You are on page 1of 2

Title: Leovegildo R. Ruzol vs. The Hon.

Sandiganbaya and the People of the Philippines


Legal Basis: PD. 705 (Revised Forestry Code)
Ponente: Velasco Jr. J.
Division and Decision: Third Division (unanimous.)

Facts: Ruzol was the mayor of General Nakar, Quezon. Earlier in his term, he organized a Multi-Sectoral Consultative
Assembly composed of civil society groups, public officials and concerned stakeholders with the end in view of
regulating and monitoring the transportation of salvaged forest products within the vicinity of General Nakar.
Among those present in the organizational meeting were Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Officer
(PENRO) Rogelio Delgado Sr. and Bishop Julio Xavier Labayen, the OCD-DD of the Prelature of Infanta Emeritus of
the Catholic Church and Chairperson of TIPAN, an environmental non-government organization that operates in the
municipalities of General Nakar, Infanta and Real in Quezon province. During the said assembly, the participants
agreed that to regulate the salvaged forests products, the Office of the Mayor, through Ruzol, shall issue a permit to
transport after payment of the corresponding fees to the municipal treasurer.

Consequently, from 2001 to 2004, two hundred twenty-one (221) permits to transport salvaged forest
products were issued to various recipients, of which forty-three (43) bore the signature of Ruzol while the remaining
one hundred seventy-eight (178) were signed by his co-accused Guillermo T. Sabiduria (Sabiduria), then municipal
administrator of General Nakar.

On June 2006, on the basis of the issued Permits to Transport, 221 Information for violation of Art. 177 of
the RPC or for Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions were filed against Ruzol and Sabiduria, docketed as
Criminal Case Nos. SB-08-CRIM-0039 to 0259.

Issue: Whether the authority to monitor and regulate the transportation of salvaged forest product is solely with the
DENR, and no one else.

Ruling: No, In ruling that the DENR, and not the local government units (LGUs), has the authority to issue transportation
permits of salvaged forest products, the Sandiganbayan invoked Presidential Decree No. 705 (PD 705), otherwise known as
the Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines and in relation to Executive Order No. 192, Series of 1987 (EO 192), or the
Reorganization Act of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Section 5 of PD 705 provides:

Section 5. Jurisdiction of Bureau. The Bureau [of Forest Management] shall have jurisdiction and authority over all forest
land, grazing lands, and all forest reservations including watershed reservations presently administered by other
government agencies or instrumentalities. It shall be responsible for the protection, development, management,
regeneration, and reforestation of forest lands; the regulation and supervision of the operation of licensees, lessees and
permittees for the taking or use of forest products therefrom or the occupancy or use thereof;
xxx.

On the other hand, the pertinent provisions of EO 192 state:

SECTION 4. Mandate. The Department shall be the primary government agency responsible for the conservation,
management, development, and proper use of the country’s environment and natural resources, specifically forest and
grazing lands of the public domain, as well as the licensing and regulation of all natural resources as maybe provided
for by law in order to ensure equitable sharing of the benefits derived therefrom for the welfare of the present and
future generations of Filipinos.
xxx
The Sandiganbayan further reasoned that the “monitoring and regulating salvaged forest products” is not one of the
DENR’s functions which had been devolved upon LGUs. It cited Sec. 17 of Republic Act No. 7160 (RA 7160) or the
Local Government Code (LGC) of 1991 which provides:
Section 17. Basic Services and Facilities.

(a) Local government units shall endeavor to be self-reliant and shall continue exercising the powers and discharging
the duties and functions currently vested upon them. They shall also discharge the functions and responsibilities of
national agencies and offices devolved to them pursuant to this Code. Local government units shall likewise exercise
such other powers and discharge such other functions and responsibilities as are necessary, appropriate, or incidental
to efficient and effective provisions of the basic services and facilities enumerated herein.
According to the Sandiganbayan, Sec. 17 of the LGC has limited the devolved functions of the DENR to the LGUs to
the following: (1) the implementation of community-based forestry products; (2) management and control of
communal forests with an area not exceeding fifty (50) square kilometers; and (3) establishment of tree parks,
greenbelts and similar forest development projects. It also referred to DENR Administrative Order No. 30, Series of
1992 (DAO 1992-30), which enumerates the forest management functions, programs and projects of the DENR
which had been devolved to the LGUs

We disagree and refuse to subscribe to this postulate suggesting exclusivity. As shall be discussed shortly, the LGU
also has, under the LGC of 1991, ample authority to promulgate rules, regulations and ordinances to monitor and
regulate salvaged forest products, provided that the parameters set forth by law for their enactment have been
faithfully complied with.

While the DENR is, indeed, the primary government instrumentality charged with the mandate of promulgating rules
and regulations for the protection of the environment and conservation of natural resources, it is not the only
government instrumentality clothed with such authority. While the law has designated DENR as the primary agency
tasked to protect the environment, it was not the intention of the law to arrogate unto the DENR the exclusive
prerogative of exercising this function. Whether in ordinary or in legal parlance, the word “primary” can never be
taken to be synonymous with “sole” or “exclusive.” In fact, neither the pertinent provisions of PD 705 nor EO 192
suggest that the DENR, or any of its bureaus, shall exercise such authority to the exclusion of all other government
instrumentalities, i.e., LGUs.

On the contrary, the claim of DENR’s supposedly exclusive mandate is easily negated by the principle of local
autonomy enshrined in the 1987 Constitution in relation to the general welfare clause under Sec. 16 of the LGC of
1991, which provides:

Section 16. General Welfare. - Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those
necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective
governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare.

Pursuant to the aforequoted provision, municipal governments are clothed with authority to enact such ordinances
and issue such regulations as may be necessary to carry out and discharge the responsibilities conferred upon them
by law, and such as shall be necessary and proper to provide for the health, safety, comfort and convenience, maintain
peace and order, improve public morals, promote the prosperity and general welfare of the municipality and its
inhabitants, and ensure the protection of property in the municipality.

As held in Oposa v. Factoran, Jr., the right of the people “to a balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the
correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment.” In ensuring that this duty is upheld and maintained, a
local government unit may, if it deems necessary, promulgate ordinances aimed at enhancing the right of the people
to a balanced ecology and, accordingly, provide adequate measures in the proper utility and conservation of natural
resources within its territorial jurisdiction. As can be deduced from Ruzol’s memoranda, as affirmed by the parties
in their Joint Stipulation of Facts, it was in the pursuit of this objective that the subject permits to transport were
issued by Ruzol––to regulate the salvaged forest products found within the municipality of General Nakar and, hence,
prevent abuse and occurrence of any untoward illegal logging in the area.

In the same vein, there is a clear merit to the view that the monitoring and regulation of salvaged forest products
through the issuance of appropriate permits is a shared responsibility which may be done either by DENR or by the
LGUs or by both. DAO 1992-30, in fact, says as much, thus: the “LGUs shall share with the national government,
particularly the DENR, the responsibility in the sustainable management and development of the environment and
natural resources within their territorial jurisdiction.” The significant role of the LGUs in environment protection is
further echoed in Joint Memorandum Circular No. 98-01(JMC 1998-01) or the Manual of Procedures for DENR-DILG-
LGU Partnership on Devolved and other Forest Management Functions, which was promulgated jointly by the DILG
and the DENR in 1998

You might also like