Natural Resources and Environmental Law

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Notes by: Pat Echano
COMMISSIONER SORIANO’S LECTURES

It cannot be denied that the exploration, development, and utilization of natural
resources had a tremendous impact on our environment, as well as, our ecological
Introduction to Natural Resources and Environmental Law system, hence, it is imperative that we have to discuss the relevant laws, general or
(August 23, 2021) special, that authorizes the government to explore, develop, and utilize natural
resources.
The course is relatively new which is a combination of two topics, Natural Resources
with two units credit, and Environmental Law, which is afforded one unit, so this The general functions of most environmental laws are to set policies and standards
course has a total of three units, requiring three hours session every week. for how human activities will be controlled and how environmental decisions and
approval will be made, as well as, to set offences and penalties for causing harm to
The course was introduced in San Beda University, College of Law, a few years ago the environment.
prompted by the universal awareness that the utilization of natural resources has
an impact on our environment, in-spite and despite of the numerous laws on the Global Warming/Climate Change
conservation and development of natural resources, particularly in the Philippines,
unabated exploration and utilization of our natural resources contributed to the The concern on the environment came into being in 1973, when two Chemists,
pollution of soil, air, water, global warming, and now climate change. namely, Frank Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina, who were then a researcher-
professors of the University of California, began studying the impacts of
I. Natural Resources – meaning Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) in the Earth’s atmosphere.
a) Resources occurring in nature that can be used to create wealth They discovered that CFC molecules were stable enough to remain in the
b) Natural wealth of a country atmosphere until they got up into the middle of the stratosphere where they would
c) Asset or material that constitute the natural capital of a nation finally be broken down by ultraviolet radiation releasing a chlorine atom, which is
d) Naturally occurring substance that are considered valuable in their causing the breakdown of large amounts of ozone in the stratosphere. Depletion of
relatively unmodified form the ozone layer by CFCs would lead to an increase in Ultraviolet Radiation, resulting
e) Natural resources refers to material objects of economic value and utility in Global Warming and now, Climate Change.
to man produced by nature (Author Narciso Pena)
Chlorofluorocarbons consist of chemical compounds made up of chlorine, fluorine,
For the purpose of our discussions relative to the two topics, natural resources and and carbon. The most common source of CFCs, are refrigerants, Freon, fire
environmental law, we shall adopt the definition of Narciso Pena, an expert on the suppressant system for aircraft, and aerosol spray.
law of natural resources – natural resources refer to material objects of economic
value and utility to man produced by nature. They constitute the patrimony of the In 1985, the United Nations organized the Vienna Convention for the Protection of
nation. the Ozone Layer and after discussion on the scientific discoveries highlighting the
adverse effect of human activity on ozone levels in the stratosphere and the
II. Environmental Law – meaning discovery of the “Ozone Hole”.
Environmental Law, which means the laws that regulate the impact of human In 1987, the Montreal Protocol was adopted by participating countries, the objective
activities with regards to their environment. It covers a broad range of activities of which is to stop the production and import of ozone depleting substances and
related to the exploration, development and utilization of natural resources. reduce their concentration in the atmosphere to help protect the earth’s ozone
layer.
Page 1
In 1997, former United States Vice President Al Gore, took interest in global warming Six Hundred Forty (640,000) Thousand of Square Miles of Territorial Waters
when he took a course on Environment Subject at Harvard University, and helped Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Kilometers of Coastline
broker the Kyoto Protocol, held in Kyoto, Japan, an International Agreement
designed to limit greenhouse gas emissions . More than Two (2) Million Species of Plants, some are found only in the Philippines
In 2001, he made a documentary film “The Inconvenience Truth” and presented this It has Twenty-One Billion and Five Hundred Million (21.5) Metric Tons of Metallic
film worldwide. The documentary film is about the changing climate of the earth Mineral and Nineteen Billion and Three Hundred Million (19.3) Metric Tons of Non-
brought about by the burning of “Fossil Fuel” that causes the “Greenhouse Effect” Metallic Mineral
where the heat from the sun that touches the surface of the earth is trapped thereby
hastening the melting of icebergs, massive flooding and extremely strong wind Nineteen Billion Metric Tons of Coal Deposits, and Natural Gas is now being
disturbance. extracted from the Malampaya, offshore of Palawan and Processed as Liquefied
Natural Gas
In 2006, a documentary film “An Inconvenient Truth” directed by American Davis
Guggenheim and narrated by Mr. Al Gore was released worldwide aimed to educate Philippine is the world largest in Nickel, Third largest in Gold, and Fifth largest in
the people of the world about the earth’s changing climate. In the same year, an copper.
American film “The Day After Tomorrow” was also shown in theaters worldwide
raising international public awareness on the effect of climate change. The Total Value of our Natural Resources is One Trillion US Dollars, converted into
Philippine Currency – Fifty-Five (55) Billion Pesos, more than enough to pay our
III. Importance of Natural Resources National Debt of 9.5 Billion US Dollars.
The importance of natural resources to a nation cannot be overemphasized. In the Incidentally, it may interest you to know the purpose of the Chinese Communist in
Philippines we look to our natural resources as our exclusive heritage and we are occupying the South China Sea, because it has a deposit of Natural Gas valued at
called upon to preserve them for ourselves and to our posterity. Sixty (6) Trillion US Dollars
It was pointed out that alien ownership of land and other natural resources of a V. Impact on the Extraction and Utilization of Natural Resources
country would tend to result in international complications. We cannot dismiss the
idea that the gradual extension of foreign influence into our politics would increase A. Advantages
the possibility of foreign control, thereby posing a danger to our internal security 1. Pay national debt
and independence. 2. More money for Infrastructures, more roads and bridges
3. More Up to Date Hospital Facilities, Equipment, and Medicines
IV. Economic Value of the Philippine’s Natural Resources 4. Provide Free Healthcare to all Filipinos
5. More school buildings
The Philippine Islands has 7,100 islands, strategically located between two major 6. Free tuition all the way to college
bodies of water, the Pacific Ocean, and the China Sea. 7. More Hall of Justice and more judges
8. Improve Internet Connections and Free Access to Public School Students
It has a land area of Thirty (30) Million Hectares and a Forest Cover of Twenty (27) 9. So many others as long as the government has the money
Million Hectares.
Page 2
B. Disadvantages
1. Climate Change brought about by the global warming phenomenon known
as “Greenhouse” effect
2. Reduction of the capacity to process carbon dioxide
3. Increase velocity of typhoon winds and storm surge
4. Heavy rainfall due to “La Nina” and spells of drought known as “El Nino”
5. Massive erosion of land and flooding resulting to loss of soil fertility of
agricultural land
6. Flooding of lowlands due to the destruction of watershed
7. The dislocation and displacement of Indigenous Cultural Minorities
8. Shortage of water supply due to drying up of the water table know as
“Aquifer”
Page 3
Article XII, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution Under the 1935 Constitution, Article XIII, Section 1 – Lands of the public domain are
(August 30, 2021) classified as Agricultural, Timber, and Mineral lands.
Article XII, Section 2 – enumerates the natural resources found in the Philippine Definitions
Islands;
Agricultural lands are simply known as farmlands, Land devoted principally to the
1) All lands of public domain planting of crops for food. Any land that is susceptible for cultivation for agricultural
2) Waters purposes
3) Minerals (Metal and Non-Metal)
4) Coal Forests land refers to a large tract of land covered with natural growth of trees and
5) Petroleum underbrush
6) Mineral oils
7) Fisheries Timberland refers to a large tract of land planted with trees that can be processed
8) Forests or Timber for woods or lumbers
9) Wildlife
10) Flora and Fauna Mineral lands are those that contained deposits of minerals that are economically
11) All forces of potential energy valuable, useful, or precious, in such quantities as to justify expenses to extract them
12) All other natural resources
National Parks are those areas of land by which, by reason of their scenic, historical
The term public domain is synonymous to public dominion or public ownership, as or cultural, and scientific value and importance are set aside and declared by law as
distinguished from private ownership. Which means that the phrase “lands of the national parks
public domain” categorically declares that land, as the single biggest major natural
resource of the nation, is owned by the State. Waters as natural resources must be potentially useful. Uses of water include
agricultural, industrial, household, recreational, and environmental. All living things
Under Section 3 of Article XII, lands of the public domain are classified into; need water to grow and reproduce. (97% of the water on earth is salt water and only
1) Agricultural; 3% is fresh water)
2) Forest or Timber;
3) Mineral; and Mineral, as a natural resource means a “solid inorganic substance of natural
4) National parks occurrence”. As a noun, mineral is defined as “an inorganic substance occurring
naturally in the earth and having a consistent and distinctive set of physical
Also, under Section 3, agricultural lands of the public domain may be further properties”. It is either Metallic or Non-Metallic.
classified by law according to the uses to which they can be devoted.
Coal is a combustible black or brownish-black sedimentary rock usually occurring in
Under the 1973 Constitution, Article XIV, Section 10 – Lands of the public domain rock strata in layers or veins called coal beds or coal seams. It is composed primarily
are classified into Agricultural, Industrial, or commercial, residential, resettlement, of carbon, along with variable quantities of other elements, such as hydrogen, sulfur,
mineral, timber or forest and grazing lands, and such other classes as may be oxygen, and nitrogen.Coal is a fossil fuel that forms when dead plant matter is
provided by law. converted into peat, which in turn is converted into lignite, then, sub-bituminous
coal, and lastly anthracite. This involves biological and geological process that takes
Page 4
place a million years. to the word “owned” is the Regalian Doctrine, also known as Jura Regalia, is a fiction
of Spanish Colonial Law that has been applied to all the colony of Spain, which refers
Petroleum is an oily naturally occurring liquid that is a form of bitumen or a mixture to feudal principle that all lands found within the territory of the Monarch is owned
of various hydrocarbons; used as a fuel or separated by distillation into gasoline. by the King. Ownership of the entire Philippines Islands passes to the Spanish
Petroleum shall include any mineral oil, hydrocarbon (natural) gas, bitumen, asphalt, Monarch by virtue of the Discovery and Conquest
and mineral gas.
They abandoned the word belong because belong simply means possession,
Other Mineral Oils are obtained from mineral other than petroleum. whereas, owned clearly declares not only possession but also ownership. Hence, the
State, as the declared owner of all the natural resources possessed the attributes of
Other forces of potential energy is an encompassing term that would include not ownership
yet known source of energy at the time of the promulgation and ratification of the
constitution, such as solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, hydrogen Preamble of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
energy, tidal energy, wave energy.
“We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to
Fishery or aquatic products include all other products of aquatic living resources in establish a government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the
any form. Fisheries, unlike lands of the public domain, cannot be the subject of common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and
alienation, exploration, development and utilization may be granted by the State by our posterity the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law
way of license, concession or lease. and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality and peace, do ordain and
promulgate this Constitution”
Wildlife traditionally refers to undomesticated animal species, but has come to
include all plants, fungi, and other organisms that grow or live wild in an area without NOTE: Constitutionally, a Preamble is not a source of power or right. Its purpose is
being introduced by humans. Wildlife can be found in all ecosystems. to lay down the ideals and aspirations of the Filipino people. It bear witness to the
fact the Constitution is the manifestation of the sovereign will of the people
The term flora refers to the plant life that exists in a particular place at a particular
time. This typically includes all indigenous plant life. Flora, which sounds like flowers Article XII, Section 2 – provides that “with the exception of agricultural lands, all
was coined by French-Swiss Botanist and Geologist Jules Thurmann. other natural resources shall not be alienated.” This particular provision
compliments the ideals and aspirations of the Filipino people declared in the
Fauna refers to animal life that exists in a particular place at a particular time. The Preamble, that with the exception of agricultural lands, the State cannot alienate
word fauna was coined by Swedish Zoologist Carl Linnaeus other natural resources.
Flora and Fauna are umbrella terms that refer to many different types of life. What Please also take note of the use of words – “conserve and develop our patrimony”
is counted as flora and fauna is dependent upon the specific region, climate or time in the 1987 Constitution was adopted from the 1973 and 1935 Constitutions.
period
○ Conserve - to preserve, meaning you must not touch its original status
Other natural resources is known as the “catch all phrase” ○ Develop - to bring to a more advance and improve status, more effective and
usable
Article XII, Section 2 – declares that all natural resources are owned by the State. ○ Patrimony - an estate inherited from ancestors
The basis by which the framers of the 1987 Constitution changed the word “belong”
Page 5
The word “Patrimony” as mentioned in the Preamble, embraces practically On September 18, 1995, the Bids and Awards Committee opened the bids of the two
everything that belongs to the Filipino people, the tangible and the material, as well (2) participating bidders, namely; Renong Berhad, a Malaysian Corporation,
as, the intangible and the spiritual assets and possessions. partnered with ITT Sheraton, bid is P44.00 per share, and the other bidder, Manila
Prince Hotel Corporation, a Filipino owned corporation, bid is P41.58 per share
It refers principally to the natural resources of our country which, under the
Constitution, include all lands of the public domain, water, minerals, coal, petroleum Pending the formal award and execution of the contract of sell, Manila Prince Hotel,
and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, in a letter dated September 28, 1995, wrote the GSIS, offered to match the bid of
wildlife, flora and fauna, and all marine wealth in its archipelagic waters, territorial Renong Berhad at P44.00 per share and sent another letter dated October 10, 1995
sea, and exclusive marine zone. together with a Manager’s Check in the amount of P33 million was sent to the GSIS
as Bid Security, which GSIS did not accept.
Filipinization of areas of investment
On October 17, 1995, Manila Prince Hotel Corp filed before the Supreme Court
Article XII, Section 10 – The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the Economic Petition for Prohibition and Mandamus, with a prayer for the issuance of Temporary
and Planning Agency, when the national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the Restraining Order against the GSIS, alleging, among others;
Philippines or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose
capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may 1) To give them preferential rights over a foreign corporation, as provided
prescribe, certain areas of investments. under Article XII, Section 10 of the Constitution
2) Submits that Manila Hotel has been identified with the Filipino people and
The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the formation and operation has practically become a historical monument which reflects the vibrancy
of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos. of Philippine heritage and culture
3) It is a proud legacy of an earlier generation of Filipinos who believed in the
In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy nobility and sacredness of independence and its power and capacity to
and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos. release the full potential of the Filipino people
4) It has become a part of the national patrimony
Case Study:
Respondents GSIS counter arguments:
Manila Prince Hotel Corp vs Government Service Insurance System 1) Article XII, Section 10 is merely a statement of principle and policy, hence,
G.R. No. 122156, Feb 03, 1997 it requires a law to implement the provision
2) Manila Hotel does not fall under the term “National Patrimony” which only
Ponente: Justice Bellosillo refers to those natural resources enumerated under Article XII, Section 2
Nature of Petition: Petition for Prohibition and Mandamus 3) Granting the Manila Hotel forms part of the national patrimony, Article XII,
Section cannot be invoked since what is being sold is only 51 per cent of the
Facts: The case arose when the Government Service Insurance System, who owned shares and not the land the building itself
the Manila Hotel thru the Manila Hotel Corporation, pursuant to the government
privatization program under Presidential Proclamation No. 50, dated December 08, Main Issues
1986, decided to sell, thru Closed Bidding, 51 per cent of the issued and outstanding 1) Is Article XII, Section 10 self-executing or not?
shares of the Manila Hotel Corporations (Controlling Majority). 2) Is Manila Hotel forms part of the national patrimony?
Page 6
Discussion to public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law, and
Section 28, Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and
Constitution is defined as the fundamental and paramount law of the nation. It implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public
prescribes the permanent framework of a system of government, assigns to the interest
different departments their respective powers and duties, establishes certain fixed
principles on which government is founded Held: Article XII, Section 10 is self-executing provision
The fundamental conception is that it is a supreme law to which all other laws must Section 10, second paragraph of Article XII of the 1987 Constitution is a mandatory,
conform and in accordance with which all private rights must be determined and all positive command which is complete in itself and which needs no further guidelines
public authority administered or implementing laws or rules for its enforcement
Under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, if a law or contract violates any From its very words the provision does not require legislation to put it in operation.
norm of the constitution that law or contract, whether promulgated by the It is per se judicially enforceable when our Constitution mandates that “in the grant
legislative or by the executive branch or entered by private persons for private of rights, privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, the
purposes is null and void and without any force and effect. Thus, since the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos, it means just that – qualified
constitution is the fundamental, paramount, and supreme law of the nation, it is Filipinos shall be preferred
deemed written in every statute and contract
And when our Constitution declares that a right exists in certain specified
A constitution provision which lays down a general principle, such as those found in circumstances an action may be maintained to enforce such right notwithstanding
Article II of the 1987 Constitution, is usually not self-executing the absence of any legislation on the subject. Consequently, if there is no statute
especially enacted to enforce such constitutional right, such right enforces itself by
But, a provision which is complete in itself and becomes operative without the aid its own inherent potency and puissance, and from which all legislations must take
of supplementary or enabling legislation, or that which supplies sufficient rule be their bearings. When there is a right there is a remedy. Ubi jus ibi remedium.
means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected, is self- executing
Thus, a constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the right Held: Manila Hotel forms part of the patrimony of the nation and must remain
conferred and the liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself, so that they with the Filipino people.
can be determined by an examination and construction of its terms, and there is no
language indicating that the subject is referred to the legislative for action The Manila Hotel is not just a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder solely for
the sake of privatization. We are not talking about an ordinary piece of property in
Under the modern constitutions, in case of doubt, the provisions of the Constitution a commercial district. We are talking about a historic relic that has hosted many of
should be considered self-executing rather than non- self- executing. Unless the the many important events in the short history of the Philippines as a nation. We are
contrary is clearly intended, the provisions of the Constitution should be considered talking about a hotel where heads of states would prefer to be housed as a strong
as self-executing, as a contrary rule would give the legislature discretion to manifestation of their desire to cloak the dignity of the highest state function to their
determine when, or whether they shall be effective. These provisions would be official visits to the Philippines.
subordinated to the will of the lawmaking body, which could make them entirely
meaningless by simply refusing to pass the needed implementing statute Thus, the Manila Hotel has played and continues to play a significant role as an
authentic repository of 20th century Philippine history and culture. In this sense, it
Ex – Article II, Sections 26, The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities has become truly a reflection of the Filipino soul – a place with a history of
Page 7
grandeur; a most historical setting that has played a part in the shaping of a capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may
country. prescribe, certain areas of investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will
encourage the formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly
This Court cannot extract rhyme nor reason from the determined effort of GSIS to owned by Filipinos. In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the
sell the historical landmark – the Grand Old Dame of Hotels in Asia, to a total national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified
stranger. For, indeed, the conveyance of this epic exponent of the Filipino psyche to Filipinos. The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments
alien hands cannot be less than Mephistophelian, for it is, in whatever manner within its national jurisdiction and in accordance with its national goals and
viewed, a veritable alienation of a nation’s soul for some pieces of foreign silver. priorities.
And so we ask: What advantage, which cannot be equally drawn from a qualified FACTS: Pursuant to the privatization program of the Philippine Government, the
Filipino, can be gained by the Filipinos, if the Manila Hotel is sold to a foreigner? How GSIS sold in public auction its stake in Manila Hotel Corporation (MHC). Only 2
much of national pride will vanish if the nation’s cultural heritage is entrusted to a bidders participated: petitioner Manila Prince Hotel Corporation, a Filipino
foreign entity? corporation, which offered to buy 51% of the MHC or 15,300,000 shares at P41.58
per share, and Renong Berhad, a Malaysian firm, with ITT-Sheraton as its hotel
On the other hand, how much dignity will be preserved and realized if the national operator, which bid for the same number of shares at P44.00 per share, or P2.42
patrimony is safekept in the hands of a qualified, zealous and well-meaning Filipino? more than the bid of the petitioner.
This is the plain and simple meaning of the Filipino First Policy provision of the 1987 Petitioner filed a petition before the Supreme Court to compel the GSIS to allow it
Philippine Constitution. And this Court, heeding the clarion call of the constitution to match the bid of Renong Berhad. It invoked the Filipino First Policy enshrined in
and accepting the duty of being the elderly watchman of the nation, will continue to §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, which provides that “in the
respect and protect the sanctity of the Constitution grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and
patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.”
Dispositive Portion ISSUES:

