PILAR C. BRAGA, et.

al
vs.
HON. JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA as Secretary of DOTC, et. al
GR No. 223076, September 13, 2016
FACTS:
Petitioner filed a continuing mandamus and writ of kalikasan directed against the DOTC
and PPA modernization project of Davao Sasa Wharf under the Public-Private Partnership (PPP)
scheme. According to the petitioner, the project has not complied in securing Environment
Compliance Certificate (ECC), Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and local consultation prior
to the implementation of the said project.
However, respondent countered that the said project is still in the bidding stage where
the contractual responsibility is yet to be awarded to the winning bidder. The proponent has
the duty to initiate and process and to apply for the ECC. Compliance with local consultation is
still pending until the award of the contract to the winning bidder. Respondent further alleged
that the issuance of writ of kalikasan does not warrant because the petitioners failed to prove
the threat of environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health, or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.
ISSUES:
1. At what stage of the project do the ECC and EIS compliance be reckoned?
2. Whose duty to comply with the EIS System, the agency involved or the proponent?
RULING:
1. The signing of the finalized contract incorporating the detailed engineering design is
the reckoning point when implementation can begin. This is the start of the
Construction Stage. The Sasa Wharf Modernization Project has not yet reached the
construction stage. The bidding process had not even been concluded when the
present petition was filed. On this account, the petition is also premature for the
purpose of compelling the respondents to comply with Sections 26 and 27 of the
LGC.

2. The duty to comply with the EIS Systems rests on the proponent. The provision
under PD 1586 is ambiguous when it comes to identifying with particularity the
responsible party in multilateral and collaborative projects. However, IRR of the EIS
System simply designates the responsible party as the proponent which, under the
Build-Operate-Transfer Law (RA 6957), as “the private sector entity which shall have
the contractual responsibility for the project.” Accordingly, there is yet no project
proponent responsible for the EIS and the ECC until the bidding process has been
concluded and the contract has been awarded.