Court issues landmark rules to cover environmental cases

THE Supreme Court on Wednesday issued landmark rules to govern how courts must handle cases involving the environment.

Chief Justice Reynato Puno said the rules, the first of their kind in the world, “will serve as a significant catalyst in support of sweeping and far-reaching reforms in environmental litigation and protection.”

Environmental activists started anticipating the new rules after the Supreme Court organized a forum on environmental justice in April last year.

The forum allowed the Court to receive feedback directly from the different stakeholders in the justice system, which aimed at determining the ways that the courts can help protect and preserve the environment.

The forum was supported by the American Bar Association-Rule of Law Initiative, the Hanns Seidel Foundation, the United Nations Development Program, the United States Agency for International Development, the US Department of the Interior and the World Bank.

Puno said the rules on environmental cases reflected the Constitution’s guarantee of the people’s right to a healthy environment.

Court Administrator and spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the new rules would expedite court proceedings on environmental cases.

The rules also dissolved the 117 special courts created in 2008 to hear environmental cases.

“Under the new rules, environmental cases would now be heard by first and second level courts [metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts in cities, municipal trial courts, municipal circuit trial courts and regional trial courts],” Marquez said.

Records showed that over 3,000 environmental cases were pending before the courts, and all of them would be distributed to the lower courts.

Marquez said the new rules were based on “the best practices in the world” in terms of handling environmental cases.

The highlights of the rules include provisions for citizen suits, consent decrees, environmental protection orders, a writ of kalikasan, a writ of continuing mandamus, strategic lawsuits against public participation, and the precautionary principle.

Puno said the provision on citizen suits liberalized standing for all cases filed seeking to enforce environmental laws. Citizen suits had proven critical in forcing the government and its agencies to act on its duty to protect and preserve the environment.

To further encourage the protection of the environment, litigants seeking to enforce environmental rights may file their cases as citizen suits, which permit the deferred payment of filing fees until after the judgment.

The use of a consent decree is another way to resolve environmental cases by allowing for a compromise agreement between two parties in an environmental suit.

An environmental protection order refers to an order issued by the court directing or enjoining any person or government agency to perform or desist from performing an act to protect, preserve or rehabilitate the environment.

Similar to the writs of habeas corpus, amparo and habeas data, the writ of kalikasan is immediate and contains a very specific set of remedies that an individual or group may seek in cases involving the environment. The writ may be issued quickly to facilitate the prompt disposition of cases before the court.

As a special civil action, the writ of continuing mandamus may be availed of to compel the performance of an act specifically enjoined by law. It permits the court to retain jurisdiction after judgment to ensure the successful implementation of the reliefs mandated under the court’s decision. For this purpose, the court may compel the submission of compliance reports from the respondent government agencies, as well as avail themselves of other means to monitor compliance with its decision.

The cases to be covered by the new writ would involve violations of the laws on mining, forestry, marine, fisheries, wildlife, waste management, toxic substances, and hazardous waste, Puno said.

Both petitions for the issuance of the writs of kalikasan and mandamus are exempt from the payment of docket fees.

Environmental advocates welcomed the new rules.

“This is a new day for the life sources of land, air and water,” said Antonio Oposa Jr., who handles environmental cases.

“Ordinary citizens like us are now empowered to take legal action where our political leaders will not. We thank the Supreme Court for this truly landmark achievement, the first of its kind in the world.”

Gloria Estenzo Ramos of Global Legal Action on Climate Change added: “This will transform the legal profession and the practice of law in our country and instil a mindset of sustainability among stakeholders, especially the lawyers, government agencies and the corporate sector. Lawyers will become stewards of both the law and the environment.”

Lawyer Roan Libarios, governor of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, described the rules as “a major breakthrough.’’ –Rey E. Requejo, Manila Standard Today