EN BANC

[ G.R. No. 175368, April 11, 2013 ]

LEAGUE OF PROVINCES OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONER, VS.

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND
HON. ANGELO T. REYES, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF DENR,
RESPONDENTS.

DECISION

PERALTA, J.:
This is a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus,[1] praying that
this Court order the following:  (1) declare as unconstitutional Section 17(b)
(3)(iii) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7160, otherwise known as The Local
Government Code of 1991 and Section 24 of Republic Act (R.A.)  No. 7076,
otherwise known as the People's Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991; (2)
prohibit and bar respondents from exercising control over provinces; and
(3) declare as illegal the respondent Secretary of the Department of Energy
and Natural Resources' (DENR)  nullification, voiding and cancellation of
the Small-Scale Mining permits issued by the Provincial Governor of
Bulacan.

The facts are as follows:

On March 28, 1996, Golden Falcon Mineral Exploration Corporation

(Golden Falcon) filed with the DENR Mines and Geosciences Bureau
Regional Office No. III (MGB R-III) an Application for Financial and
Technical Assistance Agreement (FTAA) covering an area of 61,136 hectares
situated in the Municipalities of San Miguel, San Ildefonso, Norzagaray and
San Jose del Monte, Bulacan.[2]

On April 29, 1998, the MGB R-III issued an Order denying Golden Falcon's
Application for Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement for failure to
secure area clearances from the Forest Management Sector and Lands
Management Sector of the DENR Regional Office No. III.[3]

On November 11, 1998, Golden Falcon filed an appeal with the DENR
Mines and Geosciences Bureau Central Office (MGB-Central Office), and
sought reconsideration of the Order dated April 29, 1998. [4]

On February 10, 2004, while Golden Falcon's appeal was pending, Eduardo
D. Mercado, Benedicto S. Cruz, Gerardo R. Cruz and Liberato Sembrano
filed with the Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office
(PENRO) of Bulacan  their respective Applications for Quarry Permit
(AQP), which covered the same area subject of Golden Falcon's Application
for Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement.[5]

On July 16, 2004, the MGB-Central Office issued an Order denying Golden
Falcon's appeal and affirming the MGB R-III's Order dated April 29, 1998.

On September 13, 2004, Atlantic Mines and Trading Corporation (AMTC)

filed with the PENRO of Bulacan an Application for Exploration Permit
(AEP) covering 5,281 hectares of the area covered by Golden Falcon's
Application for Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement. [6]

On October 19, 2004, DENR-MGB Director Horacio C. Ramos, in response

to MGB R-III Director Arnulfo V. Cabantog's memorandum query dated
September 8, 2004, categorically stated that the MGB-Central Office's
Order dated July 16, 2004 became final on August 11, 2004, fifteen (15)
days after Golden Falcon received the said Order, per the Certification
dated October 8, 2004 issued by the Postmaster II of the Philippine Postal
Corporation of Cainta, Rizal.[7]

Through letters dated May 5 and May 10, 2005, AMTC notified the PENRO
of Bulacan and the MGB R-III Director, respectively, that the subject
Applications for Quarry Permit fell within its (AMTC's) existing valid and
prior Application for Exploration Permit, and the the former area of Golden
Falcon was open to mining location only on August 11, 2004 per the
Memorandum dated October 19, 2004 of the MGB Director, Central Office.
[8]

On June 24, 2005, Ricardo Medina, Jr., PENRO of Bulacan, indorsed

AMTC's letter to the Provincial Legal Officer, Atty. Eugenio F.
Resurreccion, for his legal opinion on which date of denial of Golden
Falcon's application/appeal April 29, 1998 or July 16, 2004 - is to be
considered in the deliberation of the Provincial Mining Regulatory Board 
(PMRB) for the purpose of determining when the land subject of the
Applications for Quarry Permit could be considered open for application.
On June 28, 2005, Provincial Legal Officer Eugenio Resurreccion issued a
legal opinion stating that the Order dated July 16, 2004 of the MGB-Central
Office was a mere reaffirmation of the Order dated April 29, 1998 of the
MGB R-III; hence, the Order dated April 29, 1998 should be the reckoning
period of the denial of the application of Golden Falcon.

