Environmental & Natural Resources Law

2nd Year - LLB

Republic of the Philippines THE HONORABLE FULGENCIO S. FACTORAN,
SUPREME COURT JR., in his capacity as the Secretary of the
Manila Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, and THE HONORABLE ERIBERTO
EN BANC U. ROSARIO, Presiding Judge of the RTC,
Makati, Branch 66, respondents.

Oposa Law Office for petitioners.

G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993
The Solicitor General for respondents.
JUAN ANTONIO, ANNA ROSARIO and JOSE
ALFONSO, all surnamed OPOSA, minors, and  
represented by their parents ANTONIO and
RIZALINA OPOSA, ROBERTA NICOLE SADIUA, DAVIDE, JR., J.:
minor, represented by her parents CALVIN and
ROBERTA SADIUA, CARLO, AMANDA SALUD In a broader sense, this petition bears upon the
and PATRISHA, all surnamed FLORES, minors right of Filipinos to a balanced and healthful
and represented by their parents ENRICO and ecology which the petitioners dramatically
NIDA FLORES, GIANINA DITA R. FORTUN, associate with the twin concepts of "inter-
minor, represented by her parents SIGRID and generational responsibility" and "inter-
DOLORES FORTUN, GEORGE II and MA. generational justice." Specifically, it touches on
CONCEPCION, all surnamed MISA, minors and the issue of whether the said petitioners have a
represented by their parents GEORGE and cause of action to "prevent the misappropriation
MYRA MISA, BENJAMIN ALAN V. PESIGAN, or impairment" of Philippine rainforests and
minor, represented by his parents ANTONIO "arrest the unabated hemorrhage of the country's
and ALICE PESIGAN, JOVIE MARIE ALFARO, vital life support systems and continued rape of
minor, represented by her parents JOSE and Mother Earth."
MARIA VIOLETA ALFARO, MARIA
The controversy has its genesis in Civil Case No.
CONCEPCION T. CASTRO, minor, represented
90-77 which was filed before Branch 66 (Makati,
by her parents FREDENIL and JANE CASTRO,
Metro Manila) of the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
JOHANNA DESAMPARADO, 
National Capital Judicial Region. The principal
minor, represented by her parents JOSE and
plaintiffs therein, now the principal petitioners,
ANGELA DESAMPRADO, CARLO JOAQUIN T.
are all minors duly represented and joined by
1 NARVASA, minor, represented by his parents
their respective parents. Impleaded as an
F. Sagot
GREGORIO II and CRISTINE CHARITY
additional plaintiff is the Philippine Ecological
NARVASA, MA. MARGARITA, JESUS IGNACIO,
Network, Inc. (PENI), a domestic, non-stock and
MA. ANGELA and MARIE GABRIELLE, all
non-profit corporation organized for the purpose
surnamed SAENZ, minors, represented by
of, inter alia, engaging in concerted action geared
their parents ROBERTO and AURORA SAENZ,
for the protection of our environment and natural
KRISTINE, MARY ELLEN, MAY, GOLDA
resources. The original defendant was the
MARTHE and DAVID IAN, all surnamed KING,
Honorable Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr., then
minors, represented by their parents MARIO
Secretary of the Department of Environment and
and HAYDEE KING, DAVID, FRANCISCO and
Natural Resources (DENR). His substitution in
THERESE VICTORIA, all surnamed ENDRIGA,
this petition by the new Secretary, the Honorable
minors, represented by their parents
Angel C. Alcala, was subsequently ordered upon
BALTAZAR and TERESITA ENDRIGA, JOSE
proper motion by the petitioners.  1 The
MA. and REGINA MA., all surnamed ABAYA,
complaint 2 was instituted as a taxpayers' class
minors, represented by their parents
suit 3 and alleges that the plaintiffs "are all
ANTONIO and MARICA ABAYA, MARILIN,
citizens of the Republic of the Philippines,
MARIO, JR. and MARIETTE, all surnamed
taxpayers, and entitled to the full benefit, use
CARDAMA, minors, represented by their
and enjoyment of the natural resource treasure
parents MARIO and LINA CARDAMA,
that is the country's virgin tropical forests." The
CLARISSA, ANN MARIE, NAGEL, and IMEE
same was filed for themselves and others who are
LYN, all surnamed OPOSA, minors and
equally concerned about the preservation of said
represented by their parents RICARDO and
resource but are "so numerous that it is
MARISSA OPOSA, PHILIP JOSEPH, STEPHEN
impracticable to bring them all before the Court."
JOHN and ISAIAH JAMES, all surnamed
The minors further asseverate that they
QUIPIT, minors, represented by their parents
"represent their generation as well as generations
JOSE MAX and VILMI QUIPIT, BUGHAW
yet unborn." 4 Consequently, it is prayed for that
CIELO, CRISANTO, ANNA, DANIEL and
judgment be rendered:
FRANCISCO, all surnamed BIBAL, minors,
represented by their parents FRANCISCO, JR. . . . ordering defendant, his agents,
and MILAGROS BIBAL, and THE PHILIPPINE representatives and other persons acting in his
ECOLOGICAL NETWORK, INC., petitioners,  behalf to —
vs.
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
(1) Cancel all existing timber license agreements such as the phenomenon of global warming,
in the country; otherwise known as the "greenhouse effect."

(2) Cease and desist from receiving, accepting, Plaintiffs further assert that the adverse and
processing, renewing or approving new timber detrimental consequences of continued and
license agreements. deforestation are so capable of unquestionable
demonstration that the same may be submitted
and granting the plaintiffs ". . . such other reliefs as a matter of judicial notice. This
just and equitable under the premises." 5 notwithstanding, they expressed their intention
to present expert witnesses as well as
The complaint starts off with the general
documentary, photographic and film evidence in
averments that the Philippine archipelago of
the course of the trial.
