JUDICIAL REFORMS TO RESPOND TO ENVIRONMENTAL

CHALLENGES: INSTITUTIONALIZING ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTISE

THROUGH SPECIALIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL COURTS

One of the greatest challenges confronting humanity is

environmental degradation. This includes deforestation,
desertification, pollution, and climate change. This is an issue of
increasing concern for the global community, one that requires a
collective approach.

The Philippine archipelago is not spared from these challenges. My

country is made up of about 7,107 islands. It is situated on the
southeastern rim of Asia and is bordered by the Philippine Sea on the
east, the South China Sea on the west, the Luzon Strait on the north,
and the Celebes Sea on the south.1 It is ranked as one of the top
mega diverse countries and a hot spot for biodiversity.2

The Philippines currently faces several environmental issues, which

affects the country in a multitude of ways. Allow me to enumerate
these issues:
 
Speech of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno during the 2 nd Roundtable Discussion of ASEAN
Chief Justices on Environment 2012 held at Ayer Keroh, Melaka, Malaysia from December 7 to 9, 2012
1
On September 13, 2012, the President of the Republic of the Philippine signed Administrative Order
No. 29 entitled “Naming the West Philippine Sea of the Republic of the Philippines, and for other
purposes.” The order renamed South China Sea waters within the country’s exclusive economic zone
(EEZ) as West Philippine Sea.
2
The Official Website of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Retrieved from
http://www.aseansec.org/12781.htm. Last accessed on 12 November 2012.

1
First is Deforestation. The deforestation problem is emphasized by
the fact that rainforests covered only 18% of the country’s total land
area in 1997. Through government action, however, as of May 2011,
rainforest coverage went up to 25.7% or about 7,665,000 hectares. 3
Deforestation is attributed mainly to population growth and rapid
urbanization. One of the prevailing issues with monitoring
deforestation is that illegal loggers do not live in the area where
deforestation activities occur.

The next issue is Solid Waste Management. Waste is being

generated but it is not being segregated and disposed properly. The
average Filipino throws away 3.5 kilos of trash a day. Consequently,
these practices affect many aspects of our lives such as water, land,
and air.

Third is Air Pollution. While carbon dioxide emissions in the

Philippines is comparable per capita (0.8 CO2 emissions per capita) to
our Southeast Asian neighbors, our rate of ozone emissions is higher
(143 ODP tonnes).4
3
Mongabay.com. Retrieved from http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/2000/Philippines.htm.
Last accessed on 12 November 2012.

4
The World Bank. Retrieved from
http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?
ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=en_atm_co2e_pc&hl=en&dl=en#ctype=l&st
rail=false&nselm=h&met_y=en_atm_co2e_pc&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:P
HL&tdim=true&hl=en&dl=en. Last accessed on 12 November 2012.

2
Finally, there is Climate Change. According to a report of the UN
Intergovernmental Committee on Climate Change, temperatures
would increase by 1.8-4 degrees Celsius by year 2099, and sea level
will rise by 38-43 cm by the same period. Developing countries such
as the Philippines are vulnerable to climate change. Those affected
cannot fend off floods and other natural disasters. The situation is
further complicated by the reality that these economies are based on
sectors that are dependent on the state of climate such as agriculture
and fishing industry. The 2013 Global Climate Risk Index released by
non-government organization, Germanwatch ranked the Philippines
fifth among more than 190 countries surveyed for 2011 as the most
affected by climate change.

These environmental issues, combined with the Philippines’

geographic location, create unique problems for the country.

Environmental Justice in the Philippines

Environmental justice is a guaranteed state policy under Section 16,

Article II of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. It states that
“the State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a

3
balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and
harmony of nature.”

Section 2, of the same Article II provides that the Philippines “adopts

the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the
law of the land.” Thus, customary international environmental laws
are incorporated into national laws.

As of 2012, Philippine Environmental Law seeks to address a wide

array of environmental concerns such as but not limited to loss of
biodiversity, water pollution, forest degradation, air pollution, and
hazardous waste management. The Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases have classified the Philippine Environmental
Law into four groups, namely: (a) terrestrial – refers to the protection
and preservation of forest biodiversity; (b) marine and aquatic
resources – pertain to the protection and preservation of forests and
marine life; (c) aerial – deals with preventing air pollution; and (d)
others.

