery or prohibition of advocacy of racial hatred.

 4

Chapter 2

Sources and Foundations of Human Rights Law

1987 Constitution is the basic source human rights law in the Philippines. – (Article XIII) they are the ones to
investigate human rights violations involving civil and political rights either committed by the government or
by non-governmental entities and to establish a program of education and information to enhance respect for
the primacy of human rights.

- It is the 7th constitution drafted by Filipinos.

Sources: Seven Constitutions:

1. The 1987 Biak na Bato Constitution

2. The 1899 Malolos Constitution

3. The 1935 Constitution

4. The 1943 Constitution

5. The 1973 Constitution

6. The 1986 Freedom Constitution

7. The 1987 Constitution

Bill of Rights – No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property w/o due process of law, nor shall any
person be denied of the equal protection of the laws. The purpose is to protect those rights
against infringement from public officials and private citizens .

The Preamble to the Declaration is important because it refers the concepts if inherent dignity and the
inalienable nature of human rights as the philosophical sources of the Declaration and inspiration for further
development of human rights.

Other Sources of Human Rights are Philosophy and Religion.

Despotism a single person directs everything by his own will and caprice.

Religion, embedded in the sacred scriptures and books of the world’s religion sre lessons and teachings on
human dignity, sanctity of life, worth of conscience, social justice, respect for the integrity of creation, rights of
prisoners, rights of person with disabilities, rights of minorities, rights of children, etc. In Christianity, one finds
them in the old and New Testament.

The primacy attached in life and dignity of the human person, the principle of tolerance based on the
inalienability of personal conscience, respect for dwelling and the right to asylum are found in Islam.

Chapter 3

Civil and Political Rights (First Generation Rights)

 5

Bill of Rights is an enumeration of civil and political rights that are self-executing (no need of implementing
legislation) and serve as a restriction upon the powers of the State.

Bill of Rights is a regular fixture in all Philippine Constitution EXCEPT Biak-na-Bato Constitution.

What the Bill of Rights does?

- To declare some forbidden zones in the private sphere inaccessible to any power holder.

Comprehensive Agreement of respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law consist of 7
parts:

1. The Preamble

2. Declaration of Principle

3. Bases, Scope and Applicability

4. Respect for Human Rights

5. Respect for International Humanitarian Law

6. Joint Monitoring Committee

7. Final Provisions.

[ex. Provided in the book P.14]

Universal Declaration of Human Rights – Article 3 to Article 21 of the Declaration contains the catalogue of
civil and political rights of the first generation. [ex. Provided in the book P. 15]

Chapter 4

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Second Generation of Rights)

Universal Declaration of Human Rights – enumerates as the right to social security, work, rest and leisure, an
adequate standard of living, education and the rights to participate in the cultural life.

Chapter 5

Solidarity/Collective Rights (Thirds Generation)

Peace, Development, Environment.

Women, Children, Persons with Disabilities Indigenous Peoples

Chapter 6

Remedies and Procedures for Responding to Human Rights Violations and Human Rights Abuses

Human Rights Violations

- Acts committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent of a public official or other person
acting in an official capacity contrary to human rights law, causing bodily or mental pain or suffering
or death.

- Domestic remedies and non-domestic or international remedies.

Remedies

- Rights and remedies are inseparable. Must be in place and readily available anytime and anywhere.

a. Domestic Remedies – may take the form of civil, criminal and administrative remedies.
 6

- [ex. Civil action for damages in the appropriate trial courts may be proved only by a preponderance of
evidence. Moral damages, exemplary, cost of suit and Atty’s fees may be awarded as indemnity.]

b. International Remedies

- Based on treaties, mechanisms for the enforcement of human rights are the reporting requirement to
ensure State compliance with treaty obligation, the investigation of communications to determine
breaches of treaty obligations and prosecution and trial of human rights violators.

- Based on non-treaty

The Reporting Requirement

- Submits reports to the Secretary-General of the UN or to the monitoring body created by the treaty.

The International Criminal Court

- One of the most ambitious international legal initiatives in the history of modern law. The ICC
exercises international jurisdiction over criminals. Those who may have escaped from the national
jurisdiction where they committed serious crimes namely: genocide, crimes against humanity, war
crimes and aggression.