7,100 islands has a land area of thirty million
(30,000,000) hectares and is endowed with rich, As their cause of action, they specifically allege
lush and verdant rainforests in which varied, rare that:
and unique species of flora and fauna may be
found; these rainforests contain a genetic, CAUSE OF ACTION
biological and chemical pool which is
irreplaceable; they are also the habitat of 7. Plaintiffs replead by reference the foregoing
indigenous Philippine cultures which have allegations.
existed, endured and flourished since time
8. Twenty-five (25) years ago, the Philippines had
immemorial; scientific evidence reveals that in
some sixteen (16) million hectares of rainforests
order to maintain a balanced and healthful
constituting roughly 53% of the country's land
ecology, the country's land area should be
mass.
utilized on the basis of a ratio of fifty-four per
cent (54%) for forest cover and forty-six per cent 9. Satellite images taken in 1987 reveal that
(46%) for agricultural, residential, industrial, there remained no more than 1.2 million hectares
commercial and other uses; the distortion and of said rainforests or four per cent (4.0%) of the
disturbance of this balance as a consequence of country's land area.
deforestation have resulted in a host of
environmental tragedies, such as (a) water 10. More recent surveys reveal that a mere
shortages resulting from drying up of the water 850,000 hectares of virgin old-growth rainforests
table, otherwise known as the "aquifer," as well are left, barely 2.8% of the entire land mass of
2 as of rivers, brooks and streams, (b) salinization the Philippine archipelago and about F.3.0Sagot
million
of the water table as a result of the intrusion hectares of immature and uneconomical
therein of salt water, incontrovertible examples of secondary growth forests.
which may be found in the island of Cebu and
the Municipality of Bacoor, Cavite, (c) massive 11. Public records reveal that the defendant's,
erosion and the consequential loss of soil fertility predecessors have granted timber license
and agricultural productivity, with the volume of agreements ('TLA's') to various corporations to cut
soil eroded estimated at one billion the aggregate area of 3.89 million hectares for
(1,000,000,000) cubic meters per annum — commercial logging purposes.
approximately the size of the entire island of
A copy of the TLA holders and the corresponding
Catanduanes, (d) the endangering and extinction
areas covered is hereto attached as Annex "A".
of the country's unique, rare and varied flora and
fauna, (e) the disturbance and dislocation of 12. At the present rate of deforestation, i.e. about
cultural communities, including the 200,000 hectares per annum or 25 hectares per
disappearance of the Filipino's indigenous hour — nighttime, Saturdays, Sundays and
cultures, (f) the siltation of rivers and seabeds holidays included — the Philippines will be bereft
and consequential destruction of corals and other of forest resources after the end of this ensuing
aquatic life leading to a critical reduction in decade, if not earlier.
marine resource productivity, (g) recurrent spells
of drought as is presently experienced by the 13. The adverse effects, disastrous consequences,
entire country, (h) increasing velocity of typhoon serious injury and irreparable damage of this
winds which result from the absence of continued trend of deforestation to the plaintiff
windbreakers, (i) the floodings of lowlands and minor's generation and to generations yet unborn
agricultural plains arising from the absence of are evident and incontrovertible. As a matter of
the absorbent mechanism of forests, (j) the fact, the environmental damages enumerated in
siltation and shortening of the lifespan of multi- paragraph 6 hereof are already being felt,
billion peso dams constructed and operated for experienced and suffered by the generation of
the purpose of supplying water for domestic uses, plaintiff adults.
irrigation and the generation of electric power,
and (k) the reduction of the earth's capacity to 14. The continued allowance by defendant of TLA
process carbon dioxide gases which has led to holders to cut and deforest the remaining forest
perplexing and catastrophic climatic changes stands will work great damage and irreparable
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
injury to plaintiffs — especially plaintiff minors b. "protect the nation's marine wealth." (Section
and their successors — who may never see, use, 2, ibid);
benefit from and enjoy this rare and unique
natural resource treasure. c. "conserve and promote the nation's cultural
heritage and resources (sic)" (Section 14, Article
This act of defendant constitutes a XIV, id.);
misappropriation and/or impairment of the
natural resource property he holds in trust for d. "protect and advance the right of the people to
the benefit of plaintiff minors and succeeding a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with
generations. the rhythm and harmony of nature." (Section 16,
Article II, id.)
15. Plaintiffs have a clear and constitutional right
to a balanced and healthful ecology and are 21. Finally, defendant's act is contrary to the
entitled to protection by the State in its capacity highest law of humankind — the natural law —
as the parens patriae. and violative of plaintiffs' right to self-
preservation and perpetuation.
16. Plaintiff have exhausted all administrative
remedies with the defendant's office. On March 2, 22. There is no other plain, speedy and adequate
1990, plaintiffs served upon defendant a final remedy in law other than the instant action to
demand to cancel all logging permits in the arrest the unabated hemorrhage of the country's
country. vital life support systems and continued rape of
Mother Earth. 6
A copy of the plaintiffs' letter dated March 1,
1990 is hereto attached as Annex "B". On 22 June 1990, the original defendant,
Secretary Factoran, Jr., filed a Motion to Dismiss
17. Defendant, however, fails and refuses to the complaint based on two (2) grounds, namely:
cancel the existing TLA's to the continuing (1) the plaintiffs have no cause of action against
serious damage and extreme prejudice of him and (2) the issue raised by the plaintiffs is a
plaintiffs. political question which properly pertains to the
legislative or executive branches of Government.
18. The continued failure and refusal by In their 12 July 1990 Opposition to the Motion,
defendant to cancel the TLA's is an act violative of the petitioners maintain that (1) the complaint
the rights of plaintiffs, especially plaintiff minors shows a clear and unmistakable cause of action,
who may be left with a country that is desertified (2) the motion is dilatory and (3) F. theSagot
action
3 (sic), bare, barren and devoid of the wonderful presents a justiciable question as it involves the
flora, fauna and indigenous cultures which the defendant's abuse of discretion.
Philippines had been abundantly blessed with.
On 18 July 1991, respondent Judge issued an
19. Defendant's refusal to cancel the order granting the aforementioned motion to
aforementioned TLA's is manifestly contrary to dismiss. 7 In the said order, not only was the
the public policy enunciated in the Philippine defendant's claim — that the complaint states no
Environmental Policy which, in pertinent part, cause of action against him and that it raises a
states that it is the policy of the State — political question — sustained, the respondent
Judge further ruled that the granting of the relief
(a) to create, develop, maintain and improve
prayed for would result in the impairment of
conditions under which man and nature can
contracts which is prohibited by the fundamental
thrive in productive and enjoyable harmony with
law of the land.
each other;
Plaintiffs thus filed the instant special civil action
(b) to fulfill the social, economic and other
for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules
requirements of present and future generations of
of Court and ask this Court to rescind and set
Filipinos and;
aside the dismissal order on the ground that the
(c) to ensure the attainment of an environmental respondent Judge gravely abused his discretion
quality that is conductive to a life of dignity and in dismissing the action. Again, the parents of the
well-being. (P.D. 1151, 6 June 1977) plaintiffs-minors not only represent their
children, but have also joined the latter in this
20. Furthermore, defendant's continued refusal case. 8
to cancel the aforementioned TLA's is
contradictory to the Constitutional policy of the On 14 May 1992, We resolved to give due course
State to — to the petition and required the parties to submit
their respective Memoranda after the Office of the
a. effect "a more equitable distribution of Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Comment in behalf
opportunities, income and wealth" and "make full of the respondents and the petitioners filed a
and efficient use of natural resources (sic)." reply thereto.