Wherefore, respondents GSIS, et al, are directed to cease and desist from selling the 1) Whether GSIS is included in the term “State,” hence, mandated to
51 per cent of the shares of the Manila Hotel Corporation to Renong Berhad, and to implement §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the Constitution
accept the matching bid of petitioner Manila Prince Hotel Corp to purchase the 51 2) Assuming GSIS is part of the State, whether it should give preference to the
per cent at P44.00 per share, and to do such other acts and deeds as may be petitioner, a Filipino corporation, over Renong Berhad, a foreign
necessary. corporation, in the sale of the controlling shares of the Manila Hotel
Corporation.
Case Study:
RULING:
1) YES, GSIS is included in the term “State,” hence, it is mandated to
Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS implement §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the Constitution. It is undisputed
that the sale of 51% of the MHC could only be carried out with the prior
DOCTRINE: The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic and approval of the State acting through the respondent Committee on
planning agency, when the national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the Privatization. [T]his fact alone makes the sale of the assets of respondents
Philippines or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose GSIS and MHC a “state action.” In constitutional jurisprudence, the acts of
Page 8
persons distinct from the government are considered “state action” shares immediately to the foreign bidder notwithstanding its submission of
covered by the Constitution (1) when the activity it engages in is a “public a higher, or even the highest, bid. In fact, we cannot conceive of a stronger
function;” (2) when the government is so significantly involved with the reason than the constitutional injunction itself. In the instant case, where a
private actor as to make the government responsible for his action; and, (3) foreign firm submits the highest bid in a public bidding concerning the grant
when the government has approved or authorized the action. It is evident of rights, privileges and concessions covering the national economy and
that the act of respondent GSIS in selling 51% of its share in respondent patrimony, thereby exceeding the bid of a Filipino, there is no question that
MHC comes under the second and third categories of “state action.” the Filipino will have to be allowed to match the bid of the foreign entity.
Without doubt therefore the transaction, although entered into by And if the Filipino matches the bid of a foreign firm the award should go to
respondent GSIS, is in fact a transaction of the State and therefore subject the Filipino. It must be so if we are to give life and meaning to the Filipino
to the constitutional command. When the Constitution addresses the State First Policy provision of the 1987 Constitution. For, while this may neither
it refers not only to the people but also to the government as elements of be expressly stated nor contemplated in the bidding rules, the
the State. After all, the government is composed of three (3) divisions of constitutional fiat is omnipresent to be simply disregarded. To ignore it
power - legislative, executive and judicial. Accordingly, a constitutional would be to sanction a perilous skirting of the basic law.
mandate directed to the State is correspondingly directed to the three (3)
branches of government. It is undeniable that in this case the subject
constitutional injunction is addressed among others to the Executive
Department and respondent GSIS, a government instrumentality deriving
its authority from the State.
2) YES, GSIS should give preference to the petitioner in the sale of the
controlling shares of the Manila Hotel Corporation. It should be stressed
that while the Malaysian firm offered the higher bid it is not yet the winning
bidder. The bidding rules expressly provide that the highest bidder shall
only be declared the winning bidder after it has negotiated and executed
the necessary contracts and secured the requisite approvals. Since the
Filipino First Policy provision of the Constitution bestows preference on
qualified Filipinos, the mere tending of the highest bid is not an assurance
that the highest bidder will be declared the winning bidder. Resultantly,
respondents are not bound to make the award yet, nor are they under
obligation to enter one with the highest bidder. For in choosing the
awardee respondents are mandated to abide by the dictates of the 1987
Constitution the provisions of which are presumed to be known to all the
bidders and other interested parties. Paragraph 1 of the bidding rules
provides that if for any reason the Highest Bidder cannot be awarded the
Block of Shares, GSIS may offer this to other Qualified Bidders that have
validly submitted bids provided that these Qualified Bidders are willing to
match the highest bid in terms of price per share. Certainly, the
constitutional mandate itself is reason enough not to award the block of
Page 9
Article 1: The National Territory of the 1987 Constitution

(September 6, 2021) 1973 Constitution, Article I – The national territory comprises the Philippine
archipelago, with all the islands and water embraced therein, and all other territories
Section 1 – The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title, including the territorial
islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the sea, the air space, the subsoil, the seabed, the insular shelves, and the other
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and submarine areas over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction. The
aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective
shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting of their breath and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form
part of the internal waters of the Philippines. 1935 Constitution, Article I – The Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to the
United States by the Treaty of Paris concluded between the United States and Spain
Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution describes the National Territory in three (3) on the Tenth day of December, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight (Dec 10, 1898),
aspects; the limits of which are set forth in Article III of said treaty, together with all the island
a) Comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced in the treaty concluded at Washington, between the United States and
embraced therein; Spain on the seventh day of November, nineteen hundred (Nov 7, 1900), and in the
b) All other territories over which the Philippine has sovereignty or jurisdiction treaty concluded between the United States and Great Britain on the second day of
consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, aerial domains, territorial sea, seabed, January, nineteen hundred and thirty (Jan 2, 1930), and all the territory over which
subsoil, insular shelves, submarine areas; the present Government of the Philippine Islands exercises jurisdiction.
c) The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the archipelago,
regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters The territorial sea of a State, as distinct from its inland and internal waters, consists
of the Philippines. of a marginal belt of maritime waters adjacent to the base lines extending twelve
nautical miles outward.
In the 1935 Constitution, there was no mention of archipelago, but in the 1973, as
well as, the 1987 constitution, there is now mention of the word archipelago. An Exclusive Economic Zone is a sea zone prescribed by the United Nations Convention
archipelago may be defined either as 1) a cluster of islands forming a territorial unity; on the Law of Sea over which a State has special rights regarding the exploration and
or 2) a unit of water studded with islands. In the first definition, the waters are utilization of marine resources, including energy production from water and wind. It
adjacent to the land area and their extent is determined by the reference to the land stretches from the baseline out to 200 nautical miles from its coast.
area; while in the second definition, the land area is everything that comes within
the water area. Continental Shelf refers to the area of a seabed around a large landmass where the
sea is relatively shallow compared with the open ocean.
For the purpose of this course, we will adopt the definition provided in the 1982
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; The term continental shelf is used by geologists generally to mean that part of the
“Archipelagic States, made up of a group or groups of closely related islands and continental margin which is between the shoreline and the shelf break or, where
interconnecting waters, have sovereignty over a sea area enclosed by a straight lines there is no noticeable slope, between the shoreline and the point where the depth
drawn between the outermost points of the islands; the waters between the islands of the superjacent water is approximately between 100 and 200 meters.
are declared archipelagic waters where States may establish sea lanes and air routes
in which all other States enjoy the right of archipelagic passage through such However, under UNCLOS, particularly Article 76, it is used as a Juridical Term.
designated lanes”. According to the UNCLOS, the continental shelf of a coastal state comprises the
Page 10
submerged prolongation of the land territory of the coastal State – the seabed and All States enjoy the traditional freedom of navigation, overflight, scientific research
subsoil of the submarine areas that extend beyond its territorial sea to the outer and fishing on the high seas; they are obliged to adopt, or cooperate with other
edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles where the states in adopting measures to manage and conserve living resources.
outer edge of the continental margin does not extend up to that distance, it does
not include the deep ocean floor with its oceanic ridges or the subsoil thereof. All marine scientific research in the Exclusive Economic Zone and on the Continental
Shelf is subject to the consent of the coastal State, but in most cases they are obliged
Ex – Benham rise at the Pacific Ocean, now named by President Duterte as Philippine to grant consent to other states when the research is to be conducted for peaceful
Rise on May 23, 2017. The United Nation Commission on the Limits of the purposes and fulfills specified criteria.
Continental Shelf has declared in 2012 that Benham Rise is a part of the Philippine
Continental Shelf where the Philippine has sovereign right over the marine resources The limits of the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of
below the surface of the sea. islands are determined in accordance with the rules applicable to land territory, but
rocks which could not sustain human habitation or economic life of their own would
The difference between territorial sea and exclusive economic zone is that territorial have no economic zone or continental shelf.
sea confers full sovereignty over the waters, while exclusive economic zone confers
only a “sovereign right” which refers to the coastal state’s rights below the surface States parties are obliged to settle by peaceful means their dispute concerning
of the sea (over marine resources below the surface of the sea. The surface waters interpretation or application of the convention.
are considered International waters.
Case Study:
Under the UNCLOS, coastal States exercise sovereignty over their territorial sea
which they have the right to establish its breadth up to a limit not to exceed 12
nautical miles, foreign vessels are allowed “innocent passages” through those Merlin Magallona vs. Executive Secretary
waters.
DOCTRINE: Under UNCLOS and the baselines law, we have three levels of maritime
Ships and aircraft of all countries are allowed “transit passage” through straits used zones where we exercise treaty-based rights:
for international navigation; States bordering the straits can regulate navigational (a) territorial waters - 12 nautical miles from the baselines where we exercise
and other aspects of passage. sovereignty;
(b) (b) contiguous zones - 24 nautical miles from the baselines which is the
Coastal States have sovereign rights in a 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone jurisdiction where we can enforce customs, fiscal, immigration and
with respect to natural resources and certain economic activities, and exercise sanitation laws or CFIS;
jurisdiction over marine science research and environmental protection. (c) (c) exclusive economic zone - 200 nautical miles from the baselines; where
we have the right to exploit the living and non-living resources in the
All other states have freedom of navigation and overflight in the Exclusive Economic exclusive economic zone.
Zone, as well as freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines. (d) A fourth zone may be added which is the continental shelf that is covered
by Article 77 of the UNCLOS.
Coastal States have sovereign rights over the continental shelf (the national area of
seabed) for exploring and exploiting it; the shelf can extend at least 200 nautical FACTS: In 1961, Congress passed R.A. 3046 demarcating the maritime baselines of
miles from the shore, and more under specified circumstances. the Philippines as an Archipelagic State pursuant to UNCLOS I of 1958, codifying the
sovereignty of State parties over their territorial sea. Then in 1968, it was amended
Page 11
by R.A. 5446, correcting some errors in R.A. 3046 reserving the drawing of baselines Third, the new base line introduced by RA 9522 is without prejudice with delineation
around Sabah. In 2009, it was again amended by R.A. 9522, to be compliant with the of the baselines of the territorial sea around the territory of Sabah, situated in North
UNCLOS III of 1984. The requirements complied with are: to shorten one baseline, Borneo, over which the Republic of the Philippines has acquired dominion and
to optimize the location of some base points and classify Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) sovereignty.
and Scarborough Shoal as ‘regime of islands’. Petitioner now assails the
constitutionality of the law for three main reasons: (1) it reduces the Philippine And lastly, the UNCLOS III and RA 9522 are not incompatible with the Constitution’s
maritime territory under Article 1; (2) it opens the country’s waters to innocent and delineation of internal waters. Petitioners contend that RA 9522 transformed the
sea lanes passages hence undermining our sovereignty and security; and (3) treating internal waters of the Philippines to archipelagic waters hence subjecting these
KIG and Scarborough as ‘regime of islands’ would weaken our claim over those waters to the right of innocent and sea lanes passages, exposing the Philippine
territories. internal waters to nuclear and maritime pollution hazards. The Court emphasized
that the Philippines exercises sovereignty over the body of water lying landward of
ISSUE: Whether or not R.A. 9522 is unconstitutional. the baselines, including the air space over it and the submarine areas underneath,
regardless of whether internal or archipelagic waters. However, sovereignty will not
RULING: No, R.A. 9522 is not unconstitutional. The said law did not delineate the bar the Philippines to comply with its obligation in maintaining freedom of
territory of the Philippines but is merely a statutory tool to demarcate the country’s navigation and the generally accepted principles of international law. It can be either
maritime zone and continental shelf under UNCLOS III. The Supreme Court passed by legislature as a municipal law or in the absence thereof, it is deemed
emphasized that UNCLOS III is not a mode of acquiring or losing a territory as incorporated in the Philippines law since the right of innocent passage is a customary
provided under the laws of nations. UNCLOS III is a multilateral treaty that is a result international law, thus automatically incorporated thereto.
of a long-time negotiation to establish a uniform sea-use rights over maritime zones
(i.e., the territorial waters [12 nautical miles from the baselines], contiguous zone This does not mean that the states are placed in a lesser footing; it just signifies
[24 nautical miles from the baselines], exclusive economic zone [200 nautical miles concession of archipelagic states in exchange for their right to claim all waters inside
from the baselines]), and continental shelves. In order to measure said distances, it the baseline. In fact, the demarcation of the baselines enables the Philippines to
is a must for the state parties to have their archipelagic doctrines measured in delimit its exclusive economic zone, reserving solely to the Philippines the
accordance with the treaty—the role played by RA 9522. The contention of the exploitation of all living and non-living resources within such zone. Such a maritime
petitioner that RA 9522 resulted in the loss of 15,000 square nautical miles is devoid delineation binds the international community since the delineation is in strict
of merit. The truth is, RA 9522, by optimizing the location of base points, increased observance of UNCLOS III. If the maritime delineation is contrary to UNCLOS III, the
the Philippines total maritime space of 145,216 square nautical miles. international community will of course reject it and will refuse to be bound by it.
Second, the classification of KGI and Scarborough Shoal as Regime of Islands is The Court expressed that it is within the Congress who has the prerogative to
consistent with the Philippines’ sovereignty. Had RA 9522 enclosed the islands as determine the passing of a law and not the Court. Moreover, such enactment was
part of the archipelago, the country would be violating UNCLOS III since it necessary to comply with the UNCLOS III; otherwise, it shall backfire on the
categorically stated that the length of the baseline shall not exceed 125 nautical Philippines for its territory shall be open to seafaring powers to freely enter and
miles. So what the legislators did is to carefully analyze the situation: the country, exploit the resources in the waters and submarine areas around our archipelago and
for decades, had been claiming sovereignty over KGI and Scarborough Shoal on one it will weaken the country’s case in any international dispute over Philippine
hand and on the other hand they had to consider that these are located at non- maritime space.
appreciable distance from the nearest shoreline of the Philippine archipelago. So,
the classification is in accordance with the Philippines sovereignty and State’s The enactment of UNCLOS III compliant baselines law for the Philippine archipelago
responsible observance of its pacta sunt servanda obligation under UNCLOS III. and adjacent areas, as embodied in RA 9522, allows an internationally recognized
Page 12
delimitation of the breadth of the Philippines’ maritime zones and continental shelf.
RA 9522 is therefore a most vital step on the part of the Philippines in safeguarding
its maritime zones, consistent with the Constitution and our national interest.
Page 13
Article II, Sections 15 and 16 of the 1987 Constitution Under Section 11, the State shall also give priority to the needs of underprivileged
(September 13 and 20, 2021) sick, elderly, disable, women, and children. In the same section, the State shall also
endeavor to provide free medical care to paupers (very poor people).
Article II, Section 15 – The State shall protect and promote the right to health of
the people and instill health consciousness among them. In this regard, Congress enacted R.A. No. 11223 (July 2018), aka The Universal Health
Care Act. Said law established a Universal Health Care for all Filipinos, prescribing
Health is defined as the state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and reforms in the health care system, and appropriating funds thereo.
not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.
To provide the needed funds for the Universal Health Care, Congress enacted R.A.
In the case of Oposa vs Factoran, the Supreme Court declared that this provision is No. 10351 (July 2012), known as “Sin Taxes” where the law imposed an Ad Valorem
Self –Executing, meaning the right to health of the people is now legally demandable Tax equivalent to 15% of the net retail price against Alcohol and Tobacco Products
and enforceable and violation thereof is justiciable.
In addition to the Ad Valorem Tax imposed, a Specific Tax of P20.00 per liter/pack is
The Philippines is also a party to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which also imposed against Alcohol and Tobacco Products.
recognizes health as a fundamental human right, and therefore, it is incumbent upon
the Philippine government to respect and protect the right to health of the Filipino Another law was enacted by Congress, R.A. No. 11346, (July 2018) increasing the
people. Excise Tax on Tobacco Products at P20.00 per pack, and to increase by 5% every year.
When the right of the people to health is violated, the people may go to the court Again, Congress enacted R.A. No. 11467 (July 2019), imposing a higher Excise Tax on
for redress and compensation. Alcohol Products to P42.00 per proof liter, and to increase by P5.00 every year
The right to health may be invoked by the people, whereas, the rights under Article With regards to affordable cost, Congress in 1988, enacted R.A. No. 6675, aka The
III, aka the Bill of Rights may only be invoked by the particular individual whose right GENERIC ACTS designed to promote, require and ensure the production of an
is violated. adequate supply, distribution, use and acceptance of drugs and medicines identified
by their GENERIC names.
Related to Article II, Section 15 is
Article XIII, Section 11, where it provides – “The State shall adopt an integrated Article XIII, Section 12 – The State shall establish and maintain an effective food
and comprehensive approach to health development which shall endeavor to and drug regulatory system and undertake appropriate health manpower
make essential goods, health and other social services available to all people at development and research, responsive to the country’s health needs and
affordable cost. There shall be priority for the needs of the underprivileged sick, problems.
elderly, disabled, women, and children. The State shall endeavor to provide free
medical to paupers”. US Congress enacted Act 2711 (March 10, 1917), aka The Revised Administrative
Code of the Philippine Islands, providing for the organization of the Philippine Health
The key concepts in Section 11 are integrated, comprehensive and affordable. In Service and also the Food and Drugs Act.
essence what Section 11 mandates is a unified health delivery system, a combination
of public and private sector, and a blend of western medicine and traditional health On June 22, 1963, the Philippine Congress enacted R.A. No. 3720, aka The Food,
care modalities. Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Under Section 4, an office to be called the Food and Drug
Administration in the Department of Health was created to carry out the provisions
Page 14
of R.A. No. 3720.