On July 22, 2005, AMTC filed with the PMRB of Bulacan a formal protest
against the aforesaid Applications for Quarry Permit on the ground that the
subject area was already covered by its Application for Exploration Permit.
[9]

On August 8, 2005, MGB R-III Director Cabantog, who was the concurrent
Chairman of the PMRB, endorsed to the Provincial Governor of Bulacan,
Governor Josefina M. dela Cruz, the aforesaid Applications for Quarry
Permit  that had apparently been converted to Applications for Small-Scale
Mining Permit of Eduardo D. Mercado, Benedicto S. Cruz, Gerardo R. Cruz
and Lucila S. Valdez (formerly Liberato Sembrano).[10]

On August 9, 2005, the PENRO of Bulacan issued four memoranda

recommending to Governor Dela Cruz the approval of the aforesaid
Applications for Small-Scale Mining Permit.[11]

On August 10, 2005, Governor Dela Cruz issued the corresponding Small-
Scale Mining Permits in favor of Eduardo D. Mercado, Benedicto S. Cruz,
Gerardo R. Cruz and Lucila S. Valdez.[12]

Subsequently, AMTC appealed to respondent DENR Secretary the grant of

the aforesaid Small-Scale Mining Permits, arguing that: (1) The PMRB of
Bulacan erred in giving due course to the Applications for Small-Scale
Mining Permit  without first resolving its formal protest; (2) The areas
covered by the Small-Scale Mining Permits fall within the area covered by
AMTC's valid prior Application for Exploration Permit; (3) The
Applications for Quarry Permit were illegally converted to Applications for
Small-Scale Mining Permit; (4) DENR-MGB Director Horacio C. Ramos'
ruling that the subject areas became open for mining location only on
August 11, 2004 was controlling; (5) The Small-Scale Mining Permits were
null and void because they covered areas that were never declared People's
Small-Scale Mining Program sites as mandated by Section 4 of the People's
Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991; and (6) Iron ore is not considered as one of
the quarry resources, as defined by Section 43 of the Philippine Mining Act
of 1995, which could be subjects of an Application for Quarry Permit. [13]

On August 8, 2006, respondent DENR Secretary rendered a Decision [14] in

favor of AMTC. The DENR Secretary agreed with MGB Director Horacio C.
Ramos that the area was open to mining location only on August 11, 2004,
fifteen (15) days after the receipt by Golden Falcon on July 27, 2004 of a
copy of the MGB-Central Office's Order dated July 16, 2004, which Order
denied Golden Falcon's appeal. According to the DENR Secretary, the filing
by Golden Falcon of the letter-appeal suspended the finality of the Order of
denial issued on April 29, 1998 by the Regional Director until the resolution
of the appeal on July 16, 2004 by the MGB-Central Office.  He stated that
the Applications for Quarry Permit were filed on February 10, 2004 when
the area was still closed to mining location; hence, the Small-Scale Mining
Permits granted by the PMRB and the Governor were null and void.  On the
other hand, the DENR Secretary declared that AMTC filed its Application
for Exploration Permit when the area was already open to other mining
applicants; thus, AMTC's Application for Exploration Permit was valid.
Moreover, the DENR Secretary held that the questioned Small-Scale
Mining Permits were issued in violation of Section 4 of R.A. No. 7076 and
beyond the authority of the Provincial Governor pursuant to Section 43 of
R.A. No. 7942, because the area was never proclaimed to be under the
People's Small-Scale Mining Program. Further, the DENR Secretary stated
that iron ore mineral is not considered among the quarry resources.

The dispositive portion of the DENR Secretary's Decision reads:

WHEREFORE, the Application for Exploration Permit, AEP-III-02-04 of

Atlantic Mines and Trading Corp. is declared valid and may now be given
due course. The Small-Scale Mining Permits, SSMP-B-002-05 of Gerardo
Cruz, SSMP-B-003-05 of Eduardo D. Mercado, SSMP-B-004-05 of
Benedicto S. Cruz and SSMP-B-005-05 of Lucila S. Valdez are
declared NULL AND VOID. Consequently, the said permits are
hereby CANCELLED.[15]

Hence, petitioner League of Provinces filed this petition.