Anchored on the environmental safeguards enshrined in the

Philippine Constitution, the following are considered landmark
environmental cases that have been decided by the Supreme Court
of the Philippines. These cases demonstrate judicial activism in
protecting the environment.

4
In the case of Oposa v. Factoran, which was decided in 1993, the
petitioners in this case are several minors, represented by their
parents.5 The petitioners filed a class suit for themselves, for others
of their generation, and for the succeeding generations. The
petitioners wanted to stop deforestation by asserting that the
permits granted by the Secretary of Environment and Natural
Resources to Timber License Agreement (TLA) holders to cut trees in
the country’s remaining forests was violative of the constitutional
right to a balanced and healthful ecology. Thus, the petitioners
prayed that the Secretary be ordered to cancel all existing TLAs in the
country and to desist from granting and renewing new ones.

The Supreme Court ruled that minors could, for themselves and for
others of their generation and for the succeeding generations yet
unborn, file a class suit. Their personality to sue in behalf of the
succeeding generations is based on the concept of intergenerational
responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful ecology
is concerned. This right carries with it the obligation to preserve the
environment for future generations.

In another case involving the Metro Manila Development Authority

v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay which was decided in 2008, it
5
G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993, 224 SCRA 792, 802-803.

5
involved a complaint by Concerned Residents of Manila Bay against
several government agencies for the cleanup, rehabilitation, and
protection of the historic waters of Manila Bay. 6 The petitioners
alleged that the continued neglect by these agencies of their legal
duty to abate the pollution in Manila Bay constituted a violation of
several laws, including the Environment Code, Pollution Control Law,
and the Water Code, among others. The petitioners presented proof
that the waters of Manila Bay were unsafe for bathing and other
contact recreational activities. It was prayed that these government
agencies be ordered to clean Manila Bay and submit a concrete plan
of action for the purpose. The Regional Trial Court, Court of Appeals
and the Supreme Court all unanimously ordered the government
agencies to coordinate for the cleanup of Manila Bay and its
restoration to its healthy state. The Supreme Court held that, under
numerous laws, the clean-up of the Bay is the ministerial duty of the
concerned agencies and they have no discretion to do otherwise.
The Supreme Court ordered the agencies to immediately enforce the
laws and perform their duty to protect the environment. Of
particular interest in this case was the issuance by the Supreme Court
of an order of continuing mandamus. It was the first ever in the
country. It compelled the agencies to perform their respective tasks
for the cleanup and it continues indefinitely.

6
G.R. Nos. 171947 – 48, Dec. 18, 2008, 574 SCRA 661.

6
Judicial Activism to Promote Environmental Justice in the
Philippines

At the global level, environmental justice can only be achieved

through a collective approach of all nations, whether developed and
developing countries. The government of each country should
involve not just all branches of the government, but all the
stakeholders as well. The Judiciary, considered to be the most
passive of the three branches, has a vital role to play.

The Judiciary’s role was clearly recognized in 2002, during the Global
Judges Symposium, where the Johannesburg Principles on the Role
of Law and Sustainable Development was adopted.7 The
Johannesburg Principles recognized that “the fragile state of the
global environment requires the Judiciary, as the guardian of the Rule
of Law, to boldly and fearlessly implement and enforce applicable
international and national laws…”

Promulgation of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases.

In April 13, 2010, the Supreme Court wielded its rule-making power
under the Constitution to “promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleadings,
7
The symposium was supported by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

7
practice, and procedure in all courts…” and approved the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases. 8

The Rules is regarded as the first of its kind in the world and a
significant reform mechanism in environmental litigation and
protection and for expanding access to justice by the poor. It
specifically aims to:

1. Protect and advance the constitutional rights of the people to

health and to a balanced and healthful ecology,

2. Provide a simplified, speedy, and inexpensive procedure and

increased access to environmental justice and for the enforcement
of rights and duties recognized under the Constitution and
environmental laws,

3. Ensure the just administration of remedies and redress for

violations of environmental laws, and

4. Enable the courts to effectively and efficiently manage and monitor

environmental cases.

8
Philippine Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5).

8
The Rules was a direct output of the Forum on Environmental Justice:
Upholding the Right to Balanced and Healthful Ecology which was
spearheaded by the Supreme Court last April 16-17, 2009. The
forum was organized to validate the draft Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases as well as recommend actions to further protect
and preserve the environment.

