1.

Is the problem of toxic waste also happening in the

Philippines? In Mindanao? In Cagayan de Oro?
The 1987 Constitution provides that the State shall protect
and advance the right of the people to a balance and healthful
ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of life.
Moreover, the legislature has enacted several ENR laws to give
life to this constitutional mandate. But the glaring reality is
that much of our rich natural resources have deteriorated as a
result, for one, of industrialization.
Over the past decades, the Philippines has ushered in an
export-oriented industry. Many geographical areas have been
converted to host booming industrial activities.These areas,
called industrial estates or ecozones are found all over the
Philippines, with 522 companies found in Luzon and 54 others
scattered in Visayas and Mindanao. While our country may
have profited from the production of semiconductor and
electronics (which constitutes 70% of export earnings), these
companies have become the major contributors of hazardous
wastes particularly solid and semi-solid wastes. Additionally,
toxic gas emissions from the manufacture of such export
products include ammonia, chlorine, acetic acid, to name a
few, and have been proven deadly to nearby communities.
In a 2002 study conducted on coal-fired power plants located
in Pangasinan, Quezon, and Zambales provinces, it was shown
that fly ash produced from these plants contain toxic elements
such as arsenic, chromium, and lead. These elements cause
threats to the receiving environment. For instance, water
bodies contaminated with fly ash resulted in physiological
damage to amphibians living in such aquatic systems. They
also pose adverse health effects to nearby communities.
In Mindanao, there is strong opposition towards mining
activities which resultantly produce adverse impacts on
agriculture, as well as forest and water resources. In 2010,
residents in Surigao del Norte filed a class suit against three
mining companies and DENR for permitting mining exploration
without proper legal consultation with people in affected areas.
Aside from toxic waste produced from mining and
industrialization, the growing amount of garbage piling in cities
has become a huge environmental dilemma. More recently in
Cagayan de Oro, it was reported that the city dump is posing
health hazards to residents nearby. According to the City Social
Waste Management smelly, black ooze has reached a creek
that expands through Silvercreek Subdivision and Assumption
Village in Patag. Residents now fear that the leachate might
seep into the aquifers beneath the dump and contaminate
water systems in Patag and Calaanan. In March this year, the
City Health Office conducted a study on water stations near
the landfill and found that several children living in nearby
areas are suffering from skin and upper respiratory diseases

2. Can a civil action for damages prosper here in our country

given our laws and rules of procedure?
Civil actions for damages in Philippine environmental cases will
NOT prosper. Although the Rules of Procedure of Environmental
Cases governs the procedure in civil, criminal and special civil
actions involving the enforcement or violations of
environmental laws; such does not provide for the recovery of

damages suffered by a private party or individual as a result of

the respondents violation of environmental laws.
The Rules provide that the courts may issue restraining orders
against the respondents or compel them to comply with
environmental laws and protect, preserve, rehabilitate and
restore the environment. Such sanctions are ordered instead of
the indemnification of damages because the latter will not be
able to address the interest of the public but only of the
specific party or individual who has been personally injured by
the respondents violation of the law.
If an individual seeks to recover damages for injury suffered,
he must file a separate civil action for such recovery; the
ordinary Rules of Civil Procedure, and not the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases, will apply in such case.
3. What are the limitations/benefits of a civil action approach
versus a public interest perspective in environmental cases?

Civil Action Approach

1. Party must have locus standi
2. Injured party may recover damages by reason of
violation of the environmental law
3. Ordinary Rules on Civil Procedure governs
Public Interest Perspective
1. Since public interest is involved, minor and unborn
children also have legal standing
2. Injured party may not recover damages by reason of
violation of the environmental law
3. Rules of Procedure in Environmental Law governs

The limitations and benefits of a civil action approach versus a

public interest approach in environmental cases are as follow:
1) A Criminal case is faster than a civil case; it takes more than
a year to dispose a civil case while it takes only 10 months to
dispose of a criminal case. The period is based on the
limitation to decided cases under the Rules of Court.
2) Civil cases are however easier to win compared to criminal
cases. A Criminal case requires proof beyond reasonable doubt
to sustain a conviction while in civil cases mere preponderance
of evidence is sufficient.
3) In civil actions, the punishment is merely punitive in
character, it merely involves the payment of money. Thus
compared to criminal cases, an individual can be sentenced to
prison. It is the probability of imprisonment that most
characterizes criminal law from civil law. Hence, if a civil
defendant is established to be liable or settles to a consent
decree, the consequence can be a monetary fine or injunctive
relief actions required to correct the violation and come into
compliance

Group 1

institution or the government has taken or may take in

the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of
the environment or assertion of environmental rights
shall be treated as a SLAPP and shall be governed by
these Rules.

Agcopra, Maria Therese

Co, Abigail Joyce

A SLAPP suit is a harassment suit and is used as a

defense by the party against whom a complaint
involving a violation of an environmental law is filed.
The court is required to prioritize the resolution of a
SLAPP defense. If the court dismisses the action,
damages may be awarded. Such dismissal will be a bar
to the refilling of a similar case.

Pacasum, Pangarungan Mikko

Tinsay, Jeorgia Marie
Seno, Stephanie Hariette

4.

5.

(2) Can a civil action for damages prosper here in our country
given our laws and rules of procedure?
The Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases was
promulgated on April 13, 2010, through AM No. 09-6-8-SC,
governing the procedure in
Under the Rules, the following are Civil Remedies available in
Environmental Cases:
1. Writ of Kalikasan (RULE 7)
This remedy may be availed of individually or
cumulatively and is available to natural or juridical
entities whose constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology is violated, or threatened with
violation by an unlawful act or omission by a public
person.
The Writ of Kalikasan does NOT include the awarding of
damages for personal injuries in order to encourage
public participation in the availment of such writ. So if
a party seeks to recover damages for injury suffered,
he must file a separate civil action for such recovery.
2. Writ of Continuing Mandamus (RULE 8)
This remedy is similar to the filing of an ordinary writ of
mandamus but an issuance of a Temporary
Environmental Protection Order is also a remedy made
available prior to the issuance of the Writ of Continuing
Mandamus. Such remedy includes the awarding of
damages to the injured party by reason of the
malicious neglect of duty of the respondent.
3. Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)
(Rule 6)
This is a legal action filed to harass, vex, exert undue
pressure or stifle any legal recourse that any person,

Temporary Environmental Protection Order (SEC 8,

RULE 2)
This refers to an order issued by the court to directing
a person or entity to perform or refrain from
performing an act in order to protect, preserve or
rehabilitate the environment. It is both a prohibitive
and mandatory relief.
Consent Decree
This allows for compromise agreement between two
conflicting interests in environmental litigation
involving issues which may or may not be litigated in
court.

A person whose right

LIMITATIONS:
1. No Damages may be awarded in a citizen suit because
such is filed in public interest and it is the environment
which is vindicated and not a particular person or party
who suffers damage or injury.
2. Environmental cases are involves public interest and
by awarding damages to a private person or party by
reason of a violation of an environmental law would
contradict the public interest character of

And limitation sa civil kay with regards to persons with locus standi. Kay
in public i erest case pwd mga minors and unborn children ang
petitioners
And mas paspas ang envi case kay dapat 1 year lng ang trial
okay!
in relation to environmental cases, a civil action approach is more
beneficial than a public interest perspective if the injured party seeks to
recover damages. While a public interest approach is more beneficial if
the perty seeks to vindicate the environment.
The rules of ordinary procedure apply in civil action approach, while the
Rule of Procedure in Environmental Cases apply in public interet
perspective