Rule of Procedure for Environmental Cases

(AM No 09-6-8)

INTRODUCTION
It is said that in terms of formulation and legal framework
for environmental protection, the Philippines has one of the most
progressive and articulate environmental polices among
developing countries. Perhaps the problem lies in the fact that
there is no consistency and strong political will in implementing
these environmental policies and laws.
The Philippine Constitution guarantees the right of the
people to a healthy environment. The Supreme Court, in the case
of Oposa vs Factoran [224 SCRA 792 (1993)] rule that this right
is legally demandable and enforceable for it concerns nothing
less than self-preservation and self-perpetuation. The protection
of our marine and forest resources as well as the protection of
water shed areas are the subject of constitutional safeguards, on
the premise that these are constitutionally guaranteed human
rights, and therefore enforceable in law. There also exists
numerous legislative acts and executive issuances implementing
these constitutional provisions.
Judicial Initiative for the Protection
of Environmental rights & social justice
Pursuant to its mandate in Section 5, Article VIII of the
Constitution, to promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleadings & practice and
procedure in all courts, the Supreme Court issued, on April 29,
2010, the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases.
These rules are somewhat a product of the Forum on
Environmental Justice in several cities, to address the issues on,
among others: high cost of litigation, adopting innovative rules to
speed up the disposition of cases and ensuring compliance with
the decisions of courts.
The Rules of Procedure in Environmental Cases is
considered to be the first of its kind in the world. It constitute a
significant catalyst in support of far-reaching and sweeping

reforms in environmental rights. These are the objectives of these

rules:
A] To protect and advance the constitutional right
of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology;
B] To provide a simplified, speedy and
inexpensive procedure for the enforcement of
environmental rights and duties recognized under the
constitution, existing laws, rules and regulations as
well as international agreements;
C] To introduce and adopt innovations and best,
ensuring effective enforcement and remedies and
redress for violation of environmental laws; and
D] To enable the courts to monitor and exact
compliance with orders and judgement in
environmental cases.
HIGHLIGHTS
RULES:

&

SALIENT

FEATURES

of

the

1] Citizen suit
[Section 5, Rule 2, PART II Civil Procedure]
The provision on citizen suits liberalizes
standing for all cases filed enforcing environmental
laws. Citizen suits have proven critical in forcing
government and its agencies to act on its duty to
protect and preserve the environment. To further
encourage .the protection of the environment, the
Rules enable litigants enforcing environmental rights
to file their cases as citizen suits. As a procedural
device, citizen suits permit deferred payment of filling
fees until after their judgment
The rule on citizen suit in the Rules on
Environmental Cases liberalizes the rule on locus
standi or standing in court thereby abandoning
the traditional rule on personal and direct interest.
This is based on the principle that all of us humans are
stewards of nature. The rule allows minors or

generations yet unborn, to enforce

obligations under environmental law.

rights

or

2] The use of consent decree

[Section 5, Rule 3 Part II Civil Procedure]
Consent decree is an innovative way to resolve
environmental cases. It allows a compromise
agreement between two parties in environmental
litigation or issues that would normally be litigated in
court, and other matters that may not necessarily be
of issue in court.
A consent decree (consent judgment) refers
to a judicially approved
settlement
between
concerned parties based on public interest and public
policy to protect and preserve the environment.
Section 5 provides that the judge shall exert
best efforts to persuade the parties to arrive at a
settlement of the. The judge may issue a consent
decree approving the agreement between the parties
in accordance with law, public order and public policy
to protect the right of the people to a balanced and
healthful ecology.
3] Environmental Protection Order
It refers to an order issued by the court directing
or enjoining a person or government agency to
perform or desist from performing an act in order to
protect, preserve or rehabilitate the environment. It
integrates both prohibitive and mandatory injunction
reliefs in order to appropriately address the factual
circumstances surrounding the case. This remedial
measure can also be prayed for in writs of kalikasan
and continuing mandamus.
`
Under the rules the court may issue a Temporary
Protection Order (TEPO) order in environmental
cases. Under Section 3 Rule 5 (PART II Civil
Procedure) the court may convert the TEPO to a

permanent protection order (EPO) or to issue a writ of

continuing mandamus for the performance of acts
which shall be effective until judgment is satisfied.
4] Writ of Kalikasan
[Rule 7, Part III Special Civil Action]
Similar to the writs of habeas corpus, amparo
and habeas data, the issuance of the writ of kalikasan
is immediate in nature. It contains very specific set of
remedies which may be availed of individually or
cumulatively to wit:
It is available
to a natural or juridical person, entity
authorized by law,
peoples organization,NGOs, or any
public interest group accredited or
registered with any government agency
in
behalf
of
persons
whose
constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology is violated, or
threatened with violation by an
unlawful act or omission of a public
official
or
employee,
or
private
individual
or
entity,
involving
environmental
damage
of
such
magnitude as to prejudice the life,
health or properly of inhabitants in two
or more cities or provinces
Nature of Writ of Kalikasan
The Writ of Kalikasan is an extraordinary
remedy which may be issued on the magnitude
of environmental damage. The environmental
damage must be of such magnitude as to
prejudice the life, health or property of
inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces,
or that which transcend political and territorial
boundaries.