The Rules pertain to the procedure that shall govern the civil,
criminal, and special civil actions in all trial courts concerning
environmental cases. The Rules adopted the Oposa ruling on a liberal
interpretation of the doctrine of legal standing. The Rules relaxed
the rule on admissibility of evidence. Evidence used in a complaint
may be in the form of affidavits, photographs, video clips and
recordings. Certain pleadings are prohibited to prevent delay.
Extensive use of pre-trial clarifies and simplifies issues, and the
period of resolution is limited to one year. Two writs were
formulated as special civil actions: the Writ of Kalikasan and the Writ
of Continuing Mandamus. The Writ of Kalikasan empowers the Court
of Appeals or the Supreme Court to issue environmental protection
orders (temporary or permanent as applicable) as an immediate
action to protect the environment and the environmental rights of
communities.9 The Citizen’s Suit provision of the Rules enables
9
The damage or threatened damage is of such magnitude that it prejudices the ecology of two or more
cities or provinces. Since the affected area is not geographically limited to a single municipality or city, the
petitioner has to go to courts of nationwide jurisdiction, i.e., the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.

9
communities to petition for the suspension or stoppage of
destructive, environmental and development activities. The Writ of
Continuing Mandamus, on the other hand, is primarily directed at a
government agency with the performance of a legal duty.

With the promulgation of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental

Cases, the Judiciary aims to enhance the mechanisms for accessing
justice by the victims of environmental violations and at the same
time uphold the people’s constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology. Indeed, beyond the procedures and the technical
jargon of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases lies the
social component of Environmental Justice. It is apparent in our
country that the effects of environmental violations have been
mostly felt by those in the marginalized sectors. These people suffer
a gradual decline in health and in their quality of living because of
pollution and environmental damage. In the end, the adverse effects
of environmental violations are silent killers whose victims are those
who do not have the means to protect themselves. The Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases is a way for the victims to
empower themselves by availing of the remedies afforded by law.

Nevertheless, the Rules for Procedure for Environmental Cases must

not be construed to be in conflict with the administrative remedies
which may be availed by the aggrieved party. Courts must be a last

10
resort after all administrative remedies have been exhausted. The
mode of settling disputes as provided by the law should be observed
prior to asking the courts for relief.

Designation of Green Courts.

Prior to the approval of the Rule of Procedure for Environmental

Cases, the Supreme Court, in January 2008 also designated 117 trial
courts as “green” courts where environmental cases can be heard. 10
This is in addition to the few hundred single sala courts.

Capacity Building on the new Rules.

Since the approval of the Rules of Procedure of Procedure for

Environmental Cases, the Supreme Court through its training arm,
the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) has conducted Multisectoral
Capacity Building on the new Rules of Procedure as well as other
environmental rules nationwide.11 The training covered all duty-
bearers and claim-holders in the justice sector. This includes the
judges, clerks of courts, prosecutors, law enforcement, NGOs, civil
society and the community. The training was well-received and
10
Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 23-2008.
11
The Philippine Judicial Academy was originally created by the Supreme Court through Administrative
Order No. 35-96 on March 12, 1996. It was finally mandated by Republic Act 8557 on February 26,
1998 and institutionalized as a “training school for justices, judges, court personnel, lawyers and aspirants
to judicial posts.”

11
supported by key agencies of the other branches of government,
specifically the Department of the Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) and the Department of Local and Interior
Government (DILG) of the executive branch. Development partners
such as the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank also gave their
full assistance in this endeavor.

Development of a Sourcebook on Environmental Justice.

To complement the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases and

the Multi-sectoral Capacity Building, a Sourcebook on Environmental
Justice entitled Access to Environmental Justice: A Sourcebook on
Environmental Rights and Legal Remedies was developed and
eventually launched on June 10, 2011. The Sourcebook is a
comprehensive, relevant and timely material, which aims to address
all environmental policy gaps and to give recommendations for the
effective access to environmental justice. The development of the
Sourcebook was completed alongside a Capacity Assessment Report
of the Pillars of the Criminal Justice System. 12

Empowering the Citizens in Promoting Environmental Justice.

12
The Pillars of the Criminal Justice System in the Philippines is loosely composed of Law Enforcement,
Prosecution, Court System, Rehabilitation System and the Community.

