THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES:

A JUDICIAL COPING MECHANISM TO MEET THE

CHALLENGES OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES

1. INTRODUCTION

I bring you good news from the Philippines today. Thankfully, it is not
coupled with bad news. Exactly a week after the 40th year of the observance of
Earth Day, on 29 April 2010, the Philippine Supreme Court formally launched
the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases which took effect on the same
date. They are the first of their kind in the world at this time. Their issuance is
hailed by environmental advocates everywhere.

The birthing of these Rules was a meticulous effort spearheaded by our

dynamic Chief Justice Reynato Puno, a most fitting legacy to the next Court as
he retires this month. The process was in direct consultation with all
stakeholders, including the Chamber of Mines and other business groups, and
the Asian Development Bank, as well as environmental law scholars, whose
inputs were factored in.

2. FEATURES

2.1 SCOPE
The Rules are applicable to civil, criminal and special civil actions
involving enforcement or violation of environmental laws filed with the first and
second level courts designated as special environmental courts or “Green
Benches”. There are 117 of them.

2.2 NOVEL CONCEPTS INTRODUCED

2.2.1 Precautionary Principle – states that when human activities may lead
to threats of serious and irreversible damage to the environment that is
scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or
diminish that threat. This was articulated in some international
covenants like the Rio Declaration and the Kyoto Protocol. It is adopted
from Australia, India and Canada.

2.2.2 Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) – an action,

whether civil, criminal or administrative, brought against any person,
institution or any government agency or local government unit or its
officials and employees, with the intent to harass, vex, exert undue
 2

pressure or stifle any legal recourse that such person, institution or

government agency has taken or may take in the enforcement of
environmental laws, protection of the environment or assertion of
environmental rights. This is adopted from various states in the United
States, like New York, Washington, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. It
eventually found its way into the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999 and the
Solid Waste Management Act.

2.2.3 Writ of Kalikasan – Kalikasan is the Filipino word for nature. The writ of
kalikasan is a remedy available in special civil actions to a natural or
juridical person, entity authorized by law, people’s organization, non-
government organization, or any public interest group accredited by or
registered with any government agency, on behalf of persons whose
constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated, or
threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public
official or employee, or private individual or entity, involving
environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health
or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces. A petition
for the issuance of this writ shall be filed only with the Supreme Court or
the Court of Appeals. The petitioner shall be exempt from the payment
of docket fees. If the petition is sufficient in form and substance, the
appellate court shall issue the writ within three days from the time of
filing. The reliefs granted under this writ include having the respondent
1.) permanently cease and desist from committing an act or neglecting
performance of a duty appertaining to environmental laws resulting in
environmental destruction or damage; 2.) protect, preserve, rehabilitate
or restore the environment; 3.) monitor strict compliance with decisions
and orders of the court; 4.) make periodic reports on the execution of a
final judgment.

This is a particularly useful remedy that is distinctly applicable to

environmental cases the subject matters of which transcend
geographical boundaries, a fact which the counsel of respondent will
surely take issue with given the limited territorial jurisdiction in criminal
cases, and venue in civil, of trial courts.

Hardly had the Rules taken effect when a petition for the issuance
of this writ was filed with the Supreme Court by staunch champion of the
environment Atty. Antonio Oposa, a recent recipient of the Ramon
Magsaysay Awards, the Asian counterpart of the Nobel Prize. He is
 3

calling on the national government to install a more effective nationwide

flood control project by implementing a 1989 law requiring the
construction of water wells and rainwater collectors.

2.2.4 Continuing Mandamus – a writ issued in an environmental case

directing any government agency or officer thereof to perform an act or
series of acts decreed by final judgment which shall remain effective until
judgment is fully satisfied.

2.2.5 Citizen Suit – any Filipino citizen, in representation of others, including

minors and generations yet unborn, may file an action to enforce rights
or obligations under environmental laws. This requires publication once
in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines or furnishing all
affected barangays, the smallest geographical political units akin to
villages, with a copy of the court order containing a brief description of
the cause of action and the reliefs prayed for. Payment of docket fees is
deferred. They shall serve as first lien on the judgment award. The
Clean Air Act and the Solid Waste Management Act include provisions
on citizen suits.

2.2.6 Environmental Protection Order (EPO) – an order issued by the trial

court directing or enjoining any person or government agency to perform
or desist from performing an act in order to protect, preserve or
rehabilitate the environment. If it appears from the complaint with a
prayer for the issuance of an EPO that the matter is of extreme urgency
and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury, the
court may issue a Temporary EPO effective for 72 hours during which
time the court shall conduct a summary hearing to determine if the
Temporary EPO may be extended until the termination of the case or
lifted. No bond is required.

2.3 ANOTHER SALIENT FEATURE OF THE RULES: Prioritization of

Adjudication
Since “Green Benches” do not handle exclusively environmental
cases, the Rules provide that priority shall be given to these cases by
limiting the time for the adjudication of civil cases to one year from the
time of filing up to rendition of judgment. While regular cases are to be
decided not later than three months from the time of submission for
decision, only 60 days is given to “Green Benches” for environmental
cases. The conduct of trial is limited to two months from the date of
 4

issuance of the pre-trial order. This is made possible by the provision

that affidavits marked during the pre-trial shall be presented as direct
examination of the affiants, subject to cross examination by the adverse
party.

The period of disposition insofar as criminal cases are concerned

is even a shorter 10 months from the date of arraignment.

To make the periods for adjudication more realistic, the filing of

certain pleadings is prohibited.

3. CONCLUSION

Now that these Rules are in place, it is our hope that we can wield them
properly so that their core objective of protecting and advancing the
constitutional right of our people to a balanced and healthful ecology can be
attained. The rest of the world will be all the better for it and the Philippines will
be honoring its international environmental commitments. A wise man once
said, “We do not inherit the earth from our parents; we borrow it from our
children.”