(Section 1, Article XII of the Constitution);
Petitioners contend that the complaint clearly
and unmistakably states a cause of action as it
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
contains sufficient allegations concerning their Before going any further, We must first focus on
right to a sound environment based on Articles some procedural matters. Petitioners instituted
19, 20 and 21 of the Civil Code (Human Civil Case No. 90-777 as a class suit. The original
Relations), Section 4 of Executive Order (E.O.) No. defendant and the present respondents did not
192 creating the DENR, Section 3 of Presidential take issue with this matter. Nevertheless, We
Decree (P.D.) No. 1151 (Philippine Environmental hereby rule that the said civil case is indeed a
Policy), Section 16, Article II of the 1987 class suit. The subject matter of the complaint is
Constitution recognizing the right of the people to of common and general interest not just to
a balanced and healthful ecology, the concept of several, but to all citizens of the Philippines.
generational genocide in Criminal Law and the Consequently, since the parties are so numerous,
concept of man's inalienable right to self- it, becomes impracticable, if not totally
preservation and self-perpetuation embodied in impossible, to bring all of them before the court.
natural law. Petitioners likewise rely on the We likewise declare that the plaintiffs therein are
respondent's correlative obligation per Section 4 numerous and representative enough to ensure
of E.O. No. 192, to safeguard the people's right to the full protection of all concerned interests.
a healthful environment. Hence, all the requisites for the filing of a valid
class suit under Section 12, Rule 3 of the Revised
It is further claimed that the issue of the Rules of Court are present both in the said civil
respondent Secretary's alleged grave abuse of case and in the instant petition, the latter being
discretion in granting Timber License Agreements but an incident to the former.
(TLAs) to cover more areas for logging than what
is available involves a judicial question. This case, however, has a special and novel
element. Petitioners minors assert that they
Anent the invocation by the respondent Judge of represent their generation as well as generations
the Constitution's non-impairment clause, yet unborn. We find no difficulty in ruling that
petitioners maintain that the same does not they can, for themselves, for others of their
apply in this case because TLAs are not generation and for the succeeding generations,
contracts. They likewise submit that even if TLAs file a class suit. Their personality to sue in behalf
may be considered protected by the said clause, of the succeeding generations can only be based
it is well settled that they may still be revoked by on the concept of intergenerational responsibility
the State when the public interest so requires. insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful
ecology is concerned. Such a right, as hereinafter
On the other hand, the respondents aver that the
4 expounded, F.considers 
Sagot
petitioners failed to allege in their complaint a
the "rhythm and harmony of nature." Nature
specific legal right violated by the respondent
means the created world in its entirety. 9 Such
Secretary for which any relief is provided by law.
rhythm and harmony indispensably
They see nothing in the complaint but vague and
include, inter alia, the judicious disposition,
nebulous allegations concerning an
utilization, management, renewal and
"environmental right" which supposedly entitles
conservation of the country's forest, mineral,
the petitioners to the "protection by the state in
land, waters, fisheries, wildlife, off-shore areas
its capacity as parens patriae." Such allegations,
and other natural resources to the end that their
according to them, do not reveal a valid cause of
exploration, development and utilization be
action. They then reiterate the theory that the
equitably accessible to the present as well as
question of whether logging should be permitted
future generations. 10 Needless to say, every
in the country is a political question which
generation has a responsibility to the next to
should be properly addressed to the executive or
preserve that rhythm and harmony for the full
legislative branches of Government. They
enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology.
therefore assert that the petitioners' resources is
Put a little differently, the minors' assertion of
not to file an action to court, but to lobby before
their right to a sound environment constitutes, at
Congress for the passage of a bill that would ban
the same time, the performance of their
logging totally.
obligation to ensure the protection of that right
As to the matter of the cancellation of the TLAs, for the generations to come.
respondents submit that the same cannot be
The locus standi of the petitioners having thus
done by the State without due process of law.
been addressed, We shall now proceed to the
Once issued, a TLA remains effective for a certain
merits of the petition.
period of time — usually for twenty-five (25)
years. During its effectivity, the same can neither After a careful perusal of the complaint in
be revised nor cancelled unless the holder has question and a meticulous consideration and
been found, after due notice and hearing, to have evaluation of the issues raised and arguments
violated the terms of the agreement or other adduced by the parties, We do not hesitate to find
forestry laws and regulations. Petitioners' for the petitioners and rule against the
proposition to have all the TLAs indiscriminately respondent Judge's challenged order for having
cancelled without the requisite hearing would be been issued with grave abuse of discretion
violative of the requirements of due process.
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
amounting to lack of jurisdiction. The pertinent While the right to a balanced and healthful
portions of the said order reads as follows: ecology is to be found under the Declaration of
Principles and State Policies and not under the
xxx xxx xxx Bill of Rights, it does not follow that it is less
important than any of the civil and political rights
After a careful and circumspect evaluation of the
enumerated in the latter. Such a right belongs to
Complaint, the Court cannot help but agree with
a different category of rights altogether for it
the defendant. For although we believe that
concerns nothing less than self-preservation and
plaintiffs have but the noblest of all intentions, it
self-perpetuation — aptly and fittingly stressed
(sic) fell short of alleging, with sufficient
by the petitioners — the advancement of which
definiteness, a specific legal right they are
may even be said to predate all governments and
seeking to enforce and protect, or a specific legal
constitutions. As a matter of fact, these basic
wrong they are seeking to prevent and redress
rights need not even be written in the
(Sec. 1, Rule 2, RRC). Furthermore, the Court
Constitution for they are assumed to exist from
notes that the Complaint is replete with vague
the inception of humankind. If they are now
assumptions and vague conclusions based on
explicitly mentioned in the fundamental charter,
unverified data. In fine, plaintiffs fail to state a
it is because of the well-founded fear of its
cause of action in its Complaint against the
framers that unless the rights to a balanced and
herein defendant.