Chapter 7 (photocopied)

Chapter 8

The Judiciary, the Academe and the Family on building a human rights culture.

Human Rights Culture

- Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and
to share scientific advancement and its benefits.

- Is shared communitarian belief [emphasizes connection between an individual and community] in the
inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members if the human family.

- It is also a share consensus that the dignity and worth of every human person can be upheld and
honored if the State and non-state actors undertake efforts and initiatives to uphold and honor
human rights.

The Judiciary

- It is the key player in the development of a human rights culture. Through its duty to settle actual
controversies that involve rights which are legally demandable and its duty to determine whether a
grave abuse of discretion has been committed by any branch or instrumentality of the government.

Habeas Corpus – those persons who is deprived of his liberty through illegal confinement or detention or by
which the rightful custody of any person is withheld from the person entitled thereto EXCEPT as otherwise
expressly provided by law.

- The purpose is to inquire into the legality of detention or involuntary restraint. And such action found
to be illegal to relieve the person from unlawful restraint.

Writ of Amparo – a remedy available to any person who’s right to life, liberty and security has been violated or
is threatened with the violation by unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private
 7

individual or entity. The writ was intended to address extra-judicial killings [w/o due process] and enforced
disappearances or threat thereof.

Writ of Habeas Data – designated to protect by means of judicial complaint the image, privacy, honor,
information and freedom of information of an individual.

- Is a remedy available to any person who’s right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or
threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or
entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person,
family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.

Writ of Kalikasan – is a remedy available to any person 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, 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 prejudice the
life, health, or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.

Arbitrary Detention – violation to the right of liberty [freedom by unreasonable detention]

a. the grounds for the arrest are illegal

b. The victim was not informed of the reasons for the arrest

c. The procedural rights of the victim were not respected

d. The victim was not brought before a judge within a reasonable amount of time
 8

JONAS BURGOS CASE

- The Jonas Burgos case is the first of its kind in recent history to reach this far - making the police and
the military 'responsible and accountable' for his disappearance

- Activist-agriculturist Jonas Burgos who was abducted allegedly by state agents.

- Considering the findings of the CA and our review of the records of the present case, we conclude
that the PNP and the AFP have so far failed to conduct an exhaustive and meaningful investigation
 9

into the disappearance of Jonas Burgos, and to exercise the extraordinary diligence (in the
performance of their duties) that the Rule on the Writ of Amparo requires. Because of these
investigative shortcomings, we cannot rule on the case until a more meaningful investigation, using
extraordinary diligence, is undertaken.

FACTS: The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) submitted to the Court its Investigation Report on the
Enforced Disappearance of Jonas Burgos. The CHR finds that the enforced disappearance of Jonas Burgos
had transpired and that his constitutional rights to life, liberty and security were violated by the
Government have been fully determined. The CHR demonstrated in its investigations resulted in the criminal
prosecution of Lt. Baliaga [who was known as "Ka Ramon,” an alleged member of the communist New
People's Army}. Regional Trial Court found probable cause for arbitrary detention against Lt. Baliaga and
ordered his arrest in connection with Jonas’ disappearance. Based on the finding that Jonas was a victim of
enforced disappearance, the Court of Appeals concluded that the present case falls within the ambit of the
Writ of Amparo. The respondents have not appealed to the court, as provided under Section 19 of the Rule on
the Writ of Amparo. Hence, the petitioner filed an Urgent Ex Parte Motion Ex Abundanti Cautela.

ISSUE: Should the petitioner’s motion be granted?

HELD: No. The Court’s role in a writ of Amparo proceeding is merely to determine whether an enforced
disappearance has taken place; to determine who is responsible or accountable; and to define and impose
the appropriate remedies to address the disappearance. Here, the beneficial purpose of the Writ
of Amparo has been served in the present case with the CA’s final determination of the persons responsible
and accountable for the enforced disappearance of Jonas and the commencement of criminal action against Lt.
Baliaga. The full extent of the remedies envisioned by the Rule on the Writ of Amparo has been served and
exhausted; hence, there shall be no more need for the petitioner’s motion to be granted.

- Accountabiliity as "the measure of remedies that should be addressed to those who have exhibited
involvement in the enforced disappearance without bringing the level of their complicity to the level
of responsibility."

