Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ACQUISITION OF AGR-BIOTECH APPLICATIONS INC. VS. ASSAILING THE DECISION DATED DECEMBER 8, 2015 OF THE
GREENPEACE SOUTHEAST ASIA (PHILIPPINES) ET AL. (G.R. COURT (DECEMBER 8, 2015 DECISION), WHICH UPHELD WITH
NO. 209271, 26 JULY 2016, PERLAS-BERNABE, J.) (NOTE: MODIFICATION THE DECISION3 DATED MAY 17, 2013 AND
THERE ARE OTHER COMPANION CASES) (SUBJECT/S: SC THE RESOLUTION4 DATED SEPTEMBER 20, 2013 OF THE
RESOLVES ONLY ACTUAL CONTROVERSIES; EXCEPTIONS COURT OF APPEALS (CA) IN CA-G.R. SP NO. 00013.
RESOLUTION OF CASES RENDERED MOOT) (BRIEF TITLE:
INTERNATIONAL SERVICE VS. GREENPEACE)
WHEREFORE, the motions for reconsideration are GRANTED. SC GRANTED THESE MOTIONS.
The Decision dated December 8, 2015 of the Court, which
affirmed with modification the Decision dated May 17, 2013
and the Resolution dat.ed September 20, 2013 of the Court
of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 00013, is hereby SET ASIDE for ON WHAT MAIN GROUND?
the reasons above-explained. A new one is ENTERED
DISJ\r1ISSIN G the Petition for Writ of Continuing Mandamus
and Writ of Kalikasan with Prayer for the Issuance of a.
Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) filed by ON THE GROUND OF MOOTNESS.
respondents Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines),
JUagsasaka at Siyentipiko sa Pagpapaunladng Agrikultura,
and others on the ground of mootness.
THESE CASES STEMMED FROM RESPONDENTS PETITION FOR
WRIT OF KALIKASAN. THE WRIT BEING SOUGHT WAS
MOOTED BY THE EXPIRATION OF THE BIOSAFETY PERMITS
SO ORDERED. ISSUED BY BUREAU OF PLANT INDISTRY AND THE
COMPLETION OF THE BT TALONG FIELD TRIALS. THERE IS NO
MORE FIELD TEST TO ENJOIN.
SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:
YES.
HELD:
FACTS:
First issue: YES.
The USS Guardian is an Avenger-class mine
countermeasures ship of the US Navy. In December 2012, the US
Embassy in the Philippines requested diplomatic clearance for the said
vessel to enter and exit the territorial waters of the Philippines and to Petitioners have legal standing
arrive at the port of Subic Bay for the purpose of routine ship
replenishment, maintenance, and crew liberty. On January 6, 2013, Locus standi is a right of appearance in a court of justice on
the ship left Sasebo, Japan for Subic Bay, arriving on January 13, 2013 a given question. Specifically, it is a partys personal and substantial
after a brief stop for fuel in Okinawa, Japan. interest in a case where he has sustained or will sustain direct injury as
a result of the act being challenged, and calls for more than just a
On January 15, 2013, the USS Guardian departed Subic Bay generalized grievance. However, the rule on standing is a procedural
for its next port of call in Makassar, Indonesia. On January 17, 2013 at matter which this Court has relaxed for non-traditional plaintiffs like
2:20 a.m. while transiting the Sulu Sea, the ship ran aground on the
ordinary citizens, taxpayers and legislators when the public interest so its warship entered a restricted area in violation of R.A. No. 10067 and
requires, such as when the subject matter of the controversy is of caused damage to the TRNP reef system, brings the matter within the
transcendental importance, of overreaching significance to society, or ambit of Article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of
of paramount public interest. the Sea (UNCLOS). He explained that while historically, warships
enjoy sovereign immunity from suit as extensions of their flag
In the landmark case of Oposa v. Factoran, Jr., we State, Art. 31 of the UNCLOS creates an exception to this rule in
recognized the public right of citizens to a balanced and healthful cases where they fail to comply with the rules and regulations of
ecology which, for the first time in our constitutional history, is the coastal State regarding passage through the latters internal
solemnly incorporated in the fundamental law. We declared that the waters and the territorial sea.