healthful ecology and to health are mandated as
Furthermore, the Court firmly believes that the state policies by the Constitution itself, thereby
matter before it, being impressed with political highlighting their continuing importance and
color and involving a matter of public policy, may imposing upon the state a solemn obligation to
not be taken cognizance of by this Court without preserve the first and protect and advance the
doing violence to the sacred principle of second, the day would not be too far when all else
"Separation of Powers" of the three (3) co-equal would be lost not only for the present generation,
branches of the Government. but also for those to come — generations which
stand to inherit nothing but parched earth
The Court is likewise of the impression that it incapable of sustaining life.
cannot, no matter how we stretch our
jurisdiction, grant the reliefs prayed for by the The right to a balanced and healthful ecology
plaintiffs, i.e., to cancel all existing timber carries with it the correlative duty to refrain from
license agreements in the country and to cease impairing the environment. During the debates
5 and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, on this right in one of the plenary sessions of the
F. Sagot
renewing or approving new timber license 1986 Constitutional Commission, the following
agreements. For to do otherwise would amount to exchange transpired between Commissioner
"impairment of contracts" abhored (sic) by the Wilfrido Villacorta and Commissioner Adolfo
fundamental law. 11 Azcuna who sponsored the section in question:

We do not agree with the trial court's conclusions MR. VILLACORTA:

that the plaintiffs failed to allege with sufficient
Does this section mandate the State to provide
definiteness a specific legal right involved or a
sanctions against all forms of pollution — air,
specific legal wrong committed, and that the
water and noise pollution?
complaint is replete with vague assumptions and
conclusions based on unverified data. A reading MR. AZCUNA:
of the complaint itself belies these conclusions.
Yes, Madam President. The right to healthful (sic)
The complaint focuses on one specific environment necessarily carries with it the
fundamental legal right — the right to a balanced correlative duty of not impairing the same and,
and healthful ecology which, for the first time in therefore, sanctions may be provided for
our nation's constitutional history, is solemnly impairment of environmental balance. 12
incorporated in the fundamental law. Section 16,
Article II of the 1987 Constitution explicitly The said right implies, among many other things,
provides: the judicious management and conservation of
the country's forests.
Sec. 16. The State shall protect and advance the
right of the people to a balanced and healthful Without such forests, the ecological or
ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony environmental balance would be irreversiby
of nature. disrupted.

This right unites with the right to health which is Conformably with the enunciated right to a
provided for in the preceding section of the same balanced and healthful ecology and the right to
article: health, as well as the other related provisions of
the Constitution concerning the conservation,
Sec. 15. The State shall protect and promote the development and utilization of the country's
right to health of the people and instill health natural resources, 13 then President Corazon C.
consciousness among them.
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
Aquino promulgated on 10 June 1987 E.O. No. other hand, specifically speaks of the mandate of
192, 14 Section 4 of which expressly mandates the DENR; however, it makes particular reference
that the Department of Environment and Natural to the fact of the agency's being subject to law
Resources "shall be the primary government and higher authority. Said section provides:
agency responsible for the conservation,
management, development and proper use of the Sec. 2. Mandate. — (1) The Department of
country's environment and natural resources, Environment and Natural Resources shall be
specifically forest and grazing lands, mineral, primarily responsible for the implementation of
resources, including those in reservation and the foregoing policy.
watershed areas, and lands of the public domain,
(2) It shall, subject to law and higher authority,
as well as the licensing and regulation of all
be in charge of carrying out the State's
natural resources as may be provided for by law
constitutional mandate to control and supervise
in order to ensure equitable sharing of the
the exploration, development, utilization, and
benefits derived therefrom for the welfare of the
conservation of the country's natural resources.
present and future generations of Filipinos."
Section 3 thereof makes the following statement Both E.O. NO. 192 and the Administrative Code
of policy: of 1987 have set the objectives which will serve
as the bases for policy formulation, and have
Sec. 3. Declaration of Policy. — It is hereby
defined the powers and functions of the DENR.
declared the policy of the State to ensure the
sustainable use, development, management, It may, however, be recalled that even before the
renewal, and conservation of the country's forest, ratification of the 1987 Constitution, specific
mineral, land, off-shore areas and other natural statutes already paid special attention to the
resources, including the protection and "environmental right" of the present and future
enhancement of the quality of the environment, generations. On 6 June 1977, P.D. No. 1151
and equitable access of the different segments of (Philippine Environmental Policy) and P.D. No.
the population to the development and the use of 1152 (Philippine Environment Code) were issued.
the country's natural resources, not only for the The former "declared a continuing policy of the
present generation but for future generations as State (a) to create, develop, maintain and improve
well. It is also the policy of the state to recognize conditions under which man and nature can
and apply a true value system including social thrive in productive and enjoyable harmony with
and environmental cost implications relative to each other, (b) to fulfill the social, economic and
6 their utilization, development and conservation of other requirements of present and F. Sagot
future
our natural resources. generations of Filipinos, and (c) to insure the
attainment of an environmental quality that is
This policy declaration is substantially re-stated
conducive to a life of dignity and well-
it Title XIV, Book IV of the Administrative Code of
being." 16 As its goal, it speaks of the
1987, 15specifically in Section 1 thereof which
"responsibilities of each generation as trustee and
reads:
guardian of the environment for succeeding
Sec. 1. Declaration of Policy. — (1) The State shall generations." 17 The latter statute, on the other
ensure, for the benefit of the Filipino people, the hand, gave flesh to the said policy.
full exploration and development as well as the
Thus, the right of the petitioners (and all those
judicious disposition, utilization, management,
they represent) to a balanced and healthful
renewal and conservation of the country's forest,
ecology is as clear as the DENR's duty — under
mineral, land, waters, fisheries, wildlife, off-shore
its mandate and by virtue of its powers and
areas and other natural resources, consistent
functions under E.O. No. 192 and the
with the necessity of maintaining a sound
Administrative Code of 1987 — to protect and
ecological balance and protecting and enhancing
advance the said right.
the quality of the environment and the objective
of making the exploration, development and A denial or violation of that right by the other
utilization of such natural resources equitably who has the corelative duty or obligation to
accessible to the different segments of the present respect or protect the same gives rise to a cause
as well as future generations. of action. Petitioners maintain that the granting
of the TLAs, which they claim was done with
(2) The State shall likewise recognize and apply a
grave abuse of discretion, violated their right to a
true value system that takes into account social
balanced and healthful ecology; hence, the full
and environmental cost implications relative to
protection thereof requires that no further TLAs
the utilization, development and conservation of
should be renewed or granted.
our natural resources.