In the case of Oposa vs Factoran, the Supreme Court stated that the right of the
Congress in 2009, enacted R.A. No. 9711, An Act strengthening and rationalizing the people to a balanced and healthful ecology need not even be written in the
regulatory capacity of the Bureau of Food and Drugs by establishing adequate Constitution for it is assumed to exist from the inception of mankind and it is an issue
testing laboratories and field offices, upgrading its equipment, augmenting its of transcendental importance with intergenerational implications.
human resource complement, giving authority to retain its income, renaming it to
Food and Drug Administration The Supreme Court further declared that even in the absence of a categorical
provision mandating the concerned agencies of the government, they and the men
Article XIII, Section 13 – The State shall establish a special agency for disabled and women administering these offices cannot escape their obligation to future
persons for their rehabilitation, self-development and self-reliance, and their generations of Filipinos to keep the environment clean and healthy as humanely as
integration into mainstream of society. possible. Anything less would be a betrayal of public trust.
1. R.A. No. 7277, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons Section 16 is a self-executing provision.
2. R.A. No. 10524, An Act Expanding the positions reserved for persons with
disability As declared by the Supreme Court in the Oposa vs Factoran case, Article 16 together
3. R.A. No 9442, An Act providing for express lanes for persons with disability with Article 15 of the 1987 Constitution are self-executing provisions, hence, the
in all commercial and government establishments rights of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology and the right to health are
legally demandable and enforceable, violations of those rights are justiciable,
Topic: Right to a Balanced and Healthful Ecology meaning victims may go to court for redress and compensation.
Article II, Section 16, The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to A constitutional provision is self-executing when it can be given effect without the
a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of aid of legislation, and there is nothing to indicate that legislation is intended to make
nature. it operative.
During the drafting of the 1987 Constitution, the controversial debate was whether While the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology is to be found in
to continue the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant or suspend it. There was a growing the declaration of state policies (policy as used in the Constitution means it is a
concern about the nuclear fallout in case of accidents detrimental not only to the course of action adopted and pursued by the government), it does not follow that
health but as well as to the environment. it is less important than any of the civil and political rights enumerated in the Bill of
Rights
The discussions manifested a clear desire to make environmental protection and
ecological balance conscious objects of police power by regulating human activities Such a right belongs to a different category of rights altogether for it concerns
and imposing correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment, as well as, nothing less than self-preservation and self-perpetuation of the people at large.
imposing a duty to the government to protect the environment.
The right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the
Every member of the Constitutional Commission was convinced of the need to correlative duty of the State to refrain from impairing the environment, mandates
provide a particular provision on the protection of the environment hence, Section the government to conduct a judicious management and conservation of the natural
16 was provided recognizing the right of the people for a balanced and healthful resource found within the Philippine territory.
ecology.
Page 15
Article XII, Section 2 – With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural ecological systems and their diversity of plants and animals.
resources shall not be alienated.
An ecological system is a biological community consisting of all the living organisms,
But, at the same time, the State needs to extract and utilize the natural resources including humans, in a particular area and the nonliving components, such as air,
for economic gain. How can it be called wealth of the nation if the State will not water, mineral soil, with which the organism interacts. Examples of ecological
utilize the natural resources and derived benefit from it. systems include forests, grasslands, agricultural systems, lakes, streams, wetlands,
estuaries, and coral reefs.
Article XII, Section 2 – The exploration, development, and utilization of natural
resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State Ecosystems process water and nutrients, build soils, produce the oxygen we
may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint breathe, remove carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere,
venture, or production sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations and perform many other functions that are important for the health of the people
or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. and the planet as a whole.
The Congress may, be law, allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by
Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming, with priority to subsistence Meaning of Ecology
fishermen and fishworkers in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons. The President may
enter into agreements with foreign-owned corporations involving technical or The word ecology was first used by a German Zoologist Ernst Haeckel, from the
financial assistance for large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of Greek word “OIKOS”, which literally means place to live or a dwelling place.
minerals, petroleum, and other mineral oils according to general terms and However, it was an American, Eugene Odum, who introduced modern ecology and
conditions provided by law, based on real contributions to the economic growth established the first School of Ecology at the University of Georgia.
and general welfare of the country. In such agreements, the State shall promote
the development and use of local scientific and technical resources. Ecology is defined as, the branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms
to one another and to their physical surroundings (Scientific study of life or living
As manifested in the preamble, the ideals and aspirations of the Filipino people is to matter in all its forms and processes). Ecology as a science is the scientific study of
conserve and develop the patrimony of the nation, and affirmed by Section 2, Article the interaction among organisms and their environment.
XII, that except agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated,
however, in the same section, the State is authorized to explore, develop and utilize Ecology is very important to all living organisms because it provides awareness and
natural resources, so the question now is, how do we strike a balance between consciousness of the interdependence between people and nature which is vital for
environmental protection and the need for the economy of the Philippines. food production, maintaining clean air that people breathe and water that all living
organisms need.
Ecological Condition
Barry Commoner, a scientist, ecologist, and environment activist outlined the four
Ecological condition refers to the state of ecological systems or commonly known laws of ecology;
as “ecosystem” which includes their physical, chemical, and biological characteristics 1. Everything is connected to everything
and the processes and interactions that connect them. 2. Everything must go somewhere
3. Nature knows best
Understanding ecological conditions is crucial, because humans depend on healthy 4. There is no such thing as free lunch
ecological systems for food, fiber, timber, flood control, and many other benefits.
Many scientists attribute deep significance and important tangible benefits to
Page 16
Eugene Odum introduced the basic principles in ecology; 6. Maintenance of ecosystems