- Responsibility means the person in question is "imputed [contributes] with knowledge relating to the
enforced disappearance" and carries the burden of disclosure; or those who carry, but have failed to
discharge, the burden of extraordinary diligence in the investigation of enforced disappearance." 

- Burgos was last seen in a mall restaurant. It has been more than 10 years since Burgos' abduction.

- Baliaga is the first and only person ordered arrested for Burgos' disappearance, but he did not spend a
day in jail after posting a P40,000-bail.

- Baliaga allegedly led the group that abducted Burgos, at the Hapag Kainan restaurant inside Ever
Gotesco Mall. Of all the military members sued for Burgos' disappearance, only Baliaga was charged
in court.

- Baliaga's trial at the QC RTC lasted 4 years. He had originally filed a motion for leave to file a demurrer
of evidence, which the court rejected. When it was his turn to present evidence, he waived his right to
present his. On Thursday, Baliaga maintained that he has no knowledge of what happened to Jonas.
- Prosecution failed
A Court of Appeals decision in March 2013 ruled that Baliaga, then a lieutenant, was responsible for
Jonas’ disappearance.

But in the arbitrary detention case filed by the Burgoses against the military officer in Quezon City
Regional Trial Court Branch 42, Judge Alfonso Ruiz III ruled that the prosecution failed to prove his
identity in court as the one who gave orders during the abduction. This was because the three key
people who could place Baliaga at the crime scene could no longer be found.   The prosecutors then
had to rely on other witnesses, whose testimonies were later dismissed by the court as “hearsay in
nature.”
 10

- SC junks another writ of amparo hearing on Burgos disappearance

Opossa vs. Factoran

Doctrine of intergenerational responsibility

The Court did not agree with the arguments of the respondent. The complaint focuses on one fundamental
legal right — the right to a balanced and healthful ecology which is incorporated in the Constitution. It
carries with it the duty to refrain from impairing the environment and implies, among many other things,
the judicious management and conservation of the country's forests.
 11

Section 4 of E.O. 192 expressly mandates the DENR to be the primary government agency responsible for the
governing and supervising the exploration, utilization, development and conservation of the country's
natural resources. Such policy is also substantially re-stated in the Administrative Code of 1987. Both E.O. 192
and Administrative Code of 1987 have set the objectives which will serve as the bases for policy formation, and
have defined the powers and functions of the DENR. Thus, right of the petitioners to a balanced and healthful
ecology is as clear as the DENR's duty to protect and advance the said right.
The Court found no difficulty in ruling that they can, for themselves, for others of their generation and for the
succeeding generations, file a class suit. Their personality to sue in behalf of the succeeding generations can
only be based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and
healthful ecology is concerned. Such a right, as hereinafter expounded, considers the "rhythm and harmony of
nature."
The Court further elicited that every generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that rhythm and
harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology. [2]
Oposa vs. Factoran Case Digest (G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993)
FACTS:

The plaintiffs in this case are all minors duly represented and joined by their parents. The first complaint was
filed as a taxpayer's class suit at the Branch 66 (Makati, Metro Manila), of the Regional Trial Court, National
capital Judicial Region against defendant (respondent) Secretary of the Department of Environment and
Natural Reasources (DENR). Plaintiffs alleged that they are entitled to the full benefit, use and enjoyment of
the natural resource treasure that is the country's virgin tropical forests. They further asseverate that they
represent their generation as well as generations yet unborn and asserted that continued deforestation have
caused a distortion and disturbance of the ecological balance and have resulted in a host of environmental
tragedies. 

Plaintiffs prayed that judgment be rendered ordering the respondent, his agents, representatives and other
persons acting in his behalf to cancel all existing Timber License Agreement (TLA) in the country and to cease
and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, renewing or approving new TLAs. 

Defendant, on the other hand, filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint had no cause of
action against him and that it raises a political question.

The RTC Judge sustained the motion to dismiss, further ruling that granting of the relief prayed for would
result in the impairment of contracts which is prohibited by the Constitution.

Plaintiffs (petitioners) thus filed the instant special civil action for certiorari and asked the court to rescind
and set aside the dismissal order on the ground that the respondent RTC Judge gravely abused his discretion
in dismissing the action.

ISSUES:

(1) Whether or not the plaintiffs have a cause of action.

(2) Whether or not the complaint raises a political issue.