A cause of action is defined as:
The above provision stresses "the necessity of
maintaining a sound ecological balance and . . . an act or omission of one party in violation of
protecting and enhancing the quality of the the legal right or rights of the other; and its
environment." Section 2 of the same Title, on the essential elements are legal right of the plaintiff,
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
correlative obligation of the defendant, and act or part of any branch or instrumentality of the
omission of the defendant in violation of said Government.
legal right. 18
Commenting on this provision in his
It is settled in this jurisdiction that in a motion to book, Philippine Political Law, 22 Mr. Justice
dismiss based on the ground that the complaint Isagani A. Cruz, a distinguished member of this
fails to state a cause of action, 19 the question Court, says:
submitted to the court for resolution involves the
sufficiency of the facts alleged in the complaint The first part of the authority represents the
itself. No other matter should be considered; traditional concept of judicial power, involving
furthermore, the truth of falsity of the said the settlement of conflicting rights as conferred
allegations is beside the point for the truth as law. The second part of the authority
thereof is deemed hypothetically admitted. The represents a broadening of judicial power to
only issue to be resolved in such a case is: enable the courts of justice to review what was
admitting such alleged facts to be true, may the before forbidden territory, to wit, the discretion of
court render a valid judgment in accordance with the political departments of the government.
the prayer in the complaint? 20 In Militante vs.
As worded, the new provision vests in the
Edrosolano, 21 this Court laid down the rule that
judiciary, and particularly the Supreme Court,
the judiciary should "exercise the utmost care
the power to rule upon even the wisdom of the
and circumspection in passing upon a motion to
decisions of the executive and the legislature and
dismiss on the ground of the absence thereof
to declare their acts invalid for lack or excess of
[cause of action] lest, by its failure to manifest a
jurisdiction because tainted with grave abuse of
correct appreciation of the facts alleged and
discretion. The catch, of course, is the meaning of
deemed hypothetically admitted, what the law
"grave abuse of discretion," which is a very elastic
grants or recognizes is effectively nullified. If that
phrase that can expand or contract according to
happens, there is a blot on the legal order. The
the disposition of the judiciary.
law itself stands in disrepute."
In Daza vs. Singson, 23 Mr. Justice Cruz, now
After careful examination of the petitioners'
speaking for this Court, noted:
complaint, We find the statements under the
introductory affirmative allegations, as well as the In the case now before us, the jurisdictional
specific averments under the sub-heading objection becomes even less tenable and decisive.
CAUSE OF ACTION, to be adequate enough to The reason is that, even if we were F. to Sagot
assume
7
show, prima facie, the claimed violation of their that the issue presented before us was political in
rights. On the basis thereof, they may thus be nature, we would still not be precluded from
granted, wholly or partly, the reliefs prayed for. It revolving it under the expanded jurisdiction
bears stressing, however, that insofar as the conferred upon us that now covers, in proper
cancellation of the TLAs is concerned, there is the cases, even the political question. Article VII,
need to implead, as party defendants, the Section 1, of the Constitution clearly
grantees thereof for they are indispensable provides: . . .
parties.
The last ground invoked by the trial court in
The foregoing considered, Civil Case No. 90-777 dismissing the complaint is the non-impairment
be said to raise a political question. Policy of contracts clause found in the Constitution. The
formulation or determination by the executive or court a quo declared that:
legislative branches of Government is not
squarely put in issue. What is principally The Court is likewise of the impression that it
involved is the enforcement of a right vis-a- cannot, no matter how we stretch our
vis policies already formulated and expressed in jurisdiction, grant the reliefs prayed for by the
legislation. It must, nonetheless, be emphasized plaintiffs, i.e., to cancel all existing timber license
that the political question doctrine is no longer, agreements in the country and to cease and
the insurmountable obstacle to the exercise of desist from receiving, accepting, processing,
judicial power or the impenetrable shield that renewing or approving new timber license
protects executive and legislative actions from agreements. For to do otherwise would amount to
judicial inquiry or review. The second paragraph "impairment of contracts" abhored (sic) by the
of section 1, Article VIII of the Constitution states fundamental law. 24
that:
We are not persuaded at all; on the contrary, We
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of are amazed, if not shocked, by such a sweeping
justice to settle actual controversies involving pronouncement. In the first place, the respondent
rights which are legally demandable and Secretary did not, for obvious reasons, even
enforceable, and to determine whether or not invoke in his motion to dismiss the non-
there has been a grave abuse of discretion impairment clause. If he had done so, he would
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the have acted with utmost infidelity to the
Government by providing undue and
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
unwarranted benefits and advantages to the Since timber licenses are not contracts, the non-
timber license holders because he would have impairment clause, which reads:
forever bound the Government to strictly respect
the said licenses according to their terms and Sec. 10. No law impairing, the obligation of
conditions regardless of changes in policy and the contracts shall be passed. 27
demands of public interest and welfare. He was
cannot be invoked.
aware that as correctly pointed out by the
petitioners, into every timber license must be In the second place, even if it is to be assumed
read Section 20 of the Forestry Reform Code (P.D. that the same are contracts, the instant case
No. 705) which provides: does not involve a law or even an executive
issuance declaring the cancellation or
. . . Provided, That when the national interest so
modification of existing timber licenses. Hence,
requires, the President may amend, modify,
the non-impairment clause cannot as yet be
replace or rescind any contract, concession,
invoked. Nevertheless, granting further that a law
permit, licenses or any other form of privilege
has actually been passed mandating
granted herein . . .
