envi law - midterm reviewer

7/29/2019 Envi Law - Midterm Reviewer

1/5

I. Oposa Case

( The Constitution and Environmental Law: The Relevance of the Malcolm Activist

Approach )

Arguments of the Respondents :

1. No Cause of Action1

Issue:

Whether or not said petitioners have a cause of action to prevent the

misappropriation or impairment of Philippine rainforests and arrest the unbated

hemorrhage of the countrys vital life-support system and continued rape of mother

earth?

Held:

Court cited:Sec. 16. 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.

This right unites with the right to health, which is provided for in the preceding

section of the same article:

Sec. 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and

instill health consciousness among them.

Petition bears upon the right of Filipinos to a balanced and healthful ecology,which the petitioners associate with the twin concepts of intergenerationalresponsibility and intergenerational justice.

While the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is to be found under theDeclaration 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 enumerated in the latter.

Such a right belongs to a different category of rights altogether for itconcerns nothing less than self-preservation and self-perpetuation aptly

and fittingly stressed by the petitioners the advancement of which may

even be said to predate all governments and constitutions.

A denial or violation of that right by the other who has the correlative duty orobligation to respect or protect the same gives rise to a cause of action.

Petitioners maintain that the granting of the TLAs, which they claim wasdone with grave abuse of discretion, violated their right to a balanced and

healthful ecology; hence, the full protection thereof requires that no further

TLAs should be renewed or granted.

1 act or omission by which a party violates a right of another.


2/5

2. Class Suit2

Held:

We find no difficulty in ruling that they can, for themselves, for others of theirgeneration and for the succeeding generations, file a class suit. Theirpersonality to sue in behalf of the succeeding generations can only be based

on the concept of intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a

balanced and healthful ecology is concerned.

Intergenerational Responsibility- Petitioners minors assert that they represent their generation as well as

generations yet unborn

- The right of the Filipinos to a balanced and healthful ecology.3. The case involves a political question

Held:

Court cites the second paragraph of Section 1, Article VIII of the Constitutionstates that:

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual

controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable,

and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion

amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or

instrumentality of the Government.

Court then explains:The second part of the authority represents a broadening of judicial power to

enable the courts of justice to review what was before forbidden territory, to

with, the discretion of the political departments of the government.

4. Violation of the non-impairment clause

Held:

Court explained that timber license granted by the DENR is not a contract,property or a property right protested by the due process clause of the

Constitution. Court further clarified that a timber license

2 controversy is one of the common or general interest to many persons so numerous that it is

impracticable to join all as parties, a number of them which the court finds to be sufficiently

numerous and representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for

the benefit of all. Any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual

interest.


3/5

= is an instrument by which the State regulates the utilization and disposition

of forest resources to the end that public welfare is promoted.

A timber license is= not a contract within the purview of the due process clause;

= it is only a license or privilege, which can be validly withdrawn wheneverdictated by public interest or public welfare as in this case.

= merely a permit or privilege to do what otherwise would be unlawful, and

is not a contract between the authority, federal, state, or municipal, granting

it and the person to whom it is granted; neither is it property or a property

right, nor does it create a vested right; nor is it taxation

II. Judicial/Institutional Activism/Restraint

1. Judicial Interpretivism- [Ely] indicative of judges deciding constitutional issues (confining)themselves to enforcing values or norms that are stated or very clearly

implicit in the written constitution.

- The constitution is a legal document to be interpreted like other legaldocuments, in accord with its language and purpose.

- Insistence that the work of the political branches is to be invalidated onlyin accord with inference whose starting point, whose underlying

premises, is fairly discoverable in the constitution.

2. Judicial Non-interpretivism- courts should go beyond that set of references and enforce values or

norms that cannot be discovered within the four corners of the document.

3. Policy Activism- the judiciary was vested with jurisdiction, he could, within the

permissible bounds of judicial power, give full expression to values he

hold dear.

4. Policy Restraint- The court not being a democratic institution or one which is elected by

the people opts to limit its use of judicial review.

- The Court hesitates to exercise of power.5. Judicial Activism


4/5

- refer to a judges readiness to use his court, his judicial decision, or to usein a more precise legal term, the power of judicial review to advance

substantive social or political causes.

III. Rules and Objectives of the PHILJA

1. To strengthen the capacity of our judges to effectively adjudicate and managethe environmental cases before them.

2. To update them on developments in law, rules and jurisprudence.3. To pave the way for an improved and informed decision-making on

environmental issues.

4. To increase their sensitivity levels in the resolution of environmentaldisputes.

IV. Definitions

1. Climate Change- means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to

human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and

which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over

comparable time periods. (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change)

- change in vapor or weather patterns in certain areas in substantialperiods of time

- a by-product of Global Warming- human activities (since the Industrial Revolution) resulted in greenhouse

concentrations, primarily from fossil fuel, deforestation, land use change

and agriculture.

- Greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide,hydroflurocarbons and sulfur hexaflupride produced by human activities

cause the thinning of the ozone layer which protects us from ultraviolet

and the cosmic rays of outer space.

- CFCs and other gasses which were eventually carried by the windcurrents into the ozone layer reacted with the ozone molecules and broke

down the gaseous umbrella at a rate faster they could be replenished,

thus creating holes in the Antartica, Europe, and the Artic, thus leading to

global warming and global climate change.

2. Global Warming- increase in temperatures in varying areas or more specifically in the

atmosphere or near the surface of the earth.

V. Two justifications of State involvement

1. Article II Sec. 16 of the Constitution


5/5

- The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balancedand healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

2. Public Trust Doctrine- All public lands of the nation are held in trust by the government by the

people for the people of the whole country, with the government having theduty under the doctrine to protect and preserve the lands for the publics

common heritage.

envi law - midterm reviewer

Documents