Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Robles
2013-
ministerial act which can be compelled by mandamus. CA sustained the RTC stressing that
RTC did not require the agencies to do tasks outside of their usual basic functions.
Issue:
Whether the cleaning or rehabilitation of the Manila Bay is not ministerial act of
petitioners that can be compelled by mandamus.
Held:
YES. The Cleaning or Rehabilitation of Manila Bay Can be Compelled by Mandamus.
While the implementation of the MMDA's mandated tasks may entail a decision-making
process, the enforcement of the law or the very act of doing what the law exacts to be
done is ministerial in nature and may be compelled by mandamus. Under what other
judicial
discipline describes
as
continuing mandamus , the Court may, under
extraordinary circumstances, issue directives with the end in view of ensuring that its
decision would not be set to naught by administrative inaction or indifference.
Section 7 of the Rules on Environmental Procedure provides:
Sec. 7. Judgment.If warranted, the court shall grant the privilege of the writ of
continuing mandamus requiring respondent to perform an act or series of acts until the
judgment is fully satisfied and to grant such other reliefs as may be warranted resulting
from the wrongful or illegal acts of the respondent. The court shall require the
respondent to submit periodic reports detailing the progress and execution of the
judgment, and the court may, by itself or through a commissioner or the appropriate
government agency, evaluate and monitor compliance. The petitioner may submit its
comments or observations on the execution of the judgment.
3. Oposa vs Factoran
Facts:
The petitioners, all minors, sought the help of the Supreme Court to order the
respondent, then Secretary of DENR, to cancel all existing Timber License Agreement (TLA) in
the country and to cease and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, renewing or
approving new TLAs. They alleged that the massive commercial logging in the country is
causing vast abuses on rain-forest.They further asserted that the rights of their generation and
the rights of the generations yet unborn to a balanced and healthful ecology. Plaintiffs further
assert that the adverse and detrimental consequences of continued and deforestation are so
capable of unquestionable demonstration that the same may be submitted as a matter of judicial
notice. This notwithstanding, they expressed their intention to present expert witnesses as well
as documentary, photographic and film evidence in the course of the trial.
Issue:
Whether or not the petitioners have a locus standi.
Held:
YES. Locus standi means the right of the litigant to act or to be heard.Under Section 16,
Article II of the 1987 constitution, it states that: The state shall protect and advance the right of
the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of
nature. Petitioners, minors assert that they represent their generation as well as generation yet
unborn. We find no difficulty in ruling that they can, for themselves, for others of their generation
and for the succeeding generations, file a class suit. Their personality to sue in behalf of the
operations is not yet fully determined. And it is only after an extensive determination by the DOE
of the pipeline's actual physical state through its proposed activities, and not merely through a
short-form integrity audit,56 that the factual issue on the WOPL's viability can be settled. The
issue, therefore, on the pipeline's structural integrity has not yet been rendered moot and
remains to be subject to this Court's resolution. Consequently, We cannot say that the DOE's
issuance of the certification adverted to equates to the writ of kalikasan beingfunctus officio at
this point.
5. Do whales and dolphins have a standing to sue in court?
YES. As recently decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Resident Marine
Mammals of the Protected Seascape Taon Strait et al. v. Secretary Angelo Reyes,
animals have the right to sue in accordance with Section 5 Citizen Suit of the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases that:
To further encourage the protection of the environment, the Rules enable litigants
enforcing environmental rights to file their cases as citizen suits. This provision liberalizes
standing for all cases filed enforcing environmental laws and collapses the traditional rule on
personal and direct interest, on the principle that humans are stewards of nature. The
terminology of the text reflects the doctrine first enunciated in Oposa v. Factoran, insofar as it
refers to minors and generations yet unborn.
In light of the foregoing, the need to give the Resident Marine Mammals legal standing
has been eliminated by our Rules, which allow any Filipino citizen, as a steward of nature, to
bring a suit to enforce our environmental laws. It is worth noting here that the Stewards are
joined as real parties in the Petition and not just in representation of the named cetacean
species. The Stewards, Ramos and Eisma-Osorio, having shown in their petition that there may
be possible violations of laws concerning the habitat of the Resident Marine Mammals, are
therefore declared to possess the legal standing to file in the said case.