cancellations or modifications, the same cannot
Needless to say, all licenses may thus be revoked still be stigmatized as a violation of the non-
or rescinded by executive action. It is not a impairment clause. This is because by its very
contract, property or a property right protested nature and purpose, such as law could have only
by the due process clause of the Constitution. been passed in the exercise of the police power of
In Tan vs. Director of Forestry, 25 this Court held: the state for the purpose of advancing the right of
the people to a balanced and healthful ecology,
. . . A timber license is an instrument by which promoting their health and enhancing the general
the State regulates the utilization and disposition welfare. In Abe vs. Foster Wheeler 
of forest resources to the end that public welfare Corp. 28 this Court stated:
is promoted. A timber license is not a contract
within the purview of the due process clause; it is The freedom of contract, under our system of
only a license or privilege, which can be validly government, is not meant to be absolute. The
withdrawn whenever dictated by public interest same is understood to be subject to reasonable
or public welfare as in this case. legislative regulation aimed at the promotion of
public health, moral, safety and welfare. In other
A license is merely a permit or privilege to do words, the constitutional guaranty of non-
8 what otherwise would be unlawful, and is not a impairment of obligations of contract isF.limited
Sagotby
contract between the authority, federal, state, or the exercise of the police power of the State, in
municipal, granting it and the person to whom it the interest of public health, safety, moral and
is granted; neither is it property or a property general welfare.
right, nor does it create a vested right; nor is it
taxation (37 C.J. 168). Thus, this Court held that The reason for this is emphatically set forth
the granting of license does not create irrevocable in Nebia vs. New York, 29 quoted in Philippine
rights, neither is it property or property rights American Life Insurance Co. vs. Auditor
(People vs. Ong Tin, 54 O.G. 7576). General, 30 to wit:

We reiterated this pronouncement in Felipe Under our form of government the use of property
Ysmael, Jr. & Co., Inc. vs. Deputy Executive and the making of contracts are normally matters
Secretary: 26 of private and not of public concern. The general
rule is that both shall be free of governmental
. . . Timber licenses, permits and license interference. But neither property rights nor
agreements are the principal instruments by contract rights are absolute; for government
which the State regulates the utilization and cannot exist if the citizen may at will use his
disposition of forest resources to the end that property to the detriment of his fellows, or
public welfare is promoted. And it can hardly be exercise his freedom of contract to work them
gainsaid that they merely evidence a privilege harm. Equally fundamental with the private right
granted by the State to qualified entities, and do is that of the public to regulate it in the common
not vest in the latter a permanent or irrevocable interest.
right to the particular concession area and the
forest products therein. They may be validly In short, the non-impairment clause must yield
amended, modified, replaced or rescinded by the to the police power of the state. 31
Chief Executive when national interests so
Finally, it is difficult to imagine, as the trial court
require. Thus, they are not deemed contracts
did, how the non-impairment clause could apply
within the purview of the due process of law
with respect to the prayer to enjoin the
clause [See Sections 3(ee) and 20 of Pres. Decree
respondent Secretary from receiving, accepting,
No. 705, as amended. Also, Tan v. Director of
processing, renewing or approving new timber
Forestry, G.R. No. L-24548, October 27, 1983,
licenses for, save in cases of renewal, no contract
125 SCRA 302].
would have as of yet existed in the other
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
instances. Moreover, with respect to renewal, the operating in the field or sector of activity involved.
holder is not entitled to it as a matter of right. Whether such beneficiaries' right of action may
be found under any and all circumstances, or
WHEREFORE, being impressed with merit, the whether some failure to act, in the first instance,
instant Petition is hereby GRANTED, and the on the part of the governmental agency
challenged Order of respondent Judge of 18 July concerned must be shown ("prior exhaustion of
1991 dismissing Civil Case No. 90-777 is hereby administrative remedies"), is not discussed in the
set aside. The petitioners may therefore amend decision and presumably is left for future
their complaint to implead as defendants the determination in an appropriate case.
holders or grantees of the questioned timber
license agreements. The Court has also declared that the complaint
has alleged and focused upon "one specific
No pronouncement as to costs. fundamental legal right — the right to a balanced
and healthful ecology" (Decision, p. 14). There is
SO ORDERED.
no question that "the right to a balanced and
Cruz, Padilla, Bidin, Griño-Aquino, Regalado, healthful ecology" is "fundamental" and that,
Romero, Nocon, Bellosillo, Melo and Quiason, JJ., accordingly, it has been "constitutionalized." But
concur. although it is fundamental in character, I
suggest, with very great respect, that it cannot be
Narvasa, C.J., Puno and Vitug, JJ., took no part. characterized as "specific," without doing
excessive violence to language. It is in fact very
  difficult to fashion language more comprehensive
in scope and generalized in character than a right
 
to "a balanced and healthful ecology." The list of
  particular claims which can be subsumed under
this rubic appears to be entirely open-ended:
Separate Opinions prevention and control of emission of toxic fumes
and smoke from factories and motor vehicles; of
  discharge of oil, chemical effluents, garbage and
raw sewage into rivers, inland and coastal waters
FELICIANO, J., concurring
by vessels, oil rigs, factories, mines and whole
I join in the result reached by my distinguished communities; of dumping of organic and
9 brother in the Court, Davide, Jr., J., in this case inorganic wastes on open land, streets and
F. Sagot
which, to my mind, is one of the most important thoroughfares; failure to rehabilitate land after
cases decided by this Court in the last few years. strip-mining or open-pit mining; kaingin or slash-
The seminal principles laid down in this decision and-burn farming; destruction of fisheries, coral
are likely to influence profoundly the direction reefs and other living sea resources through the
and course of the protection and management of use of dynamite or cyanide and other chemicals;
the environment, which of course embraces the contamination of ground water resources; loss of
utilization of all the natural resources in the certain species of fauna and flora; and so on. The
territorial base of our polity. I have therefore other statements pointed out by the Court:
sought to clarify, basically to myself, what the Section 3, Executive Order No. 192 dated 10
Court appears to be saying. June 1987; Section 1, Title XIV, Book IV of the
1987 Administrative Code; and P.D. No. 1151,
The Court explicitly states that petitioners have dated 6 June 1977 — all appear to be
the locus standi necessary to sustain the bringing formulations of policy, as general and abstract
and, maintenance of this suit (Decision, pp. 11- as the constitutional statements of basic policy in
12). Locus standi is not a function of petitioners' Article II, Section 16 ("the right — to a balanced
claim that their suit is properly regarded as and healthful ecology") and 15 ("the right to
a class suit. I understand locus standi to refer to health").
the legal interest which a plaintiff must have in
the subject matter of the suit. Because of the very P.D. No. 1152, also dated 6 June 1977, entitled
broadness of the concept of "class" here involved "The Philippine Environment Code," is, upon the
— membership in this "class" appears to other hand, a compendious collection of more
embrace everyone living in the country whether "specific environment management policies" and
now or in the  "environment quality standards" (fourth
future — it appears to me that everyone who may "Whereas" clause, Preamble) relating to an
be expected to benefit from the course of action extremely wide range of topics:
petitioners seek to require public respondents to
(a) air quality management;
take, is vested with the necessary locus standi.