12
To increase the public’s knowledge and awareness on their
environmental rights, available legal remedies, and guide them on
possible actions against violations, a Citizen’s Handbook on
Environmental Justice was also developed in 2011.13

Crafting a Roadmap for Environmental Justice.

In the last quarter of 2011, an Assessment and Planning Workshop

was conducted to develop a roadmap towards strengthening the
implementation of Environmental Justice in the country. It
specifically aims to: (a) review the experiences of the pillars of the
criminal justice system concerning Environmental Justice; (b) identify
gaps and define the needs of each pillar of justice and across the
pillars in terms of policies and key capacities in relation to the
implementation of the Rules; and (c) identify activities and action
points on how the various pillars can address the said needs and gaps
to effectively deliver Environmental Justice. A review of the Rules of
Procedure on Environmental Cases as well as the status of the
environmental cases in all courts nationwide is being undertaken by
PHILJA in the last quarter of 2012.
13
The Sourcebook on Environmental Justice, the Capacity Assessment Report of the Pillars of the
Criminal Justice System and the Citizen’s Handbook on Environmental Justice was undertaken by the
Philippine Judicial Academy in collaboration with the Program Management Office of the Supreme Court
of the Philippines under the Enhancing Access to the Pillars of Justice Component of the Fostering
Democratic Governance Programme of the UNDP and the Government of the Philippines.

13
The Way Forward for ASEAN

The challenge that Environmental Justice intends to address covers

everyone, without regard to socioeconomic status. Thus, the success
of Environmental Justice requires all stakeholders to act in
collaborative, complementary and proactive manner. This includes
both claim-holders and duty-bearers.

Governments, international organizations and communities must

work together – at all levels – to lessen the risks associated with
environmental degradation and its contributing factors, such as
climate change, and ensure that vulnerable people are prepared to
survive and adapt. This means putting the humanitarian
consequences of climate change much higher on the international
agenda and investing more in preparedness and risk reduction. A
multi-sectoral approach involving the community, enforcement
agencies and the prosecution is the most effective means of
prosecuting environmental cases.

For its part, the Philippine Judiciary must deliver its mandate in an
efficient and effective fashion. Case decongestion and delay
reduction programs must be strengthened. The progress of cases
filed in the environmental courts as well as those that have reached

14
the Supreme Court must be monitored. Based on the results of its
evaluation, the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases must be
revised to address any gaps that maybe identified.

Awareness program on the Rules and other initiatives should be

strengthened with periodic evaluation. The results of the feedback
from the nationwide multi-sectoral capacity building must be
evaluated for enhancement and possible replication to the other
members of the Pillars of the Criminal Justice System.

Coordination among the Pillars can be coursed through the Justice

Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC), which serves as a mechanism for
the effective coordination and sharing of information in the planning,
and implementation of shared initiatives towards better
administration of justice. The Council is composed of the Supreme
Court, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and its attached agencies, the
Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and its attached
agencies such as the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Bureau
of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP), and the Department of
Budget and Management (DBM).14

14
The Joint Declaration creating the Council was signed by the heads of justice sector agencies on April
30, 2010. The Declaration contains the Sector’s guiding principles, approaches to policy making, planning
and operations, together with the JSCC’s composition, functions and implementation arrangements.

15
During the 2nd Integrity Summit in the Philippines held last
September 18, 2012, I have outlined the four Pillars of Judicial
Reform Agenda, namely: (a) instituting integrity and restoring public
trust and credibility; (b) ensuring predictability, rationality, speed,
and responsiveness of judicial actions; (c) improving systems and
infrastructure; and (d) developing efficient and effective human
resources. An integral part of these pillars includes my unequivocal
support for environmental justice. Incidentally, as the 24th Chief
Justice of the Philippines, I have 18 years to achieve the development
objectives of my reform agenda before I reach the mandatory
retirement age.15

The solutions to the clear and present dangers challenging

Environmental Justice need not be complex and elaborate. As
Margaret Mead said, "Never underestimate the power of a small
group of people to change the world. In fact, it is the only way it ever
has." As a member state of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations, let us show the global community what a small group of
nations can contribute in achieving environmental justice.

A pleasant day to all of you.

15
Philippine Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 11. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower
courts shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of seventy years or become
incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office.

16
- End -

17