1. Adaptation to nature 7. Recovery from natural and man made destructions
2. Human behavior
3. Regulation Evolution of laws on sanitation, pollution, and environment
4. Diversity 1. R. A. No. 3931, June 18, 1964, An Act Creating the National Water and Air
5. Emergent properties Pollution Control Commission
6. Energy flow 2. P. D. No. 600, December 09, 1974, Marine Pollution Decree of 1974
7. Growth development 3. P. D. No. 825, November 07, 1975, Providing Penalty for Improper
8. Everything has an end Disposal of Garbage and other Forms of Uncleanliness
4. P. D. No. 856, December 03, 1975, Code on Sanitation of the Philippines
N.B. – Emergent property is a property which a collection or complex system has, 5. P. D. No. 979, August 18, 1976, Marine Pollution Decree of 1976 (revised
but which the individual members do not have. In biology, the heart is made of heart P.D. No. 600)
cells, however, heart cells on their own do not have the property of pumping blood. 6. P.D. No. 984, August 18, 1976, National Pollution Control Decree (revised
It must be the whole heart, as a system to be able to pump blood. This is similar to R.A. No. 3931)
the interaction of the forests, timber, air, water, and the process of evaporation. 7. P. D. No. 1067, December 31, 1976, Water Code of the Philippines
8. P. D. No. 1121, April 18, 1977, Creation of the National Environmental
Equally important is the presence of trees. NASA studies on indoor air pollution Protection Council
recommends 15 to 18 plants to clean the air in an average of 1,800 square foot 9. P. D. No. 1142, June 06, 1977, Philippine Environmental Code
house. 1 plant per 100 square feet of floor space. One human being breathes about 10. R. A. No. 6969, October 26, 1990, Toxic Substances and Hazardous and
9.5 tons of air in a year, but oxygen only makes up about 23 percent of that air and Nuclear Wastes Control Act
we only extract a little over a third of the oxygen from each breath. About seven or 11. R. A. No. 7279, March 24, 1992, Urban Development and Housing Act of
eight trees are needed per single human being. 1992
12. R. A. No. 7924, March 01, 1995, An Act Creating the Metropolitan Manila
Crucial to human beings is ecological support, which is known as “Biodiversity”. The Development Authority
term biodiversity refers to the variety of life on earth at all its levels, from genes to 13. R. A. No. 8550, July 13, 1998, Philippine Fisheries Code (revised P.D.
ecosystems, and can encompass the evolutionary, ecological, and cultural processes No.704)
that sustain life. Biodiversity provides a functioning ecosystem that supplies oxygen, 14. R. A. No. 8749, June 23, 1999, Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999
clean air and water, pollination of plants, pest control, wastewater treatment. 15. R. A. No. 9003, January 26, 2001, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act
Biodiversity is also important in food production, as it ensures the sustainable 16. R. A. No. 9275, March 22, 2004, Philippine Clean Water Ac
productivity of soils and provides the genetic resources for all crops, livestock, and
marine species harvested for food.
Case Study:
Benefits of a healthy biodiversity
1. Protection of water resources Henares vs. LTFRB and DOTR
2. Soils formation and protection
3. Nutrient storage and recycling DOCTRINE: The Court determined that mandamus was available only to compel the
4. Pollution breakdown and absorption doing of an act specifically enjoined by law as a duty. Since the petitioners were
5. Contribution to climate stability unable to establish that there was an indubitable legal duty on the respondents to
Page 17
order owners of public vehicles to use CNG, a grant of the writ of mandamus was ISSUES:
not justified. 1) Whether the respondent is the agency responsible to implement the
suggested alternative of requiring public utility vehicles to use compressed
FACTS: Citing statistics from National and International agencies, petitioners prayed natural gas (CNG)
for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents Land Transportation Franchising 2) Whether the respondent can be compelled to require public utility vehicles
and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) and the Department of Transportation and to use compressed natural gas through a writ of mandamus
Communications (DOTC) to require public utility vehicles (PUVs) to use compressed
natural gas (CNG) as alternative fuel. Petitioners allege that the particulate matter RULING:
(PM) – complex mixtures of dust, dirt, smoke, and liquid droplets, varying in sizes 1) NO. Mandamus is available only to compel the doing of an act specifically
and compositions emitted into the air from various engine combustions – have enjoined by law as a duty. Here, there is no law that mandates the
caused detrimental effects on health, productivity, infrastructure and the overall respondents LTFRB and the DOTC to order owners of motor vehicles to use
quality of life. In addition, they allege that with the continuing high demand for CNG. At most the LTFRB has been tasked by E.O. No. 290 in par. 4.5 (ii),
motor vehicles, the energy and transport sectors are likely to remain the major Section 4 “to grant preferential and exclusive Certificates of Public
sources of harmful emissions. They cited studies showing that vehicular emissions Convenience (CPC) or franchises to operators of NGVs based on the results
in Metro Manila have resulted in the prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary of the DOTC surveys. In addition, under the Clean Air Act, it is the DENR that
diseases (COPD); that pulmonary tuberculosis is highest among jeepney drivers; and is tasked to set the emission standards for fuel use and the task of
that the children in Metro Manila showed more compromised pulmonary function developing an action plan. As far as motor vehicles are concerned, it
than their rural counterparts. Petitioners infer that these are mostly due to the devolves upon the DOTC and the line agency whose mandate is to oversee
emissions of PUVs. Asserting their right to clean air, petitioners contend that the that motor vehicles prepare an action plan and implement the emission
bases for their petition for a writ of mandamus to order the LTFRB to require PUVs standards for motor vehicles, namely the LTFRB.
to use CNG as an alternative fuel, lie in Section 16,12 Article II of the 1987
Constitution, in Oposa v. Factoran, Jr. and Section 414 of Republic Act No. 8749 2) No. Petitioners are unable to pinpoint the law that imposes an indubitable
otherwise known as the “Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999.” legal duty on respondents that will justify a grant of the writ of mandamus
compelling the use of CNG for public utility vehicles. The legislature should
Petitioners insist that since it is the LTFRB and the DOTC that are the government provide first the specific statutory remedy to the complex environmental
agencies clothed with power to regulate and control motor vehicles, particularly problems bared by herein petitioners before any judicial recourse by
PUVs, and with the same agencies’ awareness and knowledge that the PUVs emit mandamus is taken. In addition, the petition had been mooted by the
dangerous levels of air pollutants, then, the responsibility to see that these are issuance of Executive Order No. 290, which implemented a program on the
curbed falls under respondents’ functions and a writ of mandamus should issue use of CNG by public vehicles. The court was assured that the
against them. On the other hand, the Solicitor General said that the respondent implementation for a cleaner environment is being addressed.
government agencies, the DOTC and the LTFRB, are not in a position to compel the
PUVs to use CNG as alternative fuel. He explained that the function of the DOTC is
limited to implementing the emission standards set forth in Rep. Act No. 8749 and Oposa vs. Factoran
the said law only goes as far as setting the maximum limit for the emission of
vehicles, but it does not recognize CNG as alternative engine fuel. He recommended FACTS: The petitioner, all minors and alleges that the plaintiffs "are all citizens of the
that the petition should be addressed to Congress for it to come up with a policy Republic of the Philippines, taxpayers, and entitled to the full benefit, use and
that would compel the use of CNG as alternative fuel. enjoyment of the natural resource treasure that is the country's virgin tropical
rainforests, duly joined and represented by their parents instituted a complained as
Page 18
a taxpayers’ class suit and prayed for the rendering of judgment ordering defendant stand to inherit nothing but parched earth incapable of sustaining life. The right to a
Factoran, then Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the correlative duty to refrain from
(DENR), his agents, representatives and other persons acting in his behalf to cancel impairing the environment. The said right implies, among many other things, the
all existing timber license agreements in the country and to cease and desist form judicious management and conservation of the country's forests. E.O. No.192 and
receiving, accepting, processing, renewing or approving new timber license the Administrative Code of 1987 have set the objectives which serve as the bases for
agreements. The defendant moved for the dismissal of the complaint on two policy formulation and have defined the powers and functions of the DENR, the
grounds: 1) lack of cause of action against him and 2) the issue raised was a political primary government agency for the proper use and development of the country's
question which properly pertains to the legislative or executive branches. The trial natural resources. The right of the petitioners and all they represent to a balanced
court dismissed the complaint based on the aforementioned grounds. Thus, the and healthful ecology is as clear as the DENR’s duty to protect and advance the said
petitioners filed a special civil action for certiorari seeking to rescind and set aside. right. A denial or violation of that right by the owner who has the correlative duty or
obligation to respect or protect the same gives rise to a cause of action.
ISSUE: Whether or not the said petitioners have a cause of action to prevent the
misappropriation or impairment of the Philippine rainforests and have the
defendant stop form receiving, processing and approving timber license
agreements. MMDA vs. Concerned Citizens of Manila Bay
RULING: Yes. The petitioners have a cause of action. The complaint focuses on one FACTS: Respondents filed a complaint before the RTC in Imus, Cavite against several
specific fundamental legal right-the right to a balanced and healthful ecology which, government agencies, among them the petitioners, for the clean-up, rehabilitation,
for the first time in our constitutional history, is solemnly incorporated in the and protection of the Manila Bay. The complaint alleged that the water quality of
fundamental law. Section 16, Article II of the 1987 Constitution explicitly provides the Manila Bay had fallen way below the allowable standards set by law, specifically
that the State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and the Philippine Environment Code or Presidential Decree (PD) 1152. As plaintiffs a
healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.This right unites quo, respondents prayed that petitioners be ordered to clean the Manila Bay and
with the right to health which is provided for in Section 15 of Article II of the 1987 submit to the RTC a concerted concrete plan of action for the purpose. The RTC ruled
Constitution. While the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is to be found in the respondents’ favor.
under the Declaration of Principles and State Policies and not under the Bill of Rights,
it does not follow that it is less important than any of the civil and political rights The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Department of
enumerated in the latter. Such a right belongs to a different category of rights Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
altogether for it concerns nothing less than self-preservation and self-perpetuation (MMDA), Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), Philippine National Police (PNP) Maritime
-- aptly and fittingly stressed by the petitioners -- the advancement of which may Group, and five (5) other executive departments and agencies filed directly with this
even be said to predate all governments and constitutions. As a matter of fact, these Court a petition for review under Rule 45. Petitioners were one in arguing that the
basic rights need not even be written in the Constitution for they are assumed to pertinent provisions of the Environment Code relate only to the cleaning of specific
exist from the inception of humankind. If they are now explicitly mentioned in the pollution incidents and do not cover cleaning in general. Apart from raising concerns
fundamental charter, it is because of the well-founded fear of its framers that unless about the lack of funds appropriated for cleaning purposes, petitioners also asserted
the rights to a balanced and healthful ecology and to health are mandated as state that the cleaning of the Manila Bay is not a ministerial act which can be compelled
policies by the Constitution itself, thereby highlighting their continuing importance by mandamus.
and imposing upon the state a solemn obligation to preserve the first and protect
and advance the second, the day would not be too far when all else would be lost The CA denied petitioners’ appeal and affirmed the Decision of the RTC in toto,
not only for the present generation, but also for those to come -- generations which stressing that the trial court decision did not require petitioners to do tasks outside
Page 19
of their usual basic functions under existing laws. Thus, the Manila Bay Advisory one that allows a person to exercise judgment and choose to perform or
Committee was created to receive and evaluate the quarterly progressive reports not to perform. Any suggestion that the MMDA has the option whether or
on the activities undertaken by the agencies in accordance with said decision and to not to perform its solid waste disposal-related duties ought to be dismissed
monitor the execution phase. In the absence of specific completion periods, the for want of legal basis. A perusal of other petitioners’ respective charters
Committee recommended that time frames be set for the agencies to perform their or enabling statutes and pertinent law s would yield the conclusion that
assigned tasks. these government agencies are enjoined, as a matter of statutory
obligation, to perform certain functions relating directly or indirectly to the
ISSUES: clean-up, rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of the Manila Bay.
1) Whether or not petitioners can be compelled by mandamus to clean up They are precluded from choosing not to perform these duties.
and rehabilitate the bay.
2) Whether or not PD 1152 includes a cleanup in general or is it limited only 2) The PD does not in any way state that the government agencies concerned
to the clean-up of specific pollution incidents. ought to confine themselves to the containment, removal, and cleaning
3) Whether or not the recommendation by the Committee is an operations when a specific pollution incident occurs. The underlying duty
encroachment over the powers and functions of the Executive Branch. to upgrade the quality of water is not conditional on the occurrence of any
pollution incident. Even assuming the absence of a categorical legal
provision specifically prodding petitioners to clean up the bay, the same
RULINGS: and their representatives cannot escape their obligation to future
1) YES. Generally, the writ of mandamus lies to require the execution of a generations of Filipinos to keep the waters of the Manila Bay clean and
ministerial duty. A ministerial duty is one that requires neither the exercise clear as humanly as possible.
of official discretion nor judgment. It connotes an act in which nothing is
left to the discretion of the person executing it. It is a simple, definite duty 3) NO. The issuance of subsequent resolutions by the Court is simply an
arising under conditions admitted or proved to exist and imposed by law. exercise of judicial power under Art. VIII of the Constitution, because the
Mandamus is available to compel action, when refused, on matters execution of the Decision is but an integral part of the adjudicative function
involving discretion, but not to direct the exercise of judgment or discretion of the Court. While additional activities are required of the agencies like
one way or the other. While the implementation of the MMDA’s mandated submission of plans of action, data or status reports, these directives are
tasks may entail a decision-making process, the enforcement of the law or but part and parcel of the execution stage of a final decision under Rule 39
the very act of doing what the law exacts to be done is ministerial in nature of the Rules of Court.
and may be compelled by mandamus.1 In the instant case, the MMDA’s
duty to put up an adequate and appropriate sanitary landfill and solid waste In view thereof, the Supreme Court affirmed ― with modifications
& liquid disposal as well as other alternative garbage disposal systems is incorporating subsequent developments or supervening events ― the
ministerial, its duty being a statutory imposition. Such duty is spelled out in ruling of CA.
Sec. 3(c) of Republic Act (RA) 7924 creating the MMDA.
The MMDA’s duty in the area of waste disposal, in this regard, is set forth
not only in the PD 1152 and Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (RA
9003), but in its charter as well. This duty of putting up a proper waste
disposal system cannot be characterized as discretionary for discretion
presupposes the power or right given by law to public functionaries to act
officially according to their judgment or conscience. A discretionary duty is
Page 20
Article II, Section 22 of the 1987 Constitution f) They are marginalized and discriminated against by the State
(September 27, 2021) g) They maintain and develop their ancestral environments and systems as
distinct peoples
Article II, Section 22 – The State recognizes and promotes the rights of Indigenous
Cultural Communities within the framework of national unity and development. Complimenting this policy is
Section 22 is a new provision and it signifies the sentiments of the framers of the Article XII, Section 5 – The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and
1987 Constitution that it is about time to give due recognition to the Indigenous National Development policies and programs, shall protect the rights of
Cultural Communities. indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral land to ensure their economic,
social, and cultural well-being.
The term used by the United Nations is Indigenous Cultural Minorities. Indigenous
people’s predecessors are the natives or tribal communities. The Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing
property rights or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral
Indigenous Cultural Communities or Indigenous People – refers to a group of domain.
people or homogenous societies identified by self-ascription and ascription by
others, who have continuously lived as organized community on communally Section 22 of Article II is a declaration of the policy for the guidance of the State that
bounded and defined territory, and who have, under the claim of ownership, since it shall recognize and promotes the rights of the indigenous people, and being a
time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utilized such territories, sharing policy it does not grant unto the indigenous an enforceable and demandable rights,
common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits, whereas, Section 5 commands the State to enact a law that shall not only recognize
or who have, through resistance to political, social and cultural inroads of the rights of the indigenous people but also protect their rights and imposed
colonization, nonindigenous religions and cultures, became historically sanctions in case of violations.
differentiated from the majority of Filipinos.
The purpose of Section 5, Article XII, is to address the centuries-old neglect of the
Indigenous Peoples, shall likewise include peoples who are regarded as indigenous Indigenous Peoples by the national government, who have long suffered from the
on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, at dominance of the majority.
the time of conquest or colonization, or at the time of inroads of non-indigenous
religions and cultures, or the establishment of present state boundaries, who retain Resisting the intrusion on their ancestral land and with the massive exploitation of
some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, but who their ancestral domain, with the government as an indispensable party, they became
may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled marginalized and therefore, the State is called upon to protect their rights over their
outside their ancestral domains. ancestral lands.
Indigenous Peoples can be identified according to certain characteristics The State shall protect the rights of the indigenous people through the enactment
a) Most importantly, they self-identify as indigenous peoples of a law recognizing their rights over their ancestral domain and ancestral lands and
b) There is a historical link with those who inhabited a country or region at the imposing conditions on the exploitation of their ancestral domain.
time when people of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived
c) They have a strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources N.B. - There are two concepts mentioned in section 5, ancestral lands and ancestral
d) They have distinct social, economic or political systems domain. These two concepts are distinct from each other and they are defined by
e) They have a distinct language, culture and beliefs
Page 21
section 3 (a) and (b) in R.A. No. 8371 (Oct 1997), aka, Indigenous People’s Rights Act communities but to which they have traditionally had access for their subsistence
of 1997 and traditional activities.
Ancestral Domain – refer to all areas generally belonging to Indigenous Cultural Ancestral land is a narrower concept. It refers to those held under the same
Community/ Indigenous people comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and conditions as ancestral domain but limited to lands that are not merely occupied
natural resources therein, held under the claim of ownership, occupied or possessed and possessed but are also utilized by cultural communities under the claim of
by ICCs/IPs by themselves or through their ancestors, communally or individually individual or traditional group ownership. These include but are not limited to
since time immemorial, continuously to the present except when interrupted by residential lots, rice terraces or paddies, private forests, farms and tree lots.
war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth or as a consequence of
