Advocates for the protection of our ecosystems and the species, which include us, wish for that day when we can say the rule of law operates in our country, when environmental laws are strictly enforced, irrespective of personalities and entities involved.
In the Philippines, we are proud that our environmental statutes and jurisprudence are human rights based, progressive and way ahead of other jurisdictions as illustrated by a liberalized standing to sue, the adherence to the precautionary principle and the anti-Strategic Legal Action Against Public Participation provisions. Indeed, the no-nonsense implementation of the laws would make possible the much-needed restoration of the health of our life support systems.
Will that day ever come?
Fully conscious of the vastly degraded environment and with the highest priority given by the Supreme Court to the protection of environmental rights and the promotion of environmental justice, through the promulgation of the first-in-the-world Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases (“Rules”), I have no reason to doubt that it will.
The Supreme Court, conscious of the continuing gross failure of the Executive Department in performing the responsibility of implementing our environmental laws, issued the Rules in 2010, to protect our environmental rights and to avert a looming ecological crisis in a hotspot mega-diversity country like the Philippines. Remedies such as the writs of kalikasan (nature) and continuing mandamus serve notice to everyone, especially those in government, that the appalling culture of impunity and entitlement that have made possible the plunder of our natural resources have to end.
It is a much-welcome news indeed that the judge in the Argao tree-cutting case complied with the clear directive of the Rules that only the Supreme Court has the power to restrain enforcement of environmental laws. Lower courts are stripped of any authority to issue temporary restraining orders. Those who do so face the possibility of administrative sanctions for gross ignorance of the Rules.
Former Supreme Court chief justice Renato Puno, under whose stewardship the Rules were promulgated, declared that “All efforts will be undertaken so that the newly designated environmental courts will be manned by green judges — skillful judges who not only master environmental laws, but also understand the philosophy of environmentalism and ecologism.”
This development, which clearly augurs well for the environment and our rights, should serve as a lesson to all, not just judges, but also lawyers, public officials and the citizens, in general, that environmental justice and environmental rights are and should be a high priority in these challenging times.
The act of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources Central Visayas in ensuring protection of our public forests deserves accolade.
Our forest cover is still way below that which would give us ample protection and benefits from ecosystem services. It is true the agency has been our perennial respondent in the cases that we filed where its actions were assessed as violative of its mandates such as the offshore-drilling and coal ash disposal issues. But, when we see that it is performing its mission, then we from civil society support government agencies all the way.
Another sterling example is set by the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources in declaring closed season for sardines and in banning the modified Danish seine. This was done to implement our fisheries laws, protect our marine ecosystems and the livelihoods especially of subsistence fisherfolk who are suffering and will continue to suffer if our laws are not seriously enforced. Municipal waters are meant for them.
With the looming possibility that the Philippines will be blacklisted and prohibited from exporting its fish and fish products to the European Union, if it does not step up efforts to prevent, deter and fight illegal unrecorded and unregistered fishing, the government needs all the help from civil society organizations (CSOs) to implement its committed plan of action.
Last week, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung Rule of Law Programme Asia, in partnership with Kemitraan partnership, a nongovernment organization (NGO) pushing for governance reforms in Indonesia, held the Indonesia forum for Environmental Law Talks 3 in Jakarta. Similar to the Philippine event, held in Cebu from May 27 to 29, it was attended by members of the Bench, prosecutors and enforcers and NGOs, including the 2013 Ramon Magsaysay awardee, the Indonesian anti-corruption commission, the Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK). Indonesia and the Philippines share a lot of commonalities in enforcement issues such as a low manpower to do the job and lack of the necessary budgetary allocation.
I presented the Philippine Experience on the Role of CSOs in the Enforcement of Environmental Laws. The CSOs Participation in Environmental decision-making is significant as CSOs help ensure and facilitate the active participation of citizens in decision-making on environmental issues and those which involve their rights to life, health and a healthy environment and their empowerment. They are crucial in mainstreaming the much-needed environmental awareness and education, which are essential for environmental laws to be enforced. By using the law as a tool for change, CSOs promote respect for the Law and human rights, and the rule of law. CSOs help create a level playing field for stakeholders and even the protection of dedicated enforcers.
May more from government appreciate the significance of a partnership with CSOs, as it boosts improvement in the enforcement of our environmental laws.