The Court may be seen therefore to be (b) water quality management;
recognizing a beneficiaries' right of action in the
field of environmental protection, as against both (c) land use management;
the public administrative agency directly
concerned and the private persons or entities
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
(d) natural resources management and action be a specific, operable legal right, rather
conservation embracing: than a constitutional or statutory policy, for at
least two (2) reasons. One is that unless the legal
(i) fisheries and aquatic resources; right claimed to have been violated or disregarded
is given specification in operational terms,
(ii) wild life;
defendants may well be unable to defend
(iii) forestry and soil conservation; themselves intelligently and effectively; in other
words, there are due process dimensions to this
(iv) flood control and natural calamities; matter.

(v) energy development; The second is a broader-gauge consideration —

where a specific violation of law or applicable
(vi) conservation and utilization of surface and regulation is not alleged or proved, petitioners
ground water can be expected to fall back on the expanded
conception of judicial power in the second
(vii) mineral resources
paragraph of Section 1 of Article VIII of the
Two (2) points are worth making in this Constitution which reads:
connection. Firstly, neither petitioners nor the
Section 1. . . .
Court has identified the particular provision or
provisions (if any) of the Philippine Environment Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of
Code which give rise to a specific legal right justice to settle actual controversies involving
which petitioners are seeking to enforce. rights which are legally demandable and
Secondly, the Philippine Environment Code enforceable, and to determine whether or not
identifies with notable care the particular there has been a grave abuse of
government agency charged with the formulation discretion amounting to lack or excess of
and implementation of guidelines and programs jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
dealing with each of the headings and sub- instrumentality of the Government. (Emphasis
headings mentioned above. The Philippine supplied)
Environment Code does not, in other words,
appear to contemplate action on the part When substantive standards as general as "the
of private persons who are beneficiaries of right to a balanced and healthy ecology" and "the
implementation of that Code. right to health" are combined with remedial
10 standards as broad ranging as "a grave F. abuse
Sagotof
As a matter of logic, by finding petitioners' cause discretion amounting to lack or excess of
of action as anchored on a legal right comprised jurisdiction," the result will be, it is respectfully
in the constitutional statements above noted, the submitted, to propel courts into the uncharted
Court is in effect saying that Section 15 (and ocean of social and economic policy making. At
Section 16) of Article II of the Constitution are least in respect of the vast area of environmental
self-executing and judicially enforceable even in protection and management, our courts have no
their present form. The implications of this claim to special technical competence and
doctrine will have to be explored in future cases; experience and professional qualification. Where
those implications are too large and far-reaching no specific, operable norms and standards are
in nature even to be hinted at here. shown to exist, then the policy making
departments — the legislative and executive
My suggestion is simply that petitioners must,
departments — must be given a real and effective
before the trial court, show a more specific legal
opportunity to fashion and promulgate those
right — a right cast in language of a significantly
norms and standards, and to implement them
lower order of generality than Article II (15) of the
before the courts should intervene.
Constitution — that is or may be violated by the
actions, or failures to act, imputed to the public My learned brother Davide, Jr., J., rightly insists
respondent by petitioners so that the trial court that the timber companies, whose concession
can validly render judgment granting all or part agreements or TLA's petitioners demand public
of the relief prayed for. To my mind, the Court respondents should cancel, must be impleaded in
should be understood as simply saying that such the proceedings below. It might be asked that, if
a more specific legal right or rights may well petitioners' entitlement to the relief demanded
exist in our corpus of law, considering the general is not dependent upon proof of breach by the
policy principles found in the Constitution and timber companies of one or more of the specific
the existence of the Philippine Environment terms and conditions of their concession
Code, and that the trial court should have given agreements (and this, petitioners implicitly
petitioners an effective opportunity so to assume), what will those companies litigate
demonstrate, instead of aborting the proceedings about? The answer I suggest is that they may
on a motion to dismiss. seek to dispute the existence of the specific legal
right petitioners should allege, as well as the
It seems to me important that the legal right
reality of the claimed factual nexus between
which is an essential component of a cause of
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
petitioners' specific legal rights and the claimed The Court has also declared that the complaint
wrongful acts or failures to act of public has alleged and focused upon "one specific
respondent administrative agency. They may also fundamental legal right — the right to a balanced
controvert the appropriateness of the remedy or and healthful ecology" (Decision, p. 14). There is
remedies demanded by petitioners, under all the no question that "the right to a balanced and
circumstances which exist. healthful ecology" is "fundamental" and that,
accordingly, it has been "constitutionalized." But
I vote to grant the Petition for Certiorari because although it is fundamental in character, I
the protection of the environment, including the suggest, with very great respect, that it cannot be
forest cover of our territory, is of extreme characterized as "specific," without doing
importance for the country. The doctrines set out excessive violence to language. It is in fact very
in the Court's decision issued today should, difficult to fashion language more comprehensive
however, be subjected to closer examination. in scope and generalized in character than a right
to "a balanced and healthful ecology." The list of
 
particular claims which can be subsumed under
  this rubic appears to be entirely open-ended:
prevention and control of emission of toxic fumes
# Separate Opinions and smoke from factories and motor vehicles; of
discharge of oil, chemical effluents, garbage and
FELICIANO, J., concurring raw sewage into rivers, inland and coastal waters
by vessels, oil rigs, factories, mines and whole
I join in the result reached by my distinguished
communities; of dumping of organic and
brother in the Court, Davide, Jr., J., in this case
inorganic wastes on open land, streets and
which, to my mind, is one of the most important
thoroughfares; failure to rehabilitate land after
cases decided by this Court in the last few years.
strip-mining or open-pit mining; kaingin or slash-
The seminal principles laid down in this decision
and-burn farming; destruction of fisheries, coral
are likely to influence profoundly the direction
reefs and other living sea resources through the
and course of the protection and management of
use of dynamite or cyanide and other chemicals;
the environment, which of course embraces the
contamination of ground water resources; loss of
utilization of all the natural resources in the
certain species of fauna and flora; and so on. The
territorial base of our polity. I have therefore
other statements pointed out by the Court:
sought to clarify, basically to myself, what the
Section 3, Executive Order No. 192 dated 10
Court appears to be saying.