government projects or any other voluntary dealings entered into by government There is another provision Section 17 of Article XIV, which provides – “the State shall
and private individuals or corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their recognize, respect, and protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to
economic, social and cultural welfare. preserve and develop their culture, traditions, and institutions. It shall consider
these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies”/
It shall include ancestral land, forests, pasture, residential, agricultural, and other
lands individually owned whether alienable and disposable or otherwise, hunting The significance of Section 17 is just to reiterate the declared policy of the State
grounds, burial grounds, worship areas, bodies of water, mineral and other natural under Section 22 of Article II, which is an expression of national policy and are
resources, and lands which may no longer be exclusively occupied by ICCs/IPs but evidence of a nation seeking to understand and articulate its own cultural identity
from which they traditionally had access to for their subsistence and traditional after many years of colonial rule both from the Spain and the United States of
activities, particularly the home ranges of ICCs/IPs who are still nomadic and/or America.
shifting cultivators (Section 3 (a), R.A. No. 8371).
There is another provision in the 1987 Constitution, particularly Section 12 of Article
Ancestral lands – refers to land occupied, possessed and utilized by individuals, XVI, which provides – “The Congress may create a consultative body to advise the
families, and clans who members of the ICCs/IPs since time immemorial by President on policies affecting indigenous cultural communities, the majority of
themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, under claims of individual or the members of which shall come from such communities”.
traditional group ownership, continuously to the present, except when interrupted
by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a consequence Philippine Indigenous Peoples
of government projects and other voluntary dealings entered into by government
and private individuals/corporations, including, but not limited to, residential lots, Though the exact numbers of indigenous peoples population remains unclear, the
rice terraces or paddies, private forests, swidden farms and tree lots (Section 3(b), survey done by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples is that there are
R.A.No. 8371). approximately eleven million and three hundred thousand indigenous peoples in the
Philippine Islands.
The phrase “ancestral domain” is broader in concept than “ancestral lands”.
Ancestral domain is an all-embracing concept which refers to lands, inland waters, While some of these indigenous peoples emerged from early waves of Malay or
coastal areas, and natural resources therein and includes ancestral lands, forests, Proto-Malay migrants, such as Aeta and Ati, are negritos that were already long-
pasture, residential, agricultural, and other lands individually owned whether established in the Philippines, and are thought to be the descendants of the earliest
alienable or inalienable, hunting grounds, burial grounds, worship areas, bodies of settlers to the Philippine Islands, who may have migrated through land bridges from
waters, and all other natural resources that may be found therein. They also include the Asian mainland long before the discovery and conquest of Spain.
lands which may no longer be exclusively occupied by indigenous cultural
Page 22
Case Study
A common geographical distinction is often made between Aeta and Igorot in Luzon
and Lumad for those in Mindanao, while in the Visayas are the Mangyan. Isagani Cruz vs. Secretary of DENR
The indigenous peoples are the collateral damage of the long running insurgency. DOCTRINE: All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and
Many have been caught in the conflict, suspected to be a member or sympathizer other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife,
and subjected to militarization within their communities or targeted with extra- flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. With the
judicial killings and torture. exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The
exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full
Land rights remain an ongoing issue for indigenous communities, many of whom still control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such
lack official recognition of their ancestral land. activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing
agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least sixty per
Even land recognized as indigenous under the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a
issued by the government, can still be lost to development projects of the period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five
government or private corporations, since mining and other projects can be pursued years, and under such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of
if a certificate of “Free and Prior Informed Consent” is obtained. water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than the
development of water power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the
The most controversial incident involving the cultural minorities was the brutal grant. (Sec. 2, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution)
killing of Macli-ing Dulag on April 24, 1980, who was a PANGAT leader of the Butbut
Tribe of Kalinga Province. FACTS: Petitioners Isagani Cruz and Cesar Europa filed a suit for prohibition and
mandamus as citizens and taxpayers, assailing the constitutionality of certain
Macli-ing Dulag opposed the project of the National Power Corporation to construct provisions of Republic Act No. 8371, otherwise known as the Indigenous People’s
the Chico River Dam at the provinces of Kalinga, Bontoc, Benguet ,and Mountain Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA) and its implementing rules and regulations (IRR). The
Province, where NPC will build four (4) hydroelectric power plants. petitioners assail certain provisions of the IPRA and its IRR on the ground that these
amount to an unlawful deprivation of the State’s ownership over lands of the public
Macli-ing Dulag’s murder unified the various peoples of the Cordillera mountains domain as well as minerals and other natural resources therein, in violation of the
against the proposed Chico River Dam, and pressure from the international regalian doctrine embodied in section 2, Article XII of the Constitution.
community, particularly the withdrawal of the World Bank of its financial support,
forced President Marcos to abandoned the project. ISSUE: Whether or not the provisions of IPRA contravene the Constitution.
Macli-ing Dulag’s name is inscribed on the Bantayog ng mga Bayani (Monument of RULING: No, the provisions of IPRA do not contravene the Constitution. Examining
the Heroes Wall of Remembrance in Quezon City. the IPRA, there is nothing in the law that grants to the ICCs/IPs ownership over the
natural resources within their ancestral domain. Ownership over the natural
resources in the ancestral domains remains with the State and the rights granted by
the IPRA to the ICCs/IPs over the natural resources in their ancestral domains merely
gives them, as owners and occupants of the land on which the resources are found,
the right to the small scale utilization of these resources, and at the same time, a
priority in their large scale development and exploitation.
Page 23
Additionally, ancestral lands and ancestral domains are not part of the lands of the (1) Section 3(a) which defines the extent and coverage of ancestral domains,
public domain. They are private lands and belong to the ICCs/IPs by native title, and Section 3(b) which, in turn, defines ancestral lands;
which is a concept of private land title that existed irrespective of any royal grant (2) Section 5, in relation to section 3(a), which provides that ancestral domains
from the State. However, the right of ownership and possession by the ICCs/IPs of including inalienable public lands, bodies of water, mineral and other
their ancestral domains is a limited form of ownership and does not include the right resources found within ancestral domains are private but community
to alienate the same. property of the indigenous peoples;
(3) Section 6 in relation to section 3(a) and 3(b) which defines the composition
Commentary: of ancestral domains and ancestral lands;
In Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, Justice Puno, in his (4) Section 7 which recognizes and enumerates the rights of the indigenous
separate opinion, gave the following conclusion: The struggle of the Filipinos peoples over the ancestral domains;
throughout colonial history had been plagued by ethnic and religious differences. (5) Section 8 which recognizes and enumerates the rights of the indigenous
These differences were carried over and magnified by the Philippine government peoples over the ancestral lands;
through the imposition of a national legal order that is mostly foreign in origin or (6) Section 57 which provides for priority rights of the indigenous peoples in
derivation. Largely unpopulist, the present legal system has resulted in the the harvesting, extraction, development or exploration of minerals and
alienation of a large sector of society, specifically, the indigenous peoples. The other natural resources within the areas claimed to be their ancestral
histories and cultures of the indigenes are relevant to the evolution of Philippine domains, and the right to enter into agreements with nonindigenous
culture and are vital to the understanding of contemporary problems. It is through peoples for the development and utilization of natural resources therein
the IPRA that an attempt was made by our legislators to understand Filipino for a period not exceeding 25 years, renewable for not more than 25 years;
society not in terms of myths and biases but through common experiences in the and
course of history. The Philippines became a democracy a centennial ago and the (7) Section 58 which gives the indigenous peoples the responsibility to
decolonization process still continues. If the evolution of the Filipino people into a maintain, develop, protect and conserve the ancestral domains and
democratic society is to truly proceed democratically, i.e., if the Filipinos as a whole portions thereof which are found to be necessary for critical watersheds,
are to participate fully in the task of continuing democratization, it is this Court's mangroves, wildlife sanctuaries, wilderness, protected areas, forest cover
duty to acknowledge the presence of indigenous and customary laws in the country or reforestation.
and affirm their coexistence with the land laws in our national legal system.
After due deliberation on the petition, the Supreme Court voted as follows: seven
Petitioners in the Cruz case challenged the constitutionality of RA No. 8371, (7) Justices voted to dismiss the petition while seven (7) others voted to grant the
otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA), on the ground petition. As the votes were equally divided (7 to 7) and the necessary majority was
that it amounts to an unlawful deprivation of the State’s ownership over lands of not obtained, the case was redeliberated upon. However, after redeliberation, the
the public domain and all other natural resources therein, by recognizing the right voting remained the same. Pursuant to Section 7, Rule 56 of the Rules of Court, the
of ownership of Indigenous Cultural Communities or Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) petition was dismissed, and the validity of the law, deemed upheld.
to their ancestral domains and ancestral lands on the basis of native title.
Justice Kapunan, voting to dismiss the petition, stated that the Regalian theory does
Specifically, the following provisions of the IPRA and its Implementing Rules and not negate native title to lands held in private ownership since time immemorial,
Regulations (IRRs) were contended to be unconstitutional on the ground that they adverting to the landmark case of Cariño v. Insular Government, where the United
amount to an unlawful deprivation of the State's ownership over lands of the States Supreme Court, through Justice Holmes, declared: “It might, perhaps, be
public domain as well as minerals and other natural resources therein, in violation proper and sufficient to say that when, as far back as testimony or memory goes, the
of the regalian doctrine embodied in Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution: land has been held by individuals under a claim of private ownership, it will be
Page 24
presumed to have been held in the same way from before the Spanish conquest, and the rule that all lands that were not acquired from the government, either by
never to have been public land.” purchase or grant, belong to the public domain has an exception. This exception
would be any land that should have been in the possession of an occupant and of
According to Agcaoili (2006), this ruling (which cannot be called a "decision" because his predecessors-in-interest since time immemorial. It is this kind of possession that
it was a mere dismissal leading to a procedural necessity to uphold would justify the presumption that the land had never been part of the public
constitutionality) institutionalized the recognition of the existence of native title to domain or that it had been private property even before the Spanish conquest. Oh
land, or ownership of land by Filipinos by virtue of possession under a claim of Cho, however, was decided under the provisions of the Public Land Act and Cariño
ownership since time immemorial and independent of any grant from the Spanish was cited to support the applicant's claim of acquisitive prescription under the said
Crown, as an exception to the theory of jura regalia. Act.
JUSTICE PUNO. Describing the IPRA as a novel piece of legislation, Justice Puno "All these years, Cariño had been quoted out of context simply to justify long,
stated that Cariño firmly established a concept of private land title that existed continuous, open and adverse possession in the concept of owner of public
irrespective of any royal grant from the State and was based on the strong mandate agricultural land. It is this long, continuous, open and adverse possession in the
extended to the Islands via the Philippine Bill of 1902 that “No law shall be enacted concept of owner of thirty years both for ordinary citizens and members of the
in said islands which shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due national cultural minorities that converts the land from public into private and
process of law, or deny to any person therein the equal protection of the laws.” The entitles the registrant to a torrent's certificate of title."
IPRA recognizes the existence of ICCs/IPs as a distinct sector in Philippine society.
It grants these people the ownership and possession of their ancestral domains JUSTICE VITUG. On the other hand, Justice Vitug would grant the petition, saying
and ancestral lands, and defines the extent of these lands and domains. The that Cariño cannot override the collective will of the people expressed in the
ownership given is the indigenous concept of ownership under customary law Constitution. It is in them that sovereignty resides and from them that all
which traces its origin to native title. government authority emanates. It is not then for a court ruling or any piece of
legislation to be conformed to by the fundamental law, but it is for the former to
Justice Puno's discussion regarding Cariño is worth reading. He wrote: "In the adapt to the latter, and it is the sovereign act that must, between them, stand
Philippines, the concept of native title first upheld in Cariño and enshrined in the inviolate.
IPRA grants ownership, albeit in limited form, of the land to the ICCs/IPs. Native title
presumes that the land is private and was never public. Cariño is the only case that Putting more emphasis on the importance of the collective will of the people over
specifically and categorically recognizes native title. The long line of cases citing the Cariño doctrine, Justice Vitug continued: "The decision of the United States
Cariño did not touch on native title and the private character of ancestral domains Supreme Court in Cariño vs. Insular Government, holding that a parcel of land held
and lands. Cariñowas cited by the succeeding cases to support the concept of since time immemorial by individuals under a claim of private ownership is
acquisitive prescription under the Public Land Act which is a different matter presumed never to have been public land and cited to downgrade the application of
altogether. Under the Public Land Act, land sought to be registered must be public the regalian doctrine, cannot override the collective will of the people expressed in
agricultural land. When the conditions specified in Section 48 [b] of the Public Land the Constitution. It is in them that sovereignty resides and from them that all
Act are complied with, the possessor of the land is deemed to have acquired, by government authority emanates. It is not then for a court ruling or any piece of
operation of law, a right to a grant of the land. The land ceases to be part of the legislation to be conformed to by the fundamental law, but it is for the former to
public domain, ipso jure, and is converted to private property by the mere lapse or adapt to the latter, and it is the sovereign act that must, between them, stand
completion of the prescribed statutory period. inviolate. xxx
"It was only in the case of Oh Cho v. Director of Lands that the court declared that "The constitutional aim, it seems to me, is to get Congress to look closely into the
Page 25
customary laws and, with specificity and by proper recitals, to hew them to, and The Province of North Cotabato vs. The Government of the Philippines Peace
make them part of, the stream of laws. The "due process clause," as I so understand Panel on Ancestral Domain
it in Tanada vs. Tuvera, would require an apt publication of a legislative enactment
before it is permitted to take force and effect. So, also, customary laws, when FACTS: The Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD)
specifically enacted to become part of statutory law, must first undergo that brought about by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the
publication to render them correspondingly binding and effective as such. Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as an aspect of Tripoli Agreement of Peace in
2001 is scheduled to be signed in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
"Undoubtedly, IPRA has several good points, and I would respectfully urge Congress
to re-examine the law. Indeed, the State is exhorted to protect the rights of This Memorandum prepared by the joint efforts of the Government of the Republic
indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands, a task that would entail a of the Philippines (GRP) Peace Panel and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF)
balancing of interest between their specific needs and the imperatives of national Peace Panel, was merely a codification of consensus points reached between both
interest." parties and the aspirations of the MILF to have a Bangsamoro homeland.
JUSTICE PANGANIBAN. Justice Panganiban was more forthright when he stated that This agreement was petitioned by the Province of North Cotabato for Mandamus
all Filipinos, whether indigenous or not, are subject to the Constitution, and that no and Prohibition with Prayer for the Issuance of Writ of Preliminary Injunction and
one is exempt from its all-encompassing provisions. Temporary Restraining Order.
Justice Panganiban anchored his vote to declare certain parts of the assailed law on The agreement mentions "Bangsamoro Juridical Entity" (BJE) to which it grants the
the following premise. "My basic premise is that the Constitution is the fundamental authority and jurisdiction over the Ancestral Domain and Ancestral Lands of the
law of the land, to which all other laws must conform. It is the people's quintessential Bangsamoro; authority and jurisdiction over all natural resources within internal
act of sovereignty, embodying the principles upon which the State and the waters.
government are founded. Having the status of a supreme and all-encompassing law,
it speaks for all the people all the time, not just for the majority or for the minority The agreement is composed of two local statutes:
at intermittent times. Every constitution is a compact made by and among the ● The Organic Act for Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (R.A. No.
citizens of a State to govern themselves in a certain manner. Truly, the Philippine 9054)
Constitution is a solemn covenant made by all the Filipinos to govern themselves. ● The Indigenous People’s Rights Act (R.A No. 8371)
No group, however blessed, and no sector, however distressed, is exempt from its
compass." ISSUE: Whether by signing the MOA, the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines would be binding itself:
● to create and recognize the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) as a separate
state, or a juridical, territorial or political subdivision not recognized by law;
● to revise or amend the Constitution and existing laws to conform to the
MOA;
● to concede to or recognize the claim of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front
for ancestral domain in violation of Republic Act No. 8371 (THE
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES RIGHTS ACT OF1997)
● If in the affirmative, whether the Executive Branch has the authority to so
bind the Government of the Republic of the Philippines.
Page 26
RULING: With respect to the indigenous cultural communities/indigenous people in the case at bar aims to vest in the BJE the status of an associated state or, at any
(ICCs/IPs) have, under the IPRA (THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES RIGHTS ACT), the right rate, a status closely approximating it.
to participate fully at all levels of decision-making in matters which may affect their
rights, lives and destinies. No province, city, or municipality, not even the ARMM, is recognized under our laws
as having an “associative” relationship with the national government. Indeed, the
The MOA-AD, (The Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain), an concept implies powers that go beyond anything ever granted by the Constitution
instrument recognizing ancestral domain, failed to justify its non- compliance with to any local or regional government. It also implies the recognition of the associated
the clear-cut mechanisms ordained in said Act which provides the observance of the entity as a state. The Constitution, however, does not contemplate any state in this
free and prior informed consent of the indigenous cultural communities/indigenous jurisdiction other than the Philippine State, much less does it provide for a transitory
