Oposa et al. v. Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr. et al (G.R.No.

101083)
FACTS:
This case is unique in that it is a class suit brought by 44children, through their
parents, claiming that they bring the case in the name of their generation as well
as those generations yet unborn. Aiming to stop deforestation, it was filed against
the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources , seeking to
have him cancel all the timber license agreements (TLAs) in the country and to
cease and desist from accepting and approving more timber license agreements.
The children invoked their right to a balanced and healthful ecology and to
protection by the State in its capacity as
parens patriae. The petitioners claimed that the DENR Secretary's refusal to cancel
the TLAs and to stop issuing them was "contrary to the highest law of humankind-the natural lawand violative of plaintiffs' right to self-preservation and
perpetuation." The case was dismissed in the lower court, invoking the law on nonimpairment of contracts, so it was brought to the Supreme Cour ton certiorari.
Issue:
Did the children have the legal standing to file the case?
Court Rulings:

Yes. The Supreme Court in granting the petition ruledthat the children
had the legal standing to file the casebased on the concept of
intergenerationalresponsibility. Their right to a healthy environmentcarried
with it an obligation to preserve that environmentfor the succeeding
generations. In this, the Courtrecognized legal standing to sue on behalf of
futuregenerations. Also, the Court said, the law on non-impairment of
contracts must give way to the exercise of the police power of the state in
the interest of public welfare.

Nature of the case

Class action seeking the cancellation and non-issuance of timber licence
agreements which allegedly infringed the constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology (Section 16); non-impairment of contracts ;Environmental law;
judicial review and the political question doctrine; inter-generational responsibility
;Remedial law: cause of action and standing; Directive principles; Negative
obligation on State
Summary
An action was filed by several minors represented by their parents against the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources to cancel existing timber license
agreements in the country and to stop issuance of new ones. It was claimed that
the resultant deforestation and damage to the environment violated their
constitutional rights to a balanced and healthful ecology and to health(Sections 16
and 15, Article II of the Constitution). The petitioners asserted that they represented
others of their generation as well as generations yet unborn. Finding for the
petitioners, the Court stated that even though the right to a balanced and healthful
ecology is under the Declaration of Principles and State Policies of the Constitution
and not under the Bill of Rights, it does not follow that it is less important than any
of the rights enumerated in the latter:
[it] concerns nothing less than self-preservation and self-perpetuation, the
advancement of which may even be said to predate all governments and
constitutions.

The right is linked to the constitutional right to health, is fundamental,

constitutionalised, self-executing and judicially enforceable. It imposes the
correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment .The court stated that the
petitioners were able to file a class suit both for others of their generation and
for succeeding generations as
the minors' assertion of their right to a sound environment constitutes, at the same
time, the performance of their obligation to ensure the protection of that right for
the generations to come.

OTHER ISTES:

FACTS
A taxpayers class suit was initiated by the Philippine Ecological Network, Inc.
(PENI) together with the minors Juan Antonio Oposa et al and their parents.
All were duly represented. They claimed that as taxpayers they have the
right to the full benefit, use and enjoyment of the natural resources of the
countrys rainforests. They prayed that a judgment be rendered ordering
Secretary Fulgencio Factoran, Jr, his agents, representatives, and other
persons acting in his behalf to cancel all existing timber license agreements
in the country and cease and desist from receiving, accepting, processing,
renewing or approving new timber license agreements, Factoran being the
secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
ISSUE: Whether or not petitioners have a cause of action?
HELD: Yes, petitioners have a cause of action. The case at bar is of common
interest to all Filipinos. The right to a balanced and healthy ecology carries
with it the correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment. The
said right implies the judicious management of the countrys forests. This
right is also the mandate of the government through DENR. A denial or
violation of that right by the other who has the correlative duty or obligation
to respect or protect the same gives rise to a cause of action. All licenses
may thus be revoked or rescinded by executive action.