11 June 1987; Section 1, Title XIV, Book F.IVSagot
of the
The Court explicitly states that petitioners have 1987 Administrative Code; and P.D. No. 1151,
the locus standi necessary to sustain the bringing dated 6 June 1977 — all appear to be
and, maintenance of this suit (Decision, pp. 11- formulations of policy, as general and abstract
12). Locus standi is not a function of petitioners' as the constitutional statements of basic policy in
claim that their suit is properly regarded as Article II, Section 16 ("the right — to a balanced
a class suit. I understand locus standi to refer to and healthful ecology") and 15 ("the right to
the legal interest which a plaintiff must have in health").
the subject matter of the suit. Because of the very
P.D. No. 1152, also dated 6 June 1977, entitled
broadness of the concept of "class" here involved
"The Philippine Environment Code," is, upon the
— membership in this "class" appears to
other hand, a compendious collection of more
embrace everyone living in the country whether
"specific environment management policies" and
now or in the 
"environment quality standards" (fourth
future — it appears to me that everyone who may
"Whereas" clause, Preamble) relating to an
be expected to benefit from the course of action
extremely wide range of topics:
petitioners seek to require public respondents to
take, is vested with the necessary locus standi. (a) air quality management;
The Court may be seen therefore to be
recognizing a beneficiaries' right of action in the (b) water quality management;
field of environmental protection, as against both
the public administrative agency directly (c) land use management;
concerned and the private persons or entities
(d) natural resources management and
operating in the field or sector of activity involved.
conservation embracing:
Whether such beneficiaries' right of action may
be found under any and all circumstances, or (i) fisheries and aquatic resources;
whether some failure to act, in the first instance,
on the part of the governmental agency (ii) wild life;
concerned must be shown ("prior exhaustion of
administrative remedies"), is not discussed in the (iii) forestry and soil conservation;
decision and presumably is left for future
(iv) flood control and natural calamities;
determination in an appropriate case.
(v) energy development;
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
(vi) conservation and utilization of surface and regulation is not alleged or proved, petitioners
ground water can be expected to fall back on the expanded
conception of judicial power in the second
(vii) mineral resources paragraph of Section 1 of Article VIII of the
Constitution which reads:
Two (2) points are worth making in this
connection. Firstly, neither petitioners nor the Section 1. . . .
Court has identified the particular provision or
provisions (if any) of the Philippine Environment Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of
Code which give rise to a specific legal right justice to settle actual controversies involving
which petitioners are seeking to enforce. rights which are legally demandable and
Secondly, the Philippine Environment Code enforceable, and to determine whether or not
identifies with notable care the particular there has been a grave abuse of
government agency charged with the formulation discretion amounting to lack or excess of
and implementation of guidelines and programs jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
dealing with each of the headings and sub- instrumentality of the Government. (Emphasis
headings mentioned above. The Philippine supplied)
Environment Code does not, in other words,
appear to contemplate action on the part When substantive standards as general as "the
of private persons who are beneficiaries of right to a balanced and healthy ecology" and "the
implementation of that Code. right to health" are combined with remedial
standards as broad ranging as "a grave abuse of
As a matter of logic, by finding petitioners' cause discretion amounting to lack or excess of
of action as anchored on a legal right comprised jurisdiction," the result will be, it is respectfully
in the constitutional statements above noted, the submitted, to propel courts into the uncharted
Court is in effect saying that Section 15 (and ocean of social and economic policy making. At
Section 16) of Article II of the Constitution are least in respect of the vast area of environmental
self-executing and judicially enforceable even in protection and management, our courts have no
their present form. The implications of this claim to special technical competence and
doctrine will have to be explored in future cases; experience and professional qualification. Where
those implications are too large and far-reaching no specific, operable norms and standards are
in nature even to be hinted at here. shown to exist, then the policy making
departments — the legislative and executive
12 My suggestion is simply that petitioners must, departments — must be given a real and F. Sagot
effective
before the trial court, show a more specific legal opportunity to fashion and promulgate those
right — a right cast in language of a significantly norms and standards, and to implement them
lower order of generality than Article II (15) of the before the courts should intervene.
Constitution — that is or may be violated by the
actions, or failures to act, imputed to the public My learned brother Davide, Jr., J., rightly insists
respondent by petitioners so that the trial court that the timber companies, whose concession
can validly render judgment granting all or part agreements or TLA's petitioners demand public
of the relief prayed for. To my mind, the Court respondents should cancel, must be impleaded in
should be understood as simply saying that such the proceedings below. It might be asked that, if
a more specific legal right or rights may well petitioners' entitlement to the relief demanded
exist in our corpus of law, considering the general is not dependent upon proof of breach by the
policy principles found in the Constitution and timber companies of one or more of the specific
the existence of the Philippine Environment terms and conditions of their concession
Code, and that the trial court should have given agreements (and this, petitioners implicitly
petitioners an effective opportunity so to assume), what will those companies litigate
demonstrate, instead of aborting the proceedings about? The answer I suggest is that they may
on a motion to dismiss. seek to dispute the existence of the specific legal
right petitioners should allege, as well as the
It seems to me important that the legal right reality of the claimed factual nexus between
which is an essential component of a cause of petitioners' specific legal rights and the claimed
action be a specific, operable legal right, rather wrongful acts or failures to act of public
than a constitutional or statutory policy, for at respondent administrative agency. They may also
least two (2) reasons. One is that unless the legal controvert the appropriateness of the remedy or
right claimed to have been violated or disregarded remedies demanded by petitioners, under all the
is given specification in operational terms, circumstances which exist.
defendants may well be unable to defend
themselves intelligently and effectively; in other I vote to grant the Petition for Certiorari because
words, there are due process dimensions to this the protection of the environment, including the
matter. forest cover of our territory, is of extreme
importance for the country. The doctrines set out
The second is a broader-gauge consideration —
where a specific violation of law or applicable
 Environmental & Natural Resources Law
2nd Year - LLB
in the Court's decision issued today should,
however, be subjected to closer examination.

13 F. Sagot