people. The IPRA does not grant the Executive Department or any government status that aims to prepare any part of Philippine territory for independence. Even
agency the power to delineate and recognize an ancestral domain claim by mere the mere concept animating many of the MOA-AD’s provisions, already requires for
agreement or compromise. its validity the amendment of constitutional provisions, specifically the following
provisions of Article X:
The IPRA lays down the prevailing procedure for the delineation and recognition of
ancestral domains. The MOA-AD’s manner of delineating the ancestral domain of SECTION 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines
the Bangsamoro people is a clear departure from that procedure.The Memorandum are the provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous
just provides for: regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as hereinafter provided.
“The Bangsamoro homeland and historic territory refer to the land mass as well as SECTION 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in
the maritime, terrestrial, fluvial and alluvial domains, and the aerial domain, the the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas
atmospheric space above it, embracing the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan geographic sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social
region.” structures, and other relevant characteristics within the framework of this
Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
In proceeding to make a sweeping declaration on ancestral domain, without Republic of the Philippines.
complying with the IPRA, which is cited as one of the term of reference (TOR) of
the MOA-AD, the government of the Republic of the Philippines clearly went out The MOA-AD cannot be reconciled with the present Constitution and laws. Not its
of bounds of its authority. specific provisions but the very concept underlying them, namely, the associative
relationship envisioned between the The Government of the Republic of the
The Memorandum in question contains many provisions which are consistent with Philippines and the Basangmoro Juridical Entity are unconstitutional, for the concept
the international legal concept of association, specifically the following: assumes that the associated entity is a state and implies that the same is on its way
● The BJE’s capacity to enter into economic and trade relations with foreign to
countries, independence.
● The commitment of the Central Government to ensure the BJE’s
participation in meetings and events in the ASEAN and the specialized UN
agencies, andThe continuing responsibility of the Central Government over Rubi, et al (Manguianes) vs The Provincial Board of Mindoro
external defense.
FACTS: This is an application for habeas corpus in favor of Rubi and other
These provisions of the MOA indicate, among other things, that the parties involved Manguianes of the Province of Mindoro. The provincial board of Mindoro adopted
Page 27
resolution No. 25 which states that “provincial governor of any province in which RULING: The Court held that section 2145 of the Administrative Code does not
non-Christian inhabitants (uncivilized tribes) are found is authorized, when such a deprive a person of his liberty without due process of law and does not deny to him
course is deemed necessary in the interest of law and order, to direct such the equal protection of the laws, and that confinement in reservations in accordance
inhabitants to take up their habitation on sites on unoccupied public lands to be with said section does not constitute slavery and involuntary servitude.
selected by him and approved by the provincial board”.
The Court is further of the opinion that section 2145 of the Administrative Code is a
It is resolved that under section 2077 of the Administrative Code, 800 hectares of legitimate exertion of the police power, somewhat analogous to the Indian policy of
public land in the sitio of Tigbao on Naujan Lake be selected as a site for the the United States. Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 is constitutional.
permanent settlement of Mangyanes in Mindoro. Further, Mangyans may only
solicit homesteads on this reservation providing that said homestead applications The preamble of the resolution of the provincial board of Mindoro which set apart
are previously recommended by the provincial governor. the Tigbao reservation, it will be read, assigned as reasons fort the action, the
following:
Thereafter, the provincial governor of Mindoro issued executive order No. 2, which (1) The failure of former attempts for the advancement of the non-Christian
says that the provincial governor has selected a site in the sitio of Tigbao on Naujan people of the province; and
Lake for the permanent settlement of Mangyanes in Mindoro. (2) the only successful method for educating the Manguianes was to oblige
them to live in a permanent settlement. The Solicitor-General adds the
In that case, pursuant to Section 2145 of the Revised Administrative Code, all the following;
Mangyans in the townships of Naujan and Pola and the Mangyans east of the Baco (3) the protection of the Manguianes;
River including those in the districts of Dulangan and Rubi's place in Calapan, were (4) the protection of the public forests in which they roam;
ordered to take up their habitation on the site of Tigbao, Naujan Lake. Also, that any (5) the necessity of introducing civilized customs among the Manguianes.
Mangyan who shall refuse to comply with this order shall upon conviction be
imprisoned not exceeding sixty days, in accordance with section 2759 of the revised Considered purely as an exercise of the police power, the courts cannot fairly say
Administrative Code. Said resolution of the provincial board of Mindoro were that the Legislature has exceeded its rightful authority. It is, indeed, an unusual
claimed as necessary measures for the protection of the Mangyanes of Mindoro as exercise of that power. But a great malady requires an equally drastic remedy. One
well as the protection of public forests in which they roam, and to introduce civilized cannot hold that the liberty of the citizen is unduly interfered without when the
customs among them. degree of civilization of the Manguianes is considered. They are restrained for their
own good and the general good of the Philippines. Nor can one say that due process
It appeared that Rubi and those living in his rancheria have not fixed their dwelling of law has not been followed. None of the rights of the citizen can be taken away
within the reservation of Tigbao and are liable to be punished. It is alleged that the except by due process of law.
Manguianes are being illegally deprived of their liberty by the provincial officials of
that province. Rubi and his companions are said to be held on the reservation To constitute "due process of law," as has been often held, a judicial proceeding is
established at Tigbao, Mindoro, against their will, and one Dabalos is said to be held not always necessary. In some instances, even a hearing and notice are not requisite
under the custody of the provincial sheriff in the prison at Calapan for having run a rule which is especially true where much must be left to the discretion of the
away form the reservation. administrative officers in applying a law to particular cases. The idea of the provision
ISSUE: Whether or Not Section 2145 of the Administrative Code deprives a person in question is to unify the people of the Philippines so that they may approach the
of his liberty without due process of law. Whether or Not Section 2145 of the highest conception of nationality. The public policy of the Government of the
Administrative Code of 1917 is constitutional. Philippine Islands is shaped with a view to benefit the Filipino people as a whole. The
Manguianes, in order to fulfill this governmental policy, must be confined for a time,
Page 28
as we have said, for their own good and the good of the country.
Therefore, petitioners are not unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty.
Habeas corpus can, therefore, not issue.
Page 29
Article II, Section 25 of the 1987 Constitution this way – A perusal of our Constitution will show that extensive authority over the
(October 4, 2021) public service is granted to the President of the Philippines. All executive authority
is vested in him, and upon him devolves the constitutional duty of seeing that the
Article II, Section 25 – The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments. laws are faithfully executed. In the fulfillment of his duty which he cannot evade, he
is granted specific and express powers and functions. In addition to these specific
Section 25 of Article II, is one of the 26 State Policies and as such, it serves as a and express powers and functions, he may also exercise those necessarily implied
“course of actions” of the government and despite the perceived importance of and included in them.
State policies, the Supreme Court, in the case of Magallona vs Ermita, G.R.
No.187167 (2011), has made it clear that most of the provisions under Article II are Independently of any statutory provision authorizing the President to conduct an
to be considered as “mere legislative guides,” which absent enabling legislation, do investigation in view of the nature and character of the executive authority with
not embody enforceable rights. which the President of the Philippines is invested, the constitutional grant to him of
power to exercise general supervision over local governments and to take care that
The policy of local autonomy was first introduced in the 1973 Constitution, the laws be faithfully executed must be construed to authorized him to order an
particularly, Article II, Section 10, which provides - “The State shall guarantee and investigation of the act or conduct of the local government official.
promote the autonomy of local government units, especially the barrio, to ensure
their fullest developments as self-reliant communities” Supervision is not a meaningless thing. It is an active power. It is certainly not
without limitation, but it at least implies authority to inquire into facts and
And this guarantee of local autonomy to local government units under Section 20, is conditions in order to render the power real and effective. If supervision is to
complimented by a whole Article XI, 1973 Constitution, consisting of five (5) sections conscientious and rational, and not automatic and brutal, it must be founded upon
with the title “Local Government”. a knowledge of actual facts and conditions disclosed after careful study and
investigation.
Pursuant to Section 2 of Article XI of the 1973 Constitution, the Batasang Pambansa,
the legislative body under the 1973 Constitution, enacted B.P. Bilang 337, on Viewed from the totality of powers conferred upon the President by our
February10, 1983, aka Local Government Code, and under Section 14, the President Constitution, the Court should be reluctant to yield to the proposition that the
of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over local government units to President of the Philippines who is endowed with broad and extraordinary powers
ensure that local affairs are administered according to law. It includes the power to by our Constitution, and who is expected to govern with a firm and steady hand
order an investigation on the conduct of local government officials whenever without vexatious or embarrassing interference and much less dictation from any
necessary. source, is yet devoid of the power to order the investigation, we should avoid that
result.
The exercise of general supervision by the President over the local government units
was adopted from the 1935 Constitution, particularly, Article VII, Section 10 (1) Apart from the constitutional aspect, Section 64 of the Administrative Code of 1917,
which provides – The President shall have control of all the executive departments, which provides, among others – In addition to his general supervisory authority, the
bureaus, or offices, exercise general supervision over all local governments as may Governor General shall have such specific powers and duties as are expressly
be provided by law, and take care that the laws be faithfully executed. conferred or imposed on him by law and also, in particular, the powers and duties
set forth – To order, when in his opinion the good of the public so requires, an
In the case of Carmen Planas vs. Civil Service Commissioner Jose Gil, G.R. No. L- investigation of any action or the conduct of any person in the Government service,
46440, January 18, 1939, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to explain the and in connection therewith to designate the official, committee, or person by
power of general supervision over the local government units by the President, in whom such investigation shall be conducted.
Page 30
Under the 1935 and 1973 Constitution, local government units were purely The structure, therefore, must be both sensitive to the needs of the locality,
creatures of Congress. Their creation and extent of their powers in relation to the accountable to the electorate of the locality, and freed as much as possible from
national government were at the discretion of Congress. central government interference.
Under the 1987 Constitution, the creation of local government units is still lodged Free from interference from the central government means from the control of the
with Congress but with grant of wider autonomy in governance. national government, however, Section 4 of Article X states that – the President of
the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over local governments.
Section 25, Article II provides, that as a policy, the State shall ensure the autonomy
of local governments, there are three words, which we ought to understand. General supervision by the President over the local governments, as explained by
the Supreme Court in the case of Rodolfo Ganzon vs Court of Appeals and Secretary
First – ensure, it means that the State shall make certain that local government enjoy of Local Government and Interior Luis Santos, G.R. No. 93252, August 05, 1991,
autonomy. “Local autonomy, under the 1987 Constitution, involves a mere decentralization of
administration, not of power, in which local officials remain accountable to the
Second – autonomy, means the freedom of the local government to recruit and central government in the manner provided by law; the change in constitutional
manage its own staff, raise and manage its own finances, make bye-laws and language, with respect to the supervision clause, was meant to deny legislative
policies, and discharge its functions as provided by law without the interference control over local governments, it did not exempt the local governments from
from the higher government; and legislative regulations provided regulation is consistent with the fundamental
premise of autonomy. Since local governments remain accountable to the national
Third - local government, means the government of a specific local area constituting authority, the national authority may, by law, and in the manner set forth therein,
a political subdivision of a State which is constituted by law and has substantial impose disciplinary action against local officials”.
control of local affairs.
In the case of Mondano vs. Silvoza, G.R. No. L-7708, May 30, 1955, the Supreme
In a unitary system of government, such as the Philippines, local governments can Court had the occasion to discuss the scope and extent of the power of supervision
only be an intra-sovereign nation. It cannot be an imperium in imperio (a by the President over local government officials in contrast to the power of control
government in a government). given to him over executive officials wherein it was emphasized that the two terms,
control and supervision, are two different things which differ from the other in
The policy declared by the sovereign Filipino people in Article II, Section 25 finds meaning and extent.
implementation in Article X, Section 2, which is now a regular provision of the 1987
Constitution, which provides – “the territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy Control means the power of an officer to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what
local autonomy”. a subordinate officer had done in the performance of his duties and to substitute his
judgment over that of his subordinate.
Under the 1935 and 1973 Constitution, local governments were purely creatures of
the Congress. Their creation and extent of their powers in relation to the national Supervision means the overseeing or the power or authority of an officer to see that
government were at the discretion of Congress. subordinate officers perform their duties faithfully.
Under the 1987 Constitution, the principal guidelines given to Congress for In the case of Limbona vs. Mangeline, G.R. No. 80391, February 21, 1989, the
structuring local government units are that the structure must be responsive and Supreme Court explained local autonomy, in this way – local autonomy means a
accountable and instituted through a system of decentralization. more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a
Page 31
system of decentralization. Article X, Section 1, enumerates the local government units, namely;
1. Provinces
Decentralization can either be decentralization of administration or 2. Cities
decentralization of power. There is decentralization of administration when the 3. Municipalities
central government delegates administrative powers to political subdivisions to 4. Barangays
broaden the base of government power and in the process to make local 5. Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao
governments more responsive and accountable, and ensure their fullest 6. Cordilleras Autonomous Region
development as self-reliant communities and make them more effective partners in
the pursuit of national development and social progress. Section 3, Congress was tasked to enact a law that shall provide for more responsive
and accountable local governments and a system of decentralization. And, after four
Decentralization of power, on the other hand, involves an abdication of political (4) years, pursuant to Section 3, Congress enacted R.A. No. 7160, aka Local
power in favor of local government units declared to be autonomous, free to chart Government Code of 1991.
its own destiny and shape its own future with minimum intervention from central
authorities. Another source of power of the local government units is Article XII, Section 2, par
3, which authorizes Congress to enact a law allowing and regulating small scale
Autonomy for local government units in general is less than for the autonomous utilization of natural resources, by which Congress quickly enacted R.A. No. 7076,
regions, as provided under Section 15 – “There shall be created autonomous June 27, 1991, aka, Peoples Scale Mining Act of 1991, granting unto local
regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, governments the power to issue permits for small-scale mining within their
municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common and distinctive historical territorial jurisdiction.
and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other relevant
characteristics within the framework of the Constitution and the national Local autonomy is accompanied by decentralization of some functions and services
sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines”. from the national government, hence, Section 6 provides that local government
units shall have just share, as determined by law, in the national taxes which shall
The creation of autonomous regions under Section 15 does not mean the be automatically released to them.
establishment of sovereignties distinct from that of the Republic of the Philippines.
These autonomous regions can be established only within the framework of the Article X, Section 1, enumerates the local government units, namely;
Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
Republic. 1. Provinces
2. Cities
Congress has no power to create an autonomous region other the two regions 3. Municipalities
mentioned in Section 15, though, under Section 18, Congress shall enact an Organic 4. Barangays
Act for each autonomous region, which shall define the basic structure of 5. Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao
government for the region consisting of the executive department and legislative 6. Cordilleras Autonomous Region
assembly, both of which shall be elective and representative of the constituent
political units. The Organic Act shall likewise provide for special courts with personal, Section 3, Congress was tasked to enact a law that shall provide for a more
family, and property law jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of the responsive and accountable local governments and a system of decentralization.
Constitution and national law.
Pursuant to Section 3, Congress enacted R.A. No. 7160, aka Local Government Code
Page 32
of 1991. entitled to an equitable share because the natural gas project is not within their
respective area as provided in Section 7, Article X, 1987 Constitution.
Another source of power of the local government units is Article XII, Section 2, par The Supreme Court explained the meaning of “within their respective areas” as
3, which authorizes Congress to enact a law allowing and regulating small scale mentioned in Section 7, by definition area refers to a particular extent of space or
utilization of natural resources, by which Congress quickly enacted R.A. No. 7076, surface or geographic region, and the local government unit’s territorial jurisdiction
June 27, 1991, aka, Peoples Scale Mining Act of 1991, granting unto local refers to their land area, the Local Government Code defines land area as – it must
governments the power to issue permits for small-scale mining within their be contiguous, unless it comprises of two (2) or more islands or is separated by a
territorial jurisdiction. local government unit independent of the others; properly identified by metes and
bounds with technical descriptions; and sufficient to provide for such basic services
Autonomy of local government units was accompanied by and facilities to meet the requirement of its populace.
devolution/decentralization of some functions and basic services from the national
government, such as agriculture, health and sanitation, social welfare, public works, Since the local government Code requires the land area must be contiguous, this
tourism, environmental management, and now at present, to manage the respond Court emphasized in its Decision that contiguity is essential in determining territorial
to the “pandemic”. jurisdiction, the area of the Camago-Malampaya Natural Gas project, which is in the
continental shelf of the Philippine Islands, is beyond the Province’s territorial
Section 6 provides - that local government units shall have just share, as jurisdiction, therefore, the Province of Palawan is not entitled to an equitable share
determined by law, in the national taxes which shall be automatically released to from the natural gas project.
them.
In the case of Congressman Hermilando Mandanas vs. Executive Secretary Paquito