Petitioner is a duly organized league of local governments incorporated

under R.A. No. 7160. Petitioner declares that it is composed of 81 provincial
governments, including the Province of Bulacan. It states that this is not an
action of one province alone, but the collective action of all provinces
through the League, as a favorable ruling will not only benefit one province,
but all provinces and all local governments.

Petitioner raises these issues:

WHETHER OR NOT SECTION 17(B)(3)(III) OF THE, 1991 LOCAL

GOVERNMENT CODE AND SECTION 24 OF THE PEOPLE'S SMALL-
SCALE MINING ACT OF 1991 ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR
PROVIDING FOR EXECUTIVE CONTROL AND INFRINGING UPON THE
LOCAL AUTONOMY OF PROVINCES.

II

WHETHER OR NOT THE ACT OF RESPONDENT [DENR] IN

NULLIFYING, VOIDING AND CANCELLING THE SMALL-SCALE
MINING PERMITS AMOUNTS TO EXECUTIVE CONTROL, NOT
MERELY SUPERVISION AND USURPS THE DEVOLVED POWERS OF
ALL PROVINCES.[16]

To start, the Court finds that petitioner has legal standing to file this
petition because it is tasked under Section 504 of the Local Government
Code of 1991 to promote local autonomy at the provincial level;[17] adopt
measures for the promotion of the welfare of all provinces and its officials
and employees;[18] and  exercise such other powers and perform such other
duties and functions as the league may prescribe for the welfare of the
provinces.[19]

Before this Court determines the validity of an act of a co-equal and

coordinate branch of the Government, it bears emphasis that ingrained in
our jurisprudence is the time-honored principle that a statute is presumed
to be valid.[20] This presumption is rooted in the doctrine of separation of
powers which enjoins upon the three coordinate departments of the
Government a becoming courtesy for each other's acts.[21] This Court,
however, may declare a law, or portions thereof, unconstitutional where a
petitioner has shown a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution,
[22]
 leaving no doubt or hesitation in the mind of the Court.[23]

In this case, petitioner admits that respondent DENR Secretary had the
authority to nullify the Small-Scale Mining Permits issued by the Provincial
Governor of Bulacan, as the DENR Secretary  has control over the  PMRB,
and the implementation of the Small-Scale Mining Program is subject to
control by respondent DENR.

Control of the DENR/DENR Secretary over small-scale mining in the

provinces is granted by three statutes: (1) R.A. No. 7061 or The Local
Government Code  of 1991; (2) R.A. No. 7076 or the People's Small Scale
Mining Act of 1991; and (3) R.A. No. 7942, otherwise known as the
Philippine Mining Act of 1995.[24]  The pertinent provisions of law sought to
be declared as unconstitutional by petitioner are as follows:

R.A. No. 7061 (The Local Government Code of 1991)

SEC. 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 provision of
the basic services and facilities enumerated herein.

(b) Such basic services and facilities include, but are not limited
to, the following:

xxxx

(3) For a Province:

xxxx

(iii) Pursuant to national policies and subject to

supervision, control and  review of the DENR, enforcement
of forestry laws limited to community-based forestry projects, pollution
control law, small-scale mining law, and other laws on the protection of
the environment; and mini-hydro electric projects for local purposes; x x
x[25]

R.A. No. 7076 (People's Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991)

Sec. 24. Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board. - There is

hereby created under the direct supervision and control of the
Secretary a provincial/city mining regulatory board, herein called the
Board, which shall be the implementing agency of the Department, and
shall exercise the following powers and functions, subject to review by
the Secretary:

(a) Declare and segregate existing gold-rush areas for small-scale mining;
(b) Reserve future gold and other mining areas for small-scale mining;
(c) Award contracts to small-scale miners;
Formulate and implement rules and regulations related to small-scale
(d)
mining;
Settle disputes, conflicts or litigations over conflicting claims within a
(e) people's small-scale mining area, an area that is declared a small-
mining; and
Perform such other functions as may be necessary to achieve the goals
(f)
and objectives of this Act.[26]

Petitioner contends that the aforecited laws and DENR Administrative

Order No. 9640 (the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Philippine
Mining Act of 1995) did not explicitly confer upon respondents DENR and
the DENR Secretary the power to reverse, abrogate, nullify, void, or  cancel
the permits issued by the Provincial Governor or small-scale mining
contracts entered into by the PMRB. The statutes are also silent as to the
power of respondent DENR Secretary to substitute his own judgment over
that of the Provincial Governor and the PMRB.