The writ seeks to address the potentially

exponential nature of large-scale ecological
threats.
5] Writ of Continuing Mandamus
[Rule 8, PART III Special Civil Action]
Integrates
the ruling in Concerned
Residents of Manila Bay vs MMDA (GR Nos
171947-48 December 8, 2008 and the existing
rule on the issuance of the Writ of Mandamus.
Procedurally, its filling before the courts is
similar to the filing of an ordinary writ of
mandamus.
However,
the
issuance
of
Temporary Environmental Protection Order is
made available as an auxiliary remedy prior to
the issuance of the writ itself.
.
Generally mandamus is employed to
compel the performance when refused, of a
ministerial duty , not a discretionary duty. As
distinguished
from
Injunction
which
is
essentially a preventive remedy, the function
of mandamus is to set in motion and to compel
action. Mandamus lies to command the doing
of what ought to be done, not to undo what
has been done.
`
The Writ of continuing mandamus
commands respondents to do an act or series
of acts until judgment is fully satisfied. As a
special civil action , the writ of continuing
mandamust may be availed of to compel to
performance of an specifically enjoined by law.
It permits the court to retain jurisdiction after
judgment in order to ensure the successful
implementation of the reliefs mandated under
the courts decision. For this purpose the court
may compel the submission of compliance
reports from the respondent govt agencies as
well as avail of other means to monitor
compliance with its decision.

6]Strategic Lawsuit Agains Public Participation

( The SLAPP)
[Rule 6 PART II Civil Procedure]
A SLAPP is in every sense a harassment suit
and the affront against constitutional rights is the
very reason why no pending legal action is required to
counter a SLAPP suit. An affirmative defense should
or could be raised in the answer along with other
defences that may be raised in the case alleged to be
a SLAPP.
7] Precautionary Principle
[Rule 20 PART V Evidence]
Section 1, Rule 20 provides that when there is a
lack of full scientific certainty in establishing a causal
link between human activity and environmental
effect, the court shall apply the precautionary
principle in resolving the case before it. The
constitutional right of the people to a balanced and
healthful ecology shall be given the benefit of the
doubt.
Precautionary principle, formulation
Basically this is the common-sense adage that it
is better to be safe than sorry
The 1992 United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de
Janeiro evolved the following principle:
In order to protect the environment, the
precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States
according to their capabilities. Where
there
are
threats of serious or irreversible
damage, lack of full
scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for
postponing cost effective
measures
to
prevent
environmental degradation (Principle 15)

Another version is found in the Wingspread

Consensus Statement on the Precautionary Pronciple.
It states:
When an activity raises threats of harm to human health
or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken
even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully
established scientifically. In this context the proponent of an

activity, rather than the public , should bear the burden of

proof.
Precautionary Principle under the rules:

The
rules
acknowledge
the
peculiar
circumstances surrounding environmental cases in
that scientific evidence is usually insufficient,
insufficient or uncertain and preliminary scientific
evaluation indicates that there are reasonable for
concern . For this reason, the principle requires
those who have the means, knowledge, power and
resources to take action to prevent or mitigate the
harm to the environment or to act when conclusively
ascertained understanding by science is not yet
available. In effect the quantum of evidence to
prove potentially hazardous effects on the
environment
is relaxed and the burden is
shifted to proponents of an activity that may
cause damage to the environment.
Factors
to
consider
precautionary principle

in

applying

the

1] Threats to human life or health

2] inequity to present & future generations
2]Prejudice
to
environment
without
legal
consideration of the environmental rights of those
affected. [Section 2 Rule 20]
PROHIBITED PLEADINGS:
A] CIVIL PROCEDURE
aMotion to dismiss complaint
b]Motion for bill of particulars
c]Extension of time the file pleadings, except
answer which extension should not exceed 15
days
d]Motion to declare defendant in default

e]Reply & rejoinder

f]3rd party complaint
B] SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
Section 9
a] Motion to dismiss complaint
b] Motion for extension of time to file return;
[Equivalent to anwer]
c] Motion for postponement
d] Motion for bill of particulars
e] Counterclaim or cross-claim
f] 3rd party complaint
g] Reply; and
h] Motion to declare respondent in default