Ochoa, G.R. No. 199802, April 10, 2019, the Supreme Court declared
unconstitutional the provision of Section 284 of R.A. No. 7160, the Local
Government Code, which states – local government units shall have a share in the
national internal revenue taxes based on the collection of the third fiscal year
preceding the current fiscal year, and ordered to be deleted the phrase “internal
revenue”.
Section 7 states – local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the

proceeds of the utilization and development of the national wealth within their
respective areas, in the manner provided by law, including sharing the same with
the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.
In the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Provincial Government of Palawan,

G.R. No. 170867, January 21, 2020, the Supreme Court had finally ruled on the claim
of the Province of Palawan for the province’s equitable share from the proceeds of
the Camago-Malampaya Natural Gas Project, the service contractors are the Shell
Philippines and Chevron Philippines, which is located off-shore and distance of 80
kilometers from the land area of Palawan, that the Province of Palawan is not
Page 33
The National Economy and Patrimony and efficient use of human and natural resources, and which are competitive in
(October 11, 2021) both domestic and foreign markets. However, the State shall protect Filipino
enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices.
The Preamble
In the pursuit of these goals, all sectors of the economy and all regions of the
We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to country shall be given optimum opportunity to develop. Private enterprises,
build a just and human society and establish a government that shall embody our including corporations, cooperatives, and similar collective organizations, shall be
ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our encouraged to broaden the base of their ownership.
patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of
independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, The word “Patrimony and the National Economy” is now the Title of Article XII,
freedom, love, equality and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution. which precisely deals with the national economy of the country and the exploration,
development, and utilization of natural resources.
In the Preamble of the 1987 Constitution, the sovereign Filipino people declared -
“conserve and develop our patrimony,” the word “patrimony” embraces practically The general economic policies of the Government under the 1987 Constitution are
everything that belongs to the Filipino people. The tangible and material, as well as, the following:
the intangible and the spiritual assets, cultural heritage, national artists, and
principally to the natural resources of the nation (Manila Prince Hotel Corp. vs GSIS). 1) More equitable distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth
2) A sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the
Article II, Section 19 – It is the policy of the State to develop a self-reliant and nation for the benefit of the people
independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos. 3) Expanding productivity as the key to raising the quality of life for all,
especially the underprivileged
The National Economy mentioned in section 19, Article II, refers to the entire 4) State shall promote industrialization and full employment based on sound
structure of economic life in a country. It encompasses all the activities relating to agricultural development and agrarian reform (Art. XII, sec 1)
or concerned with the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and
services, and what are called “factors of production” which are labor or human The government would attain these objectives through the following;
resources, all natural resources, and capital, all of which are utilized to carry out
economic activities. 1) In the pursuit of these goals, all sectors of the economy and all regions of
the country shall be given optimum opportunity to develop
The National Economy and Patrimony 2) Private enterprises, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar
collective organizations, shall be encourage to broaden the base of their
Article XII, Section 1 – The goals of the national economy are a more equitable ownership (Art XII, sec 1)
distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth; a sustained increase in the
amount of goods and services produced by the nation for the benefit of the people; Please take note that under Section 1, there is now a shift of priority program of the
and an expanding productivity as the key to raising the quality of life for all, government and that is to promote industrialization and full employment based on
especially the underprivileged. sound agricultural development and agrarian reform, through industries that make
full and efficient use of human and natural resources.
The State shall promote industrialization and full employment based on sound
agricultural development and agrarian reform, through industries that make full The declared policy of the State under Section 19, Article II, shall serve as the
Page 34
guidelines in the development of the national economy, which are; The equity goal is expressed in various ways, and it should be pointed out that the
equitable distribution refers not just to distribution among people and sectors of the
1) Self-reliant economy – self-reliant simply means that the Philippines must economy but also to distribution among geographic regions.
have the ability to cope with its economic problems or to implement its
development programs by the use of its own resources with a minimum of It is the duty of the State to protect not only the Filipino enterprises but also the
dependence from foreign governments, investors or financing institutions Filipino consumer from unfair foreign competition and trade practices, such as to
for loans, investments, or aid prevent imports of low or inferior quality products or goods, as well as, impose
higher tariffs, quantitative restrictions, or total ban of imports if necessary.
2) Independent economy – the national economy must be free from undue
foreign control or intervention. This is especially true in such vital or The word “unfair foreign competition and trade practices” does not partake of any
strategic industries as the development of natural resources and public unique economic or legal interpretation given by the international organizations
utilities where foreign interference could cause incalculable harm to the since the Philippine Government may declare as unfair anything that will hurt the
nation Filipino enterprises or the Filipino Consumers.
3) Economy effectively controlled by Filipino – the principal responsibility for It is also the duty of the State to protect the nation’s marine wealth in its archipelagic
development belongs to Filipino citizens. They must be the principal waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and
determinants as well as the chief beneficiaries of economic progress. While enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens (Section 2, Article XII).
foreign capital is allowed to come in, the Constitution limits their
participation to major industries but insuring that majority control must Article XII, Section 6 – The use of property bears a social function, and all economic
belong to Filipinos agents shall contribute to the common good. Individuals and private groups,
including corporations, cooperatives and collective organizations, shall have the
In section 1 of Article XII, it states that – “the State shall protect Filipino enterprises right to own, establish and operate economic enterprises, subject to the duty of
against unfair foreign competition and trade practices.” The government may grant the State to promote distributive justice and to intervene when the common good
protection through high tariffs, quantitative restrictions, or even import controls or so demands.
total ban on imports of certain products or goods, quarantine regulations for
agricultural products, and standards regulations for industrial products (Garcia vs This is a new provision and the purpose of which is to emphasize the use of property,
Board of Investment). specifically the land, has a social dimension that affects the whole society.
Consonant with the general tenor of Section 1, three basic directions may be gleaned Please bear in mind that the ownership of a land is a privilege granted by the State,
from it. First, it sets the dual goal of dynamic productivity and a more equitable that is why owners of land are required to pay real estate taxes.
distribution of what is produced. Second, the priority of the State is shifted to
Industrialization and Full Employment. And, Third, it is protective of Filipino Section 6 imposes an obligation on the part of landowners to assume social
industries and enterprises. responsibility by sharing the produce of their lands. It also serves as a guide to all
economic agents (consumers, producers, capital, government) that in the pursuit of
The dynamism of the economy that is envisioned is expressed in the words their respective activities it must contribute to the common good, otherwise, the
“sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced” and “expanding State may intervene when the common good so demands.
productivity”.
Article XII, Section 9 – The Congress may establish an independent economic and
Page 35
planning agency headed by the President, which shall, after consultation with the In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy
appropriate public agencies, various private sectors, and local government units, and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.
recommend to Congress, and implement continuing integrated and coordinated
programs and policies for national development. The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its
national jurisdiction and in accordance with its national goals and priorities.
Until Congress provides otherwise, the National Economic and Development
Authority shall function as the independent planning agency of the government. Section 10 was a reiteration from the 1973 Constitution, particularly, Section 3,
Article XIV. The purpose of which is to provide for the Filipinization of certain areas
Section 9 speaks about the creation of an Independent Planning Agency of the of investments, as well as, give preferential opportunity to qualified Filipinos with
government, but since it was made optional for Congress, no such agency has been regards to the granting of rights and concessions on the exploration and utilization
established by Congress. of natural resources.
It is still the present National Economic Development Authority that is functioning Filipinization is different from Nationalization. Filipinization simply means for the
as the central planning agency of the government State to give preferential treatment to their own citizens, while Nationalization is
the process of transforming private assets into public assets by bringing them under
NEDA has been established since 1935 (Dec 23) pursuant to C.A. No. 2. As expected, the ownership of the national government.
NEDA has experienced several changes, the last one, was in 1987 under Executive
Order No. 230 issued by then President Corazon Aquino. What are the “certain areas of investments” the Congress may reserve for the
Filipino Enterprises is up to Congress to determine.
The primary function of the current NEDA is the country’s premier socio-economic
planning body, highly regarded as the authority in macro-economic forecasting and The third paragraph of Section 10 has reference both to the regulation of the entry
policy analysis and research. It provides high-level advise to Congress and policy of foreign investments and of those foreign investments already in place in the
makers in the Executive Department. Philippines
It is to be noted, that every administration has the power to reorganize the In this regard, the Philippine Congress had enacted R.A. No. 7042 on June 31, 1991,
composition of the NEDA Board and it is quite frustrating when the majority of the aka Foreign Investment Act of 1991, amended by R.A. No. 8179, enacted on March
members appointed are mostly politicians, so in effect, the technocrats are 28, 1996, governs the investment portfolio of foreign owned corporations.
oftentimes overruled, parochial interests of the politicians prevails.
Article XII, Section 22 – “Acts which circumvents or negate any of the provisions of
Section 10 – The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic planning this Article shall be considered inimical to the national interest and subject to
agency, when the national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the Philippines criminal and civil sanctions, as may be provided by law.
or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is
owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, Article XII, Section 22, at first blush, might look like a presumptuous declaration on
certain areas of investments. the part of the Members of the 1986 Constitutional Commission that no one should
dare act against what the framers has decreed.
The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the formation and
operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos. But what it says is simply that Congress should enact a law that would penalize
anyone who may seek to circumvent the goals set down by the economic provisions
Page 36
of the 1987 Constitution. corporations and partnerships adversely affected by the provisions of Republic Act.
No. 1180, brought this action to obtain a judicial declaration that said Act is
unconstitutional, and to enjoin the Secretary of Finance and all other persons acting
Case Study: under him, particularly city and municipal treasurers, from enforcing its provisions.
Inchong attacks the constitutionality of the Act, contending that: (1) it denies to alien
Inchong vs. Hernandez residents the equal protection of the laws and deprives of their liberty and property
without due process of law ; (2) the subject of the Act is not expressed or
FACTS: A law, RA No. 1180 entitled "An Act to Regulate the Retail Business" was comprehended in the title thereof; (3) the Act violates international and treaty
enacted with an effect of nationalizing the retail trade business. The main provisions obligations of the Republic of the Philippines; (4) the provisions of the Act against
of the Act are: the transmission by aliens of their retail business thru hereditary succession, and
(1) a prohibition against persons, not citizens of the Philippines, and against those requiring 100% Filipino capitalization for a corporation or entity to entitle it to
associations, partnerships, or corporations the capital of which are not engage in the retail business, violate the spirit of Sections 1 and 5, Article XIII and
wholly owned by citizens of the Philippines, from engaging directly or Section 8 of Article XIV of the Constitution.
indirectly in the retail trade;
(2) an exception from the above prohibition in favor of aliens actually engaged In answer, the Solicitor-General and the Fiscal of the City of Manila contend that: (1)
in said business on May 15, 1954, who are allowed to continue to engaged the Act was passed in the valid exercise of the police power of the State, which
therein, unless their licenses are forfeited in accordance with the law, until exercise is authorized in the Constitution in the interest of national economic
their death or voluntary retirement in case of natural persons, and for ten survival; (2) the Act has only one subject embraced in the title; (3) no treaty or
years after the approval of the Act or until the expiration of term in case of international obligations are infringed; (4) as regards hereditary succession, only the
juridical persons; form is affected but the value of the property is not impaired, and the institution of
(3) an exception therefrom in favor of citizens and juridical entities of the inheritance is only of statutory origin.
United States;
(4) a provision for the forfeiture of licenses (to engage in the retail business) ISSUE: Whether or not RA 1180 is unconstitutional since its exercise violates one’s
for violation of the laws on nationalization, control weights and measures right to due process and equal protection as guaranteed by the Constitution.
and labor and other laws relating to trade, commerce and industry;
(5) a prohibition against the establishment or opening by aliens actually RULING: NO. The Court finds the enactment of RA 1180 to clearly fall within the
engaged in the retail business of additional stores or branches of retail scope of police power of the State. It is clear that the law in question was enacted
business; to remedy a real and actual threat and danger to the national economy posed by
(6) a provision requiring aliens actually engaged in the retail business to alien dominance and control of retail business and free citizens and country from
present for registration with the proper authorities a verified statement the said dominance and control.
concerning their businesses, giving, among other matters, the nature of the
business, their assets and liabilities and their offices and principal offices of It has been said the police power is so far - reaching in scope, that it has become
judicial entities; and almost impossible to limit its sweep. As it derives its existence from the very
(7) a provision allowing the heirs of aliens now engaged in the retail business existence of the State itself, it does not need to be expressed or defined in its scope;
who die, to continue such business for a period of six months for purposes it is said to be co-extensive with self-protection and survival, and as such it is the
of liquidation. most positive and active of all governmental processes, the most essential, insistent
and illimitable. Especially is it so under a modern democratic framework where the
Petitioner Inchong, for and in his own behalf and on behalf of other alien resident demands of society and of nations have multiplied to almost unimaginable
Page 37
proportions; the field and scope of police power has become almost boundless, just wisdom and efficacy of the law to carry out its objectives appear to us to be plainly
as the fields of public interest and public welfare have become almost all-embracing evident — as a matter of fact it seems not only appropriate but actually necessary
and have transcended human foresight. However, the Constitution has set forth — and that in any case such matter falls within the prerogative of the Legislature,
limitations thereof and the most important of these are: the due process clause and with whose power and discretion the Judicial department of the Government may
the equal protection clause. not interfere.
The conflict, therefore, between police power and the guarantees of due process
and equal protection of the laws is more apparent than real. Properly related, the Tañada vs. Angara
power and the guarantees are supposed to coexist. The balancing is the essence or,
shall it be said, the indispensable means for the attainment of legitimate aspirations FACTS: This is a petition seeking to nullify the Philippine ratification of the World
of any democratic society. There can be no absolute power, whoever exercises it, Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement and for the prohibition of its implementation
for that would be tyranny. Yet there can neither be absolute liberty, for that would and enforcement through the release and utilization of public funds, the assignment
mean license and anarchy. So the State can deprive persons of life, liberty and of public officials and employees, as well as the use of government properties and
property, provided there is due process of law; and persons may be classified into resources by respondent-heads of various executive offices concerned therewith.
classes and groups, provided everyone is given the equal protection of the law. The Petitioners question the concurrence of herein respondents acting in their capacities
test or standard, as always, is reason. The police power legislation must be firmly as Senators via signing the said agreement.
grounded on public interest and welfare, and a reasonable relation must exist
between purposes and means. And if distinction and classification has been made, The WTO opens access to foreign markets, especially its major trading partners,
there must be a reasonable basis for said distinction. through the reduction of tariffs on its exports, particularly agricultural and industrial
products. Thus, provides new opportunities for the service sector cost and
The best evidence to determine the alien dominance in retail business are the uncertainty associated with exporting and more investment in the country. These
statistics on the retail trade, which put down the figures in black and white. Between are the predicted benefits as reflected in the agreement and as viewed by the
the constitutional convention year (1935), when the fear of alien domination and signatory Senators, a “free market” espoused by WTO.
control of the retail trade already filled the minds of our leaders with fears and
misgivings, and the year of the enactment of the nationalization of the retail trade Petitioners on the other hand viewed the WTO agreement as one that limits,
act (1954), official statistics unmistakably point out to the ever-increasing restricts and impair Philippine economic sovereignty and legislative power. That the
dominance and control by the alien of the retail trade. Statistical figures reveal that Filipino First policy of the Constitution was taken for granted as it gives foreign
in percentage distribution of assets and gross sales, alien participation has steadily trading intervention.They contended that WTO agreement violates the mandate of
increased during the years. It is true, of course, that Filipinos have the edge in the the 1987 Constitution to “develop a self-reliant and independent national economy
number of retailers, but aliens more than make up for the numerical gap through effectively controlled by Filipinos x x x (to) give preference to qualified Filipinos (and
their assets and gross sales which average between six and seven times those of the to) promote the preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic materials and locally
very many Filipino retailers. produced goods” as (1) the WTO requires the Philippines “to place nationals and
products of member-countries on the same footing as Filipinos and local products”
The Court finds that law does not also violate the equal protection clause of the and (2) that the WTO “intrudes, limits and/or impairs” the constitutional powers of
Constitution because sufficient grounds exist for the distinction between alien and both Congress and the Supreme Court.
citizen in the exercise of the occupation regulated, nor the due process of law clause,
because the law is prospective in operation and recognizes the privilege of aliens ISSUE: Whether provisions of the Agreement Establishing the World Trade
already engaged in the occupation and reasonably protects their privilege. The Organization unduly limit, restrict and impair Philippine sovereignty specifically the
Page 38
legislative power which, under Sec. 2, Article VI, 1987 Philippine Constitution is very nature of membership in the family of nations and (2) limitations imposed by
‘vested in the Congress of the Philippines. treaty stipulations. As aptly put by John F. Kennedy, “Today, no nation can build its
destiny alone. The age of self-sufficient nationalism is over. The age of
RULING: No, the WTO agreement does not unduly limit, restrict, and impair the interdependence is here.”
Philippine sovereignty, particularly the legislative power granted by the Philippine
Constitution. The Senate was acting in the proper manner when it concurred with The WTO reliance on “most favored nation,” “national treatment,” and “trade
the President’s ratification of the agreement. without discrimination” cannot be struck down as unconstitutional as in fact they
are rules of equality and reciprocity that apply to all WTO members. Aside from
While sovereignty has traditionally been deemed absolute and all-encompassing on envisioning a trade policy based on “equality and reciprocity,” the fundamental law
the domestic level, it is however subject to restrictions and limitations voluntarily encourages industries that are “competitive in both domestic and foreign markets,”
agreed to by the Philippines, expressly or impliedly, as a member of the family of thereby demonstrating a clear policy against a sheltered domestic trade
nations. Unquestionably, the Constitution did not envision a hermit-type isolation of environment, but one in favor of the gradual development of robust industries that
the country from the rest of the world. In its Declaration of Principles and State can compete with the best in the foreign markets. Indeed, Filipino managers and
Policies, the Constitution “adopts the generally accepted principles of international Filipino enterprises have shown capability and tenacity to compete internationally.
law as part of the law of the land, and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, And given a free trade environment, Filipino entrepreneurs and managers in
justice, freedom, cooperation and amity, with all nations.” By the doctrine of Hongkong have demonstrated the Filipino capacity to grow and to prosper against
incorporation, the country is bound by generally accepted principles of international the best offered under a policy of laissez faire. WHEREFORE, the petition is
law, which are considered to be automatically part of our own laws. One of the DISMISSED for lack of merit.
oldest and most fundamental rules in international law is pacta sunt servanda —
international agreements must be performed in good faith. “A treaty engagement is
not a mere moral obligation but creates a legally binding obligation on the parties x Garcia vs. Board of Investments
x x. A state which has contracted valid international obligations is bound to make in
its legislation such modifications as may be necessary to ensure the fulfillment of FACTS: The Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC), a Taiwanese private
the obligations undertaken.” corporation, applied for registration with the Board of Investments (BOI) in February
1988 as a new domestic producer of petrochemicals in the Philippines. It originally
By their inherent nature, treaties really limit or restrict the absoluteness of specified the province of Bataan as the site for the proposed investment but later
sovereignty. By their voluntary act, nations may surrender some aspects of their submitted an amended application to change the site to Batangas. Unhappy with
state power in exchange for greater benefits granted by or derived from a the change of the site, Congressman Enrique Garcia of the Second District of Bataan
convention or pact. After all, states, like individuals, live with coequals, and in pursuit requested a copy of BPC’s original and amended application documents.
of mutually covenanted objectives and benefits, they also commonly agree to limit
the exercise of their otherwise absolute rights. Thus, treaties have been used to The BOI denied the request on the basis that the investors in BPC had declined to
record agreements between States concerning such widely diverse matters as, for give their consent to the release of the documents requested, and that Article 81 of
example, the lease of naval bases, the sale or cession of territory, the termination of the Omnibus Investments Code protected the confidentiality of those documents
war, the regulation of conduct of hostilities, the formation of alliances, the absent consent to disclose.
regulation of commercial relations, the settling of claims, the laying down of rules
governing conduct in peace and the establishment of international organizations. The BOI subsequently approved the amended application without holding a second
The sovereignty of a state therefore cannot in fact and in reality be considered hearing or publishing notice of the amended application. Garcia filed a petition
absolute. Certain restrictions enter into the picture: (1) limitations imposed by the before the Supreme Court.
Page 39
ISSUE: Whether or not the BOI committed a grave abuse of discretion in yielding to
the application of the investors without considering the national interest.
RULING: Yes, the Supreme Court held that the BOI committed grave abuse of
discretion in this case, and ordered the original application of the BPC to have its
plant site in Bataan and the product naphtha as feedstock maintained.
The ponente, Justice Gutierrez, Jr., first stated the Court’s judicial power to settle
actual controversies as provided for by Section 1 of Article VIII in our 1987
Constitution before he wrote the reasons as to how the Court arrived at its
conclusion. He mentioned that nothing is shown to justify the BOI’s action in letting
the investors decide on an issue which, if handled by our own government, could
have been very beneficial to the State, as he remembered the word of a great
Filipino leader, to wit: “.. he would not mind having a government run like hell by
Filipinos than one subservient to foreign dictation”.
Justice Griño Aquino, in her dissenting opinion, argued that the petition was not
well-taken because the 1987 Investment Code does not prohibit the registration of
a certain project, as well as any decision of the BOI regarding the amended
application. She stated that the fact that petitioner disagrees with BOI does not
make the BOI wrong in its decision, and that petitioner should have appealed to the
President of the country and not to the Court, as provided for by Section 36 of the
1987 Investment Code.
Justice Melencio-Herrera, in another dissenting opinion, stated that the Constitution

does not vest in the Court the power to enter the realm of policy considerations,
such as in this case.
Page 40
and leeway for the co-equal branches to address to themselves the