Moreover, petitioner contends  that Section 17 (b)(3)(iii) of the Local

Government Code of 1991 and Section 24 of R.A. No. 7076, which confer
upon  respondents DENR and the DENR Secretary the power of control are
unconstitutional, as the Constitution states that the President (and
Executive Departments and her alter-egos) has the power of supervision
only, not control, over acts of the local government units, and grants the
local government units autonomy, thus:

The 1987 Constitution:

Article X, Section 4. The President of the Philippines shall

exercise general supervision over local governments. Provinces
with respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and
municipalities with respect to component barangays, shall ensure that the
acts of their component units are within the scope of their prescribed
powers and functions.[27]

Petitioner contends that the policy in the above-cited constitutional

provision is mirrored in the Local Government Code, which states:

SEC. 25. National Supervision over Local Government Units. - (a)

Consistent with the basic policy on local autonomy, the President shall
exercise general supervision over local government units to
ensure that their acts are within the scope of their prescribed
powers and functions.

The President shall exercise supervisory authority directly over provinces,

highly urbanized cities, and independent component cities; through the
province with respect to component cities and municipalities; and through
the city and municipality with respect to barangays.[28]

Petitioner contends that the foregoing provisions of the Constitution and

the Local Government Code of 1991 show that the relationship between the
President and the Provinces or respondent DENR, as the alter ego of the
President, and the Province of Bulacan is one of executive supervision, not
one of executive control. The term "control" has been defined as the power
of an officer to alter or modify or set aside what a subordinate officer had
done in the performance of his/her duties and to substitute the judgment of
the former for the latter, while the term "supervision" is the power of a
superior officer to see to it that lower officers perform their function in
accordance with law.[29]

Petitioner argues that respondent DENR Secretary went beyond mere

executive supervision and exercised control when he nullified the small-
scale mining permits granted by the Provincial Governor of Bulacan, as the
former substituted the judgment of the latter.

Petitioner asserts that what is involved here is a devolved power.  Under the
Local Government Code of 1991, the power to regulate small-scale mining
has been devolved to all provinces. In the exercise of devolved powers,
departmental approval is not necessary.[30]

Petitioner contends that if the provisions in Section 24 of R.A. No. 7076 and
Section 17 (b)(3)(iii) of the Local Government Code of 1991 granting the
power of control to the DENR/DENR Secretary are not nullified, nothing
would stop the DENR Secretary from nullifying, voiding and canceling the
small-scale mining permits that have been issued by a Provincial Governor.

Petitioner submits that the statutory grant of power of control to

respondents is unconstitutional, as the Constitution only allows supervision
over local governments and proscribes control by the executive
departments.

In its Comment, respondents, represented by the Office of the Solicitor

General, stated that contrary to the assertion of petitioner, the power to
implement the small-scale mining law is expressly limited in Section 17 (b)
(3)(iii) of the Local Government Code, which provides  that it must be
carried out "pursuant to national policies and subject to supervision,
control and review of the DENR."  Moreover, the fact that the  power to
implement the small-scale mining law has not been fully devolved to
provinces is further amplified by Section 4 of the People's Small-Scale
Mining Act of 1991, which provides, among others, that the People's Small-
Scale Mining Program shall be implemented by the DENR Secretary.

The petition lacks merit.

Paragraph 1 of Section 2, Article XII (National Economy and Patrimony) of

the Constitution[31] provides that "[t]he exploration, development and
utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and
supervision of the State."

Moreover, paragraph 3 of Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution provides

that "[t]he Congress may, by law, allow small-scale utilization of natural
resources by Filipino citizens x x x."

Pursuant to Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution, R.A. No. 7076 or the
People's Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991, was enacted, establishing  under
Section 4 thereof a People's Small-Scale Mining Program to be
implemented by the DENR Secretary in coordination with other concerned
government agencies.

