Gilbert S.

Vasquez
2020 – 0002
NREL Sec. 65, Sat 1:00 – 4:00 pm

Ten (10) Proposed Questions on Special Environmental Laws

Question No. 1: The Writ of Kalikasan authorizes the court, where the violation or threatened violation
results in destruction or damage of such magnitude as to impair and deprive the right of the people to a
balanced and healthful ecology, to direct the respondent to immediately desist from the undertaking the
activities complained of and to take positive steps to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore the environment.

Answer No. 1: True

Question No. 2: In a citizen suit, proof of personal injury is required.

Answer No. 2: False, a citizen suit is filed in the public interest, hence, no proof of personal injury is
required.

Question No. 3: Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) is also available under the writ of
kalikasan and writ of continuing mandamus as a relief.

Answer No. 3: True

Question No. 4: A Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) is effective for forty-eight hours
(48) hours and may not be extended.

Answer No. 4: False. Section 8, Rule 2 of the Rules of Procedures for Environmental Cases provides in
part that If it appears from the verified complaint with a prayer for the issuance of an Environmental
Protection Order (EPO) that the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer grave injustice
and irreparable injury, the executive judge of the multiple-sala court before raffle or the presiding judge
of a single-sala court as the case may be, may issue ex parte a TEPO effective for only seventy-two (72)
hours from date of the receipt of the TEPO by the party or person enjoined. Within said period, the court
where the case is assigned, shall conduct a summary hearing to determine whether the TEPO may be
extended until the termination of the case.

Question No. 5: The writ of kalikasan is categorized as a special civil action.

Answer No. 5: True

Question No. 6: The petition for a writ of kalikasan shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) where
the concerned environmental issue is situated.

Answer No. 6: False. Section 3, Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedures for Environmental Cases provides that
the petition shall be filed with the Supreme Court or with any of the stations of the Court of Appeals.

Question No. 7: Given that a petition for a writ of kalikasan is a certiorari petition, discovery measures
are not available.
Answer No. 7: False. Section 12, Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedures for Environmental Cases allows
discovery measures in a petition for a writ of kalikasan, such as ocular inspection and production and
inspection of documents or things.

Question No. 8: A petition for continuing mandamus in environmental cases is exempt from the payment
of docket fees.

Answer No. 8: True

Question No. 9: After the court granted the privilege of the writ of continuing mandamus requiring the
respondent to perform an act or series of acts, the respondent is not required to take actions other than
the act subject of the mandamus.

Answer No. 9: False. Section 7, Rule 8 of the Rules of Procedures for Environmental Cases provides in
part that the court shall require the respondent to submit periodic reports detailing the progress and
execution of the judgment, and the court may, by itself or through a commissioner or the appropriate
government agency, evaluate and monitor compliance.

Question No. 10: Like a petition for writ of kalikasan, a petition for continuing mandamus shall be filed
with the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.

Answer No. 10: False. Section 2, Rule 8 of the Rules of Procedures for Environmental Cases provides that
the petition shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction over the territory where the
actionable neglect or omission occurred or with the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.