right to a balanced and healthful ecology need not be written in the
Constitution for it is assumed, like other civil and polittcal rights
guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, to exist from the inception of mankind
and it is an issue of transcendental importance with intergenerational In the case of warships, as pointed out by Justice Carpio,
implications. Such right carries with it the correlative duty to refrain they continue to enjoy sovereign immunity subject to the following
from impairing the environment. exceptions:
On the novel element in the class suit filed by the petitioners Article 30: Non-compliance by warships with the laws and regulations
minors in Oposa, this Court ruled that not only do ordinary citizens of the coastal State
have legal standing to sue for the enforcement of environmental rights,
they can do so in representation of their own and future generations. If any warship does not comply with the laws and regulations of the
coastal State concerning passage through the territorial sea and
Second issue: YES. disregards any request for compliance therewith which is made to it,
the coastal State may require it to leave the territorial sea immediately.
But what if the offending warship is a non-party to the UNCLOS, as in In fine, the relevance of UNCLOS provisions to the present
this case, the US? controversy is beyond dispute. Although the said treaty upholds
the immunity of warships from the jurisdiction of Coastal States
According to Justice Carpio, although the US to date has not ratified while navigating the latters territorial sea, the flag States shall be
the UNCLOS, as a matter of long-standing policy the US considers required to leave the territorial sea immediately if they flout the
itself bound by customary international rules on the traditional uses of laws and regulations of the Coastal State, and they will be liable
the oceans as codified in UNCLOS. for damages caused by their warships or any other government
vessel operated for non-commercial purposes under Article 31.
Moreover, Justice Carpio emphasizes that the US refusal to join the
UNCLOS was centered on its disagreement with UNCLOS regime of Third issue: NO.
deep seabed mining (Part XI) which considers the oceans and deep
seabed commonly owned by mankind, pointing out that such has
nothing to do with its the US acceptance of customary international
rules on navigation. The waiver of State immunity under the VF A pertains only
to criminal jurisdiction and not to special civil actions such as the
The Court also fully concurred with Justice Carpios view that non- present petition for issuance of a writ of Kalikasan. In fact, it can be
membership in the UNCLOS does not mean that the US will disregard inferred from Section 17, Rule 7 of the Rules that a criminal case
the rights of the Philippines as a Coastal State over its internal waters against a person charged with a violation of an environmental law is to
and territorial sea. We thus expect the US to bear international be filed separately.
responsibility under Art. 31 in connection with the USS Guardian
grounding which adversely affected the Tubbataha reefs. Indeed, it is The Court considered a view that a ruling on the application
difficult to imagine that our long-time ally and trading partner, which or non-application of criminal jurisdiction provisions of the VFA to US
has been actively supporting the countrys efforts to preserve our vital personnel who may be found responsible for the grounding of the USS
marine resources, would shirk from its obligation to compensate the Guardian, would be premature and beyond the province of a petition
damage caused by its warship while transiting our internal waters. for a writ of Kalikasan.
Much less can we comprehend a Government exercising leadership in
international affairs, unwilling to comply with the UNCLOS directive The Court also found unnecessary at this point to determine
for all nations to cooperate in the global task to protect and preserve whether such waiver of State immunity is indeed absolute. In the same
the marine environment as provided in Article 197 of UNCLOS vein, we cannot grant damages which have resulted from the violation
of environmental laws. The Rules allows the recovery of damages,
Article 197: Cooperation on a global or regional basis including the collection of administrative fines under R.A. No. 10067,
in a separate civil suit or that deemed instituted with the criminal 2. Whether LAMI flattened any mountain and cause
action charging the same violation of an environmental law. environmental damage of such magnitured as to
prejudice the life, health, property of inhabitants in two
or more cities or provinces
Ruling