The People's Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991 defines "small-scale mining"

as "refer[ring] to mining activities, which rely heavily on manual labor
using simple implement and methods and do not use explosives or heavy
mining equipment."[32]

It should be pointed out that the Administrative Code of 1987[33]  provides

that the DENR is, subject to law and higher authority, in charge of carrying
out the State's constitutional mandate, under Section 2, Article XII of the
Constitution, to control and supervise the exploration, development,
utilization and conservation of the country's natural resources. Hence, the
enforcement of small-scale mining law in the provinces is made subject to
the supervision, control and review of the DENR under the Local
Government Code of 1991, while the People's Small-Scale Mining Act of
1991 provides that the People's Small-Scale Mining Program is to be
implemented by the DENR Secretary in coordination with other concerned
local government agencies.

Indeed, Section 4, Article X (Local Government) of the Constitution states

that "[t]he President of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision
over local governments," and Section 25 of the Local Government Code
reiterates the same. General supervision by the President means no more
than seeing to it that laws are faithfully executed or that subordinate
officers act within the law.[34]

The Court has clarified that the constitutional guarantee of local autonomy
in the Constitution [Art. X, Sec. 2] refers to the administrative autonomy of
local government units or, cast in more technical language, the
decentralization of government authority.[35] It does not make local
governments sovereign within the State.[36]  Administrative autonomy may
involve devolution of powers, but subject to limitations like following
national policies or standards,[37] and those provided by the Local
Government Code, as the structuring of local governments and the
allocation of powers, responsibilities, and resources among the different
local government units and local officials have been placed by the
Constitution in the hands of Congress[38]  under Section 3, Article X of the
Constitution.

Section 3, Article X of the Constitution mandated Congress to "enact a

local government code which shall provide for a more responsive
and accountable local government structure instituted through a
system of decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall,
initiative, and referendum, allocate among the different local
government units their powers, responsibilities, and
resources, and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment
and removal, term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local
officials, and all other matters relating to the organization and
operation of the local units."

In connection with the enforcement of the small-scale mining law in the

province, Section 17 of the Local Government Code provides:

SEC. 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 provision of
the basic services and facilities enumerated herein.

(b) Such basic services and facilities include, but are not limited
to, the following:

xxxx

(3) For a Province:

xxxx

(iii) Pursuant to national policies and subject to

supervision, control and  review of the DENR, enforcement
of forestry laws limited to community-based forestry projects, pollution
control law, small-scale mining law, and other laws on the protection of the
environment; and mini-hydro electric projects for local purposes; [39]

Clearly, the Local Government Code did not fully devolve the enforcement
of the small-scale mining law to the provincial  government, as its
enforcement is subject to the supervision, control and review of the DENR,
which is in charge, subject to law and higher authority, of carrying out the
State's constitutional mandate to control and supervise the exploration,
development, utilization of the country's natural resources.[40]

Section 17 (b)(3)(iii) of the Local Government Code of 1991 is in harmony

with R.A. No. 7076 or the People's Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991,[41] which
established a People's Small-Scale Mining Program to be implemented by
the Secretary of the DENR,  thus:

Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy.   It is hereby declared of the State to

promote, develop, protect and rationalize viable small-scale mining
activities in order to generate more employment opportunities and provide
an equitable sharing of the nation's wealth and natural resources, giving
due regard to existing rights as herein provided.

xxxx

Sec. 4. People's Small-Scale Mining Program. - For the purpose of

carrying out the declared policy provided in Section 2 hereof, there is
hereby established a People's Small-Scale Mining Program to be
implemented by the Secretary of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, hereinafter called the
Department, in coordination with other concerned government
agencies, designed to achieve an orderly, systematic and rational scheme
for the small-scale development and utilization of mineral resources in
certain mineral areas in order to address the social, economic, technical,
and environmental problems connected with small-scale mining activities.

xxxx

Sec. 24. Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board. There is hereby

created under the direct supervision and control of the
Secretary a provincial/city mining regulatory board, herein called the
Board, which shall be the implementing agency of the Department, and
shall exercise the following powers and functions, subject to review by
the Secretary:

