Chavez Vs.

Public Estates Authority, GR No 133250, July 9, 2002

The government, through the Commissioner of Public Highways, signed a contract with the
Construction and Development Corporation of the Philippines ("CDCP" for brevity) to reclaim
certain foreshore and offshore areas of Manila Bay. Subsequently, JVA was created, under the
agreement, the AMARI will acquire and own a maximum of 367.5 hectares of reclaimed land
which will be titled in its name.
Issue: Whether AMARI, a private corporation, can acquire and own under the Amended JVA
367.5 hectares of reclaimed foreshore and submerged areas in Manila Bay in view of Sections 2
and 3, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution which state that all other natural resources shall not
be alienated.
Ruling: The mere reclamation of these areas by PEA does not convert these inalienable natural
resources of the State into alienable or disposable lands of the public domain. There must be a
law or presidential proclamation officially classifying these reclaimed lands as alienable or
disposable and open to disposition or concession.
PD No. 1085, coupled with President Aquino's actual issuance of a special patent covering the
Freedom Islands, is equivalent to an official proclamation classifying the Freedom Islands as
alienable or disposable lands of the public domain. The Freedom Islands are thus alienable or
disposable lands of the public domain, open to disposition or concession to qualified parties.

Petitioners, are all minors duly represented and joined by their respective parents. They pray that
DENR cancel all existing timber license agreements in the country and cease and desist from
receiving, accepting, processing, renewing or approving new timber license agreements as it
causes distortion and disturbance of this balance as a consequence of deforestation have resulted
in a host of environmental tragedies
The right to a balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the correlative duty to refrain from
impairing the environment. The said right implies, among many other things, the judicious
management and conservation of the country's forests. Thus, the right of the petitioners (and all
those they represent) to a balanced and healthful ecology is as clear as the DENR's duty. A denial
or violation of that right by the other who has the corelative duty or obligation to respect or
protect the same gives rise to a cause of action. Petitioners maintain that the granting of the
TLAs, which they claim was done 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.