(3) Whether or not the original prayer of the plaintiffs result in the impairment of contracts.
 12

RULING:

First Issue: Cause of Action.

Respondents aver that the petitioners failed to allege in their complaint a specific legal right violated by the
respondent Secretary for which any relief is provided by law. The Court did not agree with this. The complaint
focuses on one fundamental legal right “Doctrine of Intergenerational responsibility” -- the right to a
balanced and healthful ecology which is incorporated in Section 16 Article II of the Constitution. The said right
carries with it is the duty to refrain from impairing the environment and implies, among many other things,
the judicious management and conservation of the country's forests. Section 4 of E.O. 192 expressly
mandates the DENR to be the primary government agency responsible for the governing and supervising the
exploration, utilization, development and conservation of the country's natural resources. The policy
declaration of E.O. 192 is also substantially re-stated in Title XIV Book IV of the Administrative Code of 1987.
Both E.O. 192 and Administrative Code of 1987 have set the objectives which will serve as the bases for policy
formation, and have defined the powers and functions of the DENR. Thus, right of the petitioners (and all
those they represent) to a balanced and healthful ecology is as clear as DENR's duty to protect and advance
the said right.

A denial or violation of that right by the other who has the correlative duty or obligation to respect or
protect or respect the same gives rise to a “cause of action”. Petitioners maintain that the granting of the
TLA, which they claim was done with grave abuse of discretion, violated their right to a balance and healthful
ecology. Hence, the full protection thereof requires that no further TLAs should be renewed or granted.

After careful examination of the petitioners' complaint, the Court finds it to be adequate enough to show,
prima facie, the claimed violation of their rights.

Second Issue: Political Issue.

Second paragraph, Section 1 of Article VIII of the constitution provides for the expanded jurisdiction vested
upon the Supreme Court. It allows the Court to rule upon even on the wisdom of the decision of the
Executive and Legislature and to declare their acts as invalid for lack or excess of jurisdiction because it is
tainted with grave abuse of discretion.

Third Issue: Violation of the non-impairment clause.

The Court held that the Timber License Agreement is an instrument by which the state regulates the
utilization and disposition of forest resources to the end that public welfare is promoted. It is not a contract
within the purview of the due process clause thus, the non-impairment clause cannot be invoked. It can be
 13

validly withdraw whenever dictated by public interest or public welfare as in this case. The granting of license
does not create irrevocable rights, neither is it property or property rights. 

Moreover, the constitutional guaranty of non-impairment of obligations of contract is limit by the exercise
by the police power of the State, in the interest of public health, safety, moral and general welfare. In short,
the non-impairment clause must yield to the police power of the State.

The instant petition, being impressed with merit, is hereby GRANTED and the RTC decision is SET ASIDE.

Political Question –

1.  A ‘political question’ is one the resolution of which has been vested by the Constitution exclusively in either
the people, in the exercise of their sovereign capacity, or in which full discretionary authority has been
delegated to a co-equal branch of the Government.

2.  Thus, while courts can determine questions of legality with respect to governmental action, they cannot
review government policy and the wisdom thereof, for these questions have been vested by the Constitution
in the Executive and Legislative Departments.

The "limitation on the power of judicial review to actual cases and controversies" carries the assurance that
"the courts will not intrude into areas committed to the other branches of government.

OPOSSA vs. FACTORAN

FACTS:

A taxpayer’s class suit was filed by minors Juan Antonio Oposa, et al., representing their generation and
generations yet unborn, and represented by their parents against Fulgencio Factoran Jr., Secretary of DENR.
They prayed that judgment be rendered ordering the defendant, his agents, representatives and other persons
acting in his behalf to:

           1.       Cancel all existing Timber Licensing Agreements (TLA) in the country;

           2.       Cease and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, renewing, or appraising new TLAs;

and granting the plaintiffs “such other reliefs just and equitable under the premises.” They alleged that they
have a clear and constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology and are entitled to protection by the
State in its capacity as parens patriae. Furthermore, they claim that the act of the defendant in allowing TLA
holders to cut and deforest the remaining forests constitutes a misappropriation and/or impairment of the
natural resources property he holds in trust for the benefit of the plaintiff minors and succeeding
generations.

The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the following 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:
 14

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 the concept of

intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is
concerned. Such a right considers the “rhythm and harmony of nature” which indispensably 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.