(a) Declare and segregate existing gold-rush areas for small-scale mining;
(b) Reserve future gold and other mining areas for small-scale mining;
(c) Award contracts to small-scale miners;
Formulate and implement rules and regulations related to small-scale
(d)
mining;
Settle disputes, conflicts or litigations over conflicting claims within a
(e) people's small-scale mining area, an area that is declared a small-
mining; and
Perform such other functions as may be necessary to achieve the goals
(f)
and objectives of this Act.[42]

DENR Administrative Order No. 34, series of 1992, containing the Rules
and Regulations to implement R.A. No. 7076, provides:

SEC. 21. Administrative Supervision over the People's Small-

Scale Mining Program. - The following DENR officials shall exercise
the following supervisory functions in the implementation of the Program:

21.1 DENR Secretrary direct supervision and control over the

program and activities of the small-scale miners within the people's
small-scale mining area;

21.2 Director - the Director shall:

a. Recommend the depth or length of the tunnel or adit taking into

account the: (1) size of membership and capitalization of the
cooperative; (2) size of mineralized areas; (3) quantity of mineral
deposits; (4) safety of miners; and (5) environmental impact and
other considerations;
 b. Determine the right of small-scale miners to existing facilities in
consultation with the operator, claimowner, landowner or lessor of an
affected area upon declaration of a small-scale mining area;

c. Recommend to the Secretary the withdrawal of the status of the

people's small-scale mining area when it can no longer be feasibly
operated on a small-scale basis; and

d. See to it that the small-scale mining contractors abide by small-scale

mines safety rules and regulations.

xxxx

SEC. 22. Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board. - The

Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board created under R.A. 7076 shall
exercise the following powers and functions, subject to review by the
Secretary:

22.1  Declares and segregates existing gold rush area for small-scale
mining;

22.2  Reserves for the future, mineralized areas/mineral lands for people's
small-scale mining;

22.3   Awards contracts to small-scale miners' cooperative;

22.4  Formulates and implements rules and regulations related to R.A.

7076;

22.5  Settles disputes, conflicts or litigations over conflicting claims within

ninety (90) days upon filing of protests or complaints; Provided, That any
aggrieved party may appeal within five (5) days from the Board's decision
to the Secretary for final resolution otherwise the same is considered final
and executory; and

22.6  Performs such other functions as may be necessary to achieve the

goals and objectives of R.A. 7076.

SEC. 6.  Declaration of People's Small-Scale Mining Areas. The

Board created under R.A. 7076 shall have the authority to declare and set
aside People's Small-Scale Mining Areas in sites onshore suitable for small-
scale mining operations subject to review by the DENR
Secretary thru the Director.[43]

DENR Administrative Order No. 23, otherwise known as the Implementing

Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 7942, otherwise known as the
Philippine Mining Act of 1995, adopted on August 15, 1995, provides under
Section 123[44] thereof that small-scale mining applications should be filed
with the PMRB[45] and the corresponding permits shall be issued by the
Provincial Governor, except small-scale mining applications within the
mineral reservations.

Thereafter, DENR Administrative Order No. 96-40, otherwise known as

the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 7942,
otherwise known as the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, adopted on
December 19, 1996, provides that  applications for Small-Scale Mining
Permits shall be filed with the Provincial Governor/City Mayor through the
concerned Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board for areas outside the
Mineral Reservations and with the Director though the Bureau for areas
within the Mineral Reservations.[46]  Moreover, it  provides that Local
Government Units shall, in coordination with the Bureau/ Regional
Office(s) and subject to valid and existing mining rights, "approve
applications for small-scale mining, sand and gravel, quarry x x x and
gravel permits not exceeding five (5) hectares."[47]

Petitioner contends that the Local Government Code of 1991, R.A. No.
7076, DENR Administrative Orders Nos. 95-23 and 96-40 granted the
DENR Secretary the broad statutory power of control, but did not confer
upon the respondents DENR and DENR Secretary the power to reverse,
abrogate, nullify, void, cancel the permits issued by the Provincial Governor
or small-scale mining contracts entered into by the Board.

The contention does not persuade.