MIDTERM EXAMS REVIEW MATERIALS environmental problems raised in this petition.
(October 18, 2021)
In the same manner that we have associated the fundamental right to a
1. Oposa vs Factoran - the Supreme Court sustained the legal standing of the balanced and healthful ecology with the twin concepts of intergenerational
Petitioner-Minors that they can represent themselves, and for others of their responsibility and intergenerational justice in Oposa, where we upheld the right
generation, and for the succeeding generations, to file a class suit because of of future Filipinos to prevent the destruction of the rainforests, so do we
the special and novel element of their petition. recognize, in this petition, the right of the petitioners and the future generation
to clean air.
The Petitioner-Minors personality to sue on behalf of the succeeding
generations can only be based on the concept of intergenerational The right to a balanced and healthful ecology is now explicitly provided in the
responsibility and intergenerational justice insofar as the right to a balanced and 1987 Constitution, it is because of the well-founded fear of its framers that
healthful ecology is concerned. Such a right considers the rhythm and harmony unless the rights to a balanced and healthful ecology and the right to health are
of nature. mandated as State policies by the Constitution itself, thereby imposing upon the
State a solemn obligation to preserve the first and advance the second, the day
Nature means the created world in its entirety. Such rhythm and harmony would not be too far when all else would be lost not only for the present
indispensably include the judicious disposition, utilization, management, generation, but also for those to come.
renewal and conservation of the country’s forest, mineral, land, waters,
fisheries, wildlife, off-shore areas and other natural resources to the end that 3. Manila Prince Hotel Corp vs Government Service Insurance System – the
their exploration, development and utilization be equitably accessible to the Supreme Court declared that Manila Hotel is not just a commodity to be sold to
present as well as future generations. the highest bidder solely for the sake of privatization. We are not talking about
an ordinary piece of property in a commercial district. We are talking about a
Needless to say, every generation has a responsibility to the next succeeding historic relic that has hosted many of the most important events in the short
generations to preserve that rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a history of the Philippines as a nation. We are talking about a hotel where heads
balanced and healthful ecology. of states would prefer to be housed as a strong manifestation of their desire to
cloak the dignity of the highest state function to their official visits to the
2. Henares vs Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board – the Philippines.
Supreme Court dismissed the petition, and declared, that the writ of mandamus
commanding the LTFRB to require Public Utility Vehicles to use Compressed Thus, the Manila Hotel has played and continues to play a significant role as an
Natural Gas is unavailing authentic repository of twentieth century Philippine’s history and culture. In
this sense, it has become truly a reflection of the Filipino soul, a place with a
Mandamus is available only to compel the doing of an act specifically enjoined history of grandeur; a most historical setting that has played a role in the
by law as a duty. Here, there is no law that mandates LTFRB to order owners of shaping of a country.
PUV’s to use CNG. Besides, mandamus will not generally lie from one branch of
government to a co-equal branch, for the obvious reason that neither is inferior This Court cannot extract rhyme and reason from the determined efforts of GSIS
to the other. to sell the historical landmark – the Grand Old Dame of Hotels in Asia – to a total
stranger. For indeed, the conveyance of this epic exponent of the Filipino psyche
Comity and courtesy to a co-equal branch dictates that we give sufficient time to alien hands cannot be less than Mephistophelian for it is, in whatever manner
Page 41
viewed, a veritable alienation of a nation’s soul for some pieces of foreign silver. The demarcation of the baselines enables the Philippines to delimit its exclusive
economic zone, reserving solely to the Philippines the exploitation of all living
And so we ask: What advantage, which cannot be equally drawn from a qualified and non-living resources within such zone. Such a maritime delineation binds
Filipino, can be gained by the Filipinos if Manila Hotel and all that it stands for, the international community since the delineation is in strict observance of
is sold to a non-Filipino? How much of national pride will vanish if the nation’s UNCLOS III. If the maritime delineation is contrary to UNCLOS III, the
cultural heritage is entrusted to a foreign entity? international community will of course reject it and will refuse to be bound by
it.
On the other hand, how much dignity will be preserved and realized if the
national patrimony is safekept in the hands of a qualified, zealous and well- The enactment of UNCLOS III compliant baselines law for the Philippine
meaning Filipino? This is the plain and simple meaning of the Filipino First Policy archipelago and adjacent areas, as embodied in R.A. 9522, allows an
provision of the Philippine Constitution. internationally-recognized delimitation of the breadth of the Philippines’
maritime zones and continental shelf. R.A. 9522 is therefore a most vital step
Section 10, second paragraph, of Article XII of the 1987 Constitution is self- on the part of the Philippines in safeguarding its maritime zones, consistent with
executing and mandatory, it is a positive command which is complete in itself the Constitution and our national interest.
and which needs no further guidelines or implementing laws or rules for its
enforcement. From its very words the provision does not require any legislation Nota Bene:
to put it in operation. It is per se judicially enforceable.
UNCLOS I – in 1956, the United Nations held its first Conference on the Law of the
When our Constitution mandates that in the grants of rights, privileges, and Sea at Geneva, resulted in four (4) international treaties, among them;
concessions covering national economy and patrimony, the State shall give
preference to qualified Filipinos, it means just that – qualified Filipinos shall be 1. Convention on the High Seas (1962)
preferred. 2. Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone (1964)
3. Convention on the Continental Shelf (1964)
And when our Constitution declares that a right exists in certain specified 4. Convention on the Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources on the High
circumstances an action may be maintained to enforce such right Seas (1966)
notwithstanding the absence of any legislation on the subject; consequently, if
there is no statute especially enacted to enforce such constitutional right, such UNCLOS II – in 1960, the United Nations held the second Conference on the Law of
right enforces itself by its own inherent potency and puissance, and from which the Sea at Geneva again, but after six (6) weeks of deliberations, no new agreement
all legislations must take their bearings. Where there is right there is a remedy. was concluded.
4. Magallona vs Ermita – the case stems from the original action for the writs of UNCLOS III – in 1973, the 3rd United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was
certiorari and prohibition assailing the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9522, which convened in New York, USA. In an attempt to reduce the possibility of a group of
amended R.A. No. 3046, enacted by Congress in 1961, demarcating the States dominating the discussions, the UN used a consensus process rather than
maritime baselines of the Philippines as an archipelagic State. majority vote. With more than 160 countries participating, the conference lasted
until 1982 UNCLOS III was agreed upon open for signatures, and came into force in
The purpose of R.A. 9522 is to adjust the country’s archipelagic baselines and 1994 after the 60th State, Guyana, ratified the treaty.
classify the baseline regime of nearby territories, in compliance with the terms
of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS III). UNCLOS III significant issues covered were setting limits, navigation, archipelagic
Page 42
status and transit regimes, exclusive economic zones, continental shelf jurisdiction, State, that the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land and
deep seabed mining, the exploitation regime, protection of the marine environment, charged with the conservation of such patrimony. The doctrine has been
scientific research, and settlement of disputes. consistently adopted under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitution.
a. The Permanent Court of Arbitration was established in 1899 in The Hague, All lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are
by the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. The presumed to belong to the State. Thus, all lands that have not been acquired
conference had been convened upon the initiative of Czar Nicolas of Russia, from the government, either by purchase or by grant, belong to the State as
with the purpose of seeking the most objective means of ensuring to all part of the inalienable public domain. Necessarily, it is up to the State to
peoples the benefits of a real and lasting peace, and above all, of limiting determine if lands of the public domain will be disposed of for private
the progressive developments of existing armaments ownership.
b. Dispute settlement options under Article 287, UNCLOS III a) the In keeping with the presumption of State ownership, the Supreme Court has
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea established in accordance with time and again emphasized that there must be a positive act of the government,
Annex VI; b) the International Court of Justice; c) Arbitral Tribunal such an official proclamation, declassifying inalienable public land into alienable
constituted in accordance with Annex VII; d) Special Arbitral Tribunal land.
constituted in accordance with Annex VIII
The first law governing the disposition public lands in the Philippines under
American rule was embodied in the Philippine Bill of 1902, whereby the
5. DENR Secretary vs Mayor Jose Yap – at stake in this case is the right of the Governor General was granted with the power to proclaim a land suitable for
present occupants of Boracay Island to secure titles over their occupied lands. planting of crops for food production as agricultural land and open for private
Boracay island is in the Municipality of Malay, Province of Aklan, with its ownership
powdery white sand beaches and warm crystalline waters, is reputedly a
premier Philippine tourist destination. The island is also home to 12,300 This authority of the Governor General to classify land as agricultural land and
inhabitants who live in the bone-shaped island’s three (3) barangays. therefore alienable or disposable, has been accepted by the Court as the source
of the authority of the President of the Philippines to classify land. However, the
On November 10, 1978, upon the recommendation of the DENR, then President President has to first proclaim such land as agricultural land to be alienable,
Marcos issued Proclamation No. 1081 declaring Boracay island as tourist zones rather than proclaiming such public land as alienable
and marine reserves, under the administration of the Department of Tourism,
which issued PTA Circular No. 3-82 to implement the Proclamation 1081. 6. Cruz vs DENR Secretary – the petition assailing the constitutionality of R.A. No.
8371, aka the Indigenous Peoples Right Act, was dismissed by the Supreme
On May 22, 2006, President Arroyo issued Proclamation No. 1064 classifying Court for failure to have a majority vote as required by the Rules of Court to
Boracay island into four hundred (400) hectares of reserved forest land and six declare a law unconstitutional
hundred twenty eight (628) hectares of agricultural land. The Proclamation
likewise provided for a fifteen (15) meter buffer zone on each side of the If you are in favor of the constitutionality of R.A. No. 8371, you read the Opinion
centerline of roads and trails, reserved for right-of-way and which shall form of Justice Reynato Puno
part of the area reserved for forest land.
If your view of the law is unconstitutional, you read the case of Province of North
The Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong to the Cotabato vs GRP-Peace Panel.
Page 43
7. R. A. No. 7160, Local Government Code, Section 149, Fishery Rentals, Fees and The Court shall further order the confiscation in favor of the government of the
Charges; timber or forest products to cut, gathered, collected or removed, and the
machinery, equipment, implements and tools used therein, and the forfeiture
a. Municipalities shall have the exclusive authority to grant fishery privileges of his improvements in the area.
in the municipal waters and impose rentals, fees or charges therefor in
accordance with the provisions of this section 10. R. A. No. 7586, National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992
b. Power of the Sangguniang Bayan over the municipal waters Section 2, Declaration of Policy
Cognizant of the profound impact of man’s activities on all components of the

8. R. A. No. 1067, the Water Code of the Philippines; natural environment particularly the effect of increasing population, resource
exploitation and industrial advancement and recognizing the critical importance
a. Article 6, the owner of the land where the water is found may use the same of protecting and maintaining the natural biological and physical diversities of
for domestic purposes without securing a permit, provided that such use the environment notably on areas with biologically unique features to sustain
shall be registered, when required by the Council. The Council, however, human life and development, as well as plant and animal life, it is hereby
may regulate such when there is wastage, or in times of emergency declared the policy of the State to secure for the Filipino people of present and
future generations the perpetual existence of all native plants and animals
b. Article 88, the National Water Resource Council shall have original through the establishment of a comprehensive system of integrated protected
jurisdiction over all disputes to relating to appropriation, utilization, areas within the classification of national park as provided for in the
exploitation, development, control, conservation and protection of waters constitution.
within the meaning and context of the provisions of this Code
c. Article 89, the decisions of the of the Council on water rights controversies It is hereby recognized that these areas, although distinct in features, posses
may be appealed to the Court of First Instance of the Province where the common ecological values that may be incorporated into a holistic plan
subject matter of the controversy is situated, on the following grounds; 1) representative of our natural heritage; that effective administration of this area
grave abuse of discretion; 2) question of law; 3) question of fact and law. is possible only through cooperation among national government, local
government and concerned private organizations; that the use and enjoyment
N.B. If the dispute is about the violation of the right of the permit/license of these protected areas must be consistent with the principles of biological
holder or the concessionaire, it is the Regional Trial Court that will have diversity and sustainable development.
jurisdiction pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1, 1987 Constitution.
To this end, there is hereby established a National Integrated Protected Areas
9. P.D. No. 705, Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines System, which shall encompass outstandingly remarkable areas and biologically
important public lands that are habitats of rare and endangered species of
Section 68 – Any person who shall cut, gather, collect, or remove timber or other plants and animals, biogeographic zones and related ecosystems, whether
forest products from any forest land, or timber from alienable and disposable terrestrial, wetland or marine, all of which shall be designated as “protected
public lands, or from private lands, without any authority under a license areas”.
agreement, lease, license or permit, shall be guilty of qualified theft as defined
and punished under Articles 309 and 310 of the Revised Penal Code.
Page 44
Section 10, Administration and Management of the System g. To exact administrative fees and fines as authorized in Section 21 for violation
of guidelines, rules and regulations of this Act as would endanger the viability
The National Integrated Protected Areas System is hereby placed under the control of protected areas;
and administration of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. For
this purpose, there is hereby created a division in the regional offices of the h. To enter into contracts and/or agreements with private entities or public
Department to be called the Protected Areas and Wildlife Division in regions where agencies as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act;
protected areas have been established, which shall be under the supervision of a
Regional Technical Director, and shall include subordinate officers, clerks, and i. To accept in the name of the Philippine Government and in behalf of NIPAS
employees as may be proposed by the Secretary, duly approved by the Department funds, gifts or bequests of money for immediate disbursements or other
of Budget and Management, and appropriated by the Congress. The Service thus property in the interest of the NIPAS, its activities or its services;
established shall manage protected areas and promote the permanent preservation,
to the greatest extent possible of their natural conditions. j. To call on any agency or instrumentality of the Government as well as academic
institutions, non-government organizations and the private sector as may be
To carry out the mandate of this Act, the Secretary of the DENR is empowered to necessary to accomplish the objectives and activities of the System;
perform any and all of the following acts:
k. To submit an annual report to the President of the Philippines and to Congress
a. To conduct studies on various characteristic features and conditions of the on the status of protected areas in the country;
different protected areas, using commonalities in their characteristics, classify
and define them into categories and prescribe permissible or prohibited human l. To establish a uniform marker of the System, including an appropriate and
activities in each category in the System; distinctive symbol for each category in the System, in consultation with
appropriate government agencies and public and private organizations;
b. To adopt and enforce a land use scheme and zoning plan in adjoining areas for
the preservation and control of activities that may threaten the ecological m. To determine the specification of the class, type and style of buildings and other
balance in the protected areas; structures to be constructed in protected areas and the materials to be used;
c. To cause the preparation of and exercise the power to review all plans and n. Control the construction, operation and maintenance of roads, trails,
proposals for the management of protected areas; waterworks, sewerage, fire protection, and sanitation systems and other public
utilities within the protected area;
d. To promulgate rules and regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of this
Act; o. Control occupancy of suitable portions of the protected area and resettle
outside of said area forest occupants therein, with the exception of the
e. To deputize field officers and delegate any of his powers under this Act and members of indigenous communities area; and
other laws to expedite its implementation and enforcement;
p. To perform such other functions as may be directed by the President of the
f. To fix and prescribe reasonable NIPAS fees to be collected from government Philippines, and to do such acts as may be necessary or incidental to the
agencies or any person, firm or corporation deriving benefits from the protected accomplishment of the purpose and objectives of the System.
areas;
Page 45
Section 11, Protected Area Management Board
A Protected Area Management Board for each of the established protected area
shall be created and shall be composed of the following: The Regional Executive
Director under whose jurisdiction the protected area is located; one (1)
representative from the autonomous regional government, if applicable; the
Provincial Development Officer; one (1) representative from the municipal
government; one (1) representative from each barangay covering the protected
area; one (1) representative from each tribal community, if applicable; and, at least
three (3) representatives from non-government organizations/local community
organizations, and if necessary, one (1) representative from other departments or
national government agencies involved in protected area management.
The Board shall, by a majority vote, decide the allocations for budget, approve
proposals for funding, decide matters relating to planning, peripheral protection and
general administration of the area in accordance with the general management
strategy. The members of the Board shall serve for a term of five (5) years without
compensation, except for actual and necessary traveling and subsistence expenses
incurred in the performance of their duties. They shall be appointed by the Secretary
of the DENR as follows:
a. A member who shall be appointed to represent each local government down to

barangay level whose territory or portion is included in the protected area. Each
appointee shall be the person designated by the head of such LGU, except for
the Provincial Development Officer who shall serve ex officio;
b. A member from non-government organizations who shall be endorsed by heads

of organizations which are preferably based in the area, or which have
established and recognized interest in protected areas;
c. The RED/s in the region/s where such protected area lies shall sit as ex officio
member of the Board and shall serve as adviser/s in matters related to the
technical aspect of management of the area; and
d. The RED shall act as chairman of the Board. When there are two (2) or more
REDs in the Board, the Secretary shall designate one (1) of them to be the
Chairman. Vacancies shall be filled in the same manner as the original
appointment.
Page 46

Natural Resources and Environmental Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Natural Resources and Environmental Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Natural Resources and Environmental Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

Notes by: Pat Echano

COMMISSIONER SORIANO’S LECTURES

Dispositive Portion ISSUES:

Article 1: The National Territory of the 1987 Constitution

of R.A. No. 3720.

Eugene Odum introduced the basic principles in ecology; 6. Maintenance of ecosystems

In the case of Congressman Hermilando Mandanas vs. Executive Secretary Paquito

Section 7 states – local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the

In the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Provincial Government of Palawan,

Justice Melencio-Herrera, in another dissenting opinion, stated that the Constitution

and leeway for the co-equal branches to address to themselves the

Cognizant of the profound impact of man’s activities on all components of the

Section 11, Protected Area Management Board

a. A member who shall be appointed to represent each local government down to

b. A member from non-government organizations who shall be endorsed by heads

You might also like