Oposa v.

Factoran (1993)

Doctrine:
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 minors' 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.

Summary:
The controversy started in in a civil case whereby the principal plaintiffs were minors who were
duly represented by their parents and the defendants were Fulgencio Factoran as the Secretary
of DENR and Angel Alcala who subsequently held the office. Complaint was instituted as a
taxpayers class suit and alleged that the minors “represent their generation as well as
generations yet unborn”. They prayed for a judgment to be rendered, cancelling all the timber
license agreements in the Philippines, claiming 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.

Issues:
WON plaintiffs have standing to file the instant petition.

Ruling: Yes.
This case has a special and novel element. Petitioners minors assert that they represent their
generation as well as generations yet unborn. We find 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. Petitioners have locus standi.