The settlement of disputes over conflicting claims in small-scale mining is

provided for in Section 24 of R.A. No. 7076, thus:
Sec. 24. Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board. - There is
hereby created under the direct supervision and control of the Secretary a
provincial/city mining regulatory board, herein called the Board, which
shall be the implementing agency of the Department, and shall exercise the
following powers and functions, subject to review by the Secretary:

xxxx

(e) Settle disputes, conflicts or litigations over conflicting claims within a

people's small-scale mining area, an area that is declared a small mining
area; x x x

Section 24, paragraph (e) of R.A. No. 7076 cited above is reflected in
Section 22, paragraph 22.5 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of
R.A. No. 7076, to wit:

SEC. 22. Provincial/City Mining Regulatory Board. The Provincial/City

Mining Regulatory Board created under R.A. No. 7076 shall exercise the
following powers and functions, subject to review by the Secretary:

xxxx

22.5  Settles disputes, conflicts or litigations over conflicting claims within

ninety (90) days upon filing of protests or complaints; Provided, That any
aggrieved party may appeal within five (5) days from the Board's decision
to the Secretary for final resolution otherwise the same is considered final
and executory; x x x

In this case, in accordance with Section 22, paragraph 22.5 of the

Implementing Rules and Regulations of  R.A. No. 7076, the AMTC filed on
July 22, 2005 with the PMRB of Bulacan a formal protest against the
Applications for Quarry Permits of Eduardo Mercado, Benedicto Cruz,
Liberato Sembrano (replaced by Lucila Valdez) and Gerardo Cruz on the
ground that the subject area was already covered by its Application for
Exploration Permit.[48]  However, on August 8, 2005, the PMRB issued
Resolution Nos. 05-8, 05-9, 05-10 and 05-11, resolving to submit to the
Provincial Governor of Bulacan the Applications for Small-Scale Mining
Permits of Eduardo Mercado, Benedicto Cruz, Lucila Valdez and Gerardo
Cruz for the granting/issuance of the said permits.[49] On August 10, 2005,
the Provincial Governor of Bulacan issued the Small-Scale Mining Permits
to Eduardo Mercado, Benedicto Cruz, Lucila Valdez and Gerardo Cruz
based on the legal opinion of the Provincial Legal Officer and the
Resolutions of the PMRB of Bulacan.

Hence, AMTC filed an appeal with respondent DENR Secretary, appealing

from Letter-Resolution No. 05-1317 and Resolution Nos. 05-08, 05-09, 05-
10 and 05-11, all dated August 8, 2005, of the PMRB of Bulacan, which
resolutions gave due course and granted, on August 10, 2005, Small-Scale
Mining Permits to Eduardo D. Mercado, Benedicto S. Cruz, Lucila Valdez
and Gerardo Cruz involving parcels of mineral land situated at Camachin,
Doña Remedios Trinidad, Bulacan.

The PMRB of Bulacan filed its Answer, stating that it is an administrative

body, created under R.A. No. 7076, which  cannot be equated with the court
wherein a full-blown hearing could be conducted, but it is enough that the
parties were given the opportunity to present evidence. It asserted that the
questioned resolutions it issued were in accordance with the mining laws
and that the Small-Scale Mining Permits granted were registered ahead of
AMTC's Application for Exploration Permit. Further, the Board stated that
the Governor of Bulacan  had the power to approve the Small-Scale Mining
Permits under R.A. No. 7160.

The DENR Secretary found the appeal meritorious, and resolved these
pivotal issues: (1) when is the subject mining area open for mining location
by other applicants; and (2) who among the applicants have valid
applications. The pertinent portion of the decision of the DENR Secretary
reads:

We agree with the ruling of the MGB Director that the area is [open only] to
mining location on August 11, 2004, fifteen (15) days after the receipt by
Golden Falcon on July 27, 2004 of a copy of the subject Order of July 16,
2004. The filing by Golden Falcon of the letter-appeal suspended the
finality of the Order of Denial issued on April 29, 1998 by the Regional
Director until the Resolution thereof on July 16, 2004.

Although the subject AQPs/SSMPs were processed in accordance with the

procedures of the PMRB, however, the AQPs were filed on February 10,
2004 when the area is still closed to mining location. Consequently, the
SSMPs granted by the PMRB and the Governor are null and void making
thereby AEP No. III-02-04 of the AMTC valid, it having been filed when the
area is already open to other mining applicants.

Records also show that the AQPs were converted into SSMPs. These are two
(2) different applications. The questioned SSMPs were issued in violation of
Section 4 of RA 7076 and beyond the authority of the Provincial Governor
pursuant to Section 43 of RA 7942 because the area was never proclaimed
as "People's Small-Scale Mining Program." Moreover, iron ore mineral is
not considered among the quarry resources.

xxxx

WHEREFORE, the Application for Exploration Permit, AEP-III-02-04 of

Atlantic Mines and Trading Corp. is declared valid and may now be given
due course. The Small-Scale Mining Permits, SSMP-B-002-05 of Gerardo
Cruz, SSMP-B-003-05 of Eduardo D. Mercado, SSMP-B-004-05 of
Benedicto S. Cruz and SSMP-B-005-05 of Lucila S. Valdez are
declared NULL AND VOID. Consequently, the said permits are
hereby CANCELLED.[50]

The Court finds that the decision of the DENR Secretary was rendered in
accordance with the power of review granted to the DENR Secretary in the
resolution of disputes, which is provided for in Section 24 of R.A. No.
7076[51] and Section 22 of its Implementing Rules and Regulations.[52] It is
noted that although AMTC filed a protest with the PMRB regarding its
superior and prior Application for Exploration Permit over the Applications
for Quarry Permit, which were  converted to Small-Scale Mining Permits,
the PMRB did not resolve the same, but issued Resolution Nos. 05-08 to
05-11 on August 8, 2005, resolving to submit to the Provincial Governor of
Bulacan the Applications for Small-Scale Mining Permits of Eduardo
Mercado, Benedicto Cruz, Lucila Valdez and Gerardo Cruz for the granting
of the said permits.  After the Provincial Governor of Bulacan issued the
Small-Scale Mining Permits on August 10, 2005, AMTC appealed the
Resolutions of the PMRB giving due course to the granting of the Small-
Scale Mining Permits by the Provincial Governor.

Hence, the decision of the DENR Secretary, declaring that the Application
for Exploration Permit of AMTC was valid and may be given due course,
and canceling the Small-Scale Mining Permits issued by the Provincial
Governor,  emanated from the power of review granted to the DENR
Secretary under R.A. No. 7076 and its Implementing Rules and
Regulations. The DENR Secretary's power to review and, therefore, decide,
in this case, the issue on the validity of the issuance of the Small-Scale
Mining Permits by the Provincial Governor as recommended by the PMRB,
is a quasi-judicial function, which involves the determination of what the
law is, and what the legal rights of the contending parties are, with respect
to the matter in controversy and, on the basis thereof and the facts
obtaining, the adjudication of their respective rights. [53] The DENR
Secretary exercises quasi-judicial function under R.A. No. 7076 and its
Implementing Rules and Regulations to the extent necessary in settling
disputes, conflicts or litigations over conflicting claims. This quasi-judicial
function of the DENR Secretary can neither be equated with "substitution
of judgment" of the Provincial Governor in issuing Small-Scale Mining
Permits nor "control" over the said act of the Provincial Governor as it is a
determination of the rights of AMTC over conflicting claims based on the
law.

In determining whether Section 17 (b)(3)(iii) of the Local Government Code

of 1991 and Section 24 of R.A. No. 7076  are unconstitutional, the Court has
been guided by Beltran v. The Secretary of Health,[54] which held:

The fundamental criterion is that all reasonable doubts should be resolved

in favor of the constitutionality of a statute. Every law has in its favor the
presumption of constitutionality. For a law to be nullified, it must be shown
that there is a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution. The ground
for nullity must be clear and beyond reasonable doubt. Those who petition
this Court to declare a law, or parts thereof, unconstitutional must clearly
establish the basis therefor. Otherwise, the petition must fail.[55]

In this case, the Court finds that the grounds raised by petitioner to
challenge the constitutionality of Section 17 (b)(3)(iii) of the Local
Government Code of 1991 and Section 24 of R.A. No.7076 failed to
overcome the constitutionality of the said provisions of law.

WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit.

No costs.
SO ORDERED.