A Powerpoint Presentation

by

CHERYL L. DAYTEC-YAGOT
Cordillera Indigenous Peoples Legal
Center
(DINTEG)

THE WRIT OF
KALIKASAN:
NORMATIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE is now a recognized
human right at this time that the planet is facing an
FOUNDATIONS
ecological timebomb with threats of environmental
disaster in different parts of the globe.

INTERGENERATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY: The

present generation has the responsibility to

preserve the environment for generations yet to be
born ( a doctrine enunciated in the Stockholm
Declaration and by the Philippine Supreme Court in
Oposa v. Factoran).

WE DO NOT
INHERIT THE LAND
FROM OUR
ANCESTORS; WE
BORROW IT FROM
OUR CHILDREN.- A
proverb common to indigenous peoples

OBJECTIVES OF THE
OF
KALIKASAN
1. WRIT
Protection and
promotion
of constitutional right to

a balanced and healthful ecology;

2. Provision of access to justice- through simplified,
speedy
and inexpensive procedure for the
enforcement of environmental rights and duties
3. To introduce and adopt innovations and best
practices
ensuring the effective enforcement of remedies and
redress for violation of environmental laws; and
4. To enable the courts to monitor and exact
compliance
with orders and judgments in environmental cases.

CONSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORK
RIGHT TO A BALANCED AND

HEALTHFUL

ECOLOGY
(Sec. 16, Art. 2 of Phil. Consti.) The state shall advance
the right of the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology in accordance with the rhythm and harmony of
nature

RIGHT TO HEALTH (Sec. 15, Art. II, Phil. Consti.)

The state shall protect and promote the right to health of
the people and instill health consciousness among them.
RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES which include the
right to their cultural and spiritual base (in other words,
their ancestral land which are the Philippines last living
lung).

RULE ON WRIT OF
KALIKASAN
Where Rule is found: It is incorporated as Rule VII of

The Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases

adopted by the Supreme Court in April 2010.
Nature of Writ : Special Civil Action
Applicability: Applies when there is damage in
violation of environmental law, rule or regulation,
where damage is of such magnitude as to prejudice
the life, health or property of inhabitants in 2 or more
cities or provinces
Who May File: A natural or juridical person, entity
authorized by law, PO, NGO, or any public interest
group accredited by or registered with any
government agency, on behalf of persons whose
constitutional right to a balanced and healthful
ecology is violated, or threatened with violation.
(Note: Requirement of accredition is to guarantee
legal existence of group or NGO.)

RULE ON WRIT OF
Respondent: A public official or employee, or private
KALIKASAN
individual or entity.
Contents of Petition:
(1) Name/s and personal circumstances of petitioner/s,
and of respondent/s who if unknown and uncertain,
may be described under assumed appellation;
(2) The environmental law, rule or regulation violated or
threatened to be violated , the act or omission
complained of, and the environmental damage
sustained.
(3) Evidence to be attached: affidavits of witnesses,
documentary evidence, scientific or other expert
studies, and object evidence;
(4) The certification of non-forum shopping
(5) The reliefs prayed for which may include a prayer for
the issuance of a Temporary Protection Order

RULE ON WRIT OF
When is a Temporary Environmental Protection
KALIKASAN
Order (or TEPO, which is equivalent to the
TRO in ordinary jurisprudence) available? In
case of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer
grave injustice and irreparable injury, the court may
issue ex parte a TEPO effective for only seventy-two
(72) hours from date of the receipt of the TEPO by the
party or person enjoined. Within said period, the court
where the case is assigned shall conduct a summary
hearing to determine whether the TEPO may be
extended until the termination of the case.
The court should periodically monitor the existence of
acts which are the subject matter of the TEPO, the
TEPO can being lifted anytime as the circumstances
may warrant.

RULE ON WRIT OF
KALIKASAN

Dissolution of the TEPO: The TEPO may be dissolved if it

appears after hearing that its issuance or continuance
would cause irreparable damage to the party or person
enjoined while the applicant may be fully compensated for
such damages as he may suffer and subject to the posting of
a sufficient bond by the party or person enjoined.
Filing Fee: Pay as you enter rule does not apply; no filing
fee required.
When to File Return: Within TEN days from receipt of notice
Form and Content of Return: Must be verified; General
denial of allegations is deemed an admission, thus denials
must be specific.
Effect of Failure to File Return: Court will hear the case ex
parte

RULE ON WRIT OF
Why prohibit certain
Prohibited
Pleadings:
KALIKASAN
pleadings? To expedite

(a) Motion to dismiss;

(b) Motion for extension
of time to file return;
(c) Motion for
postponement;
(d) Motion for a bill of
particulars;
(e) Counterclaim or
cross-claim;
(f) Third-party complaint;
(g) Reply; and
(h) Motion to declare
respondent in

the judicial process.

A motion for
intervention is not a
prohibited pleading.
Thus, any interested
party may file such a
motion which affirms
the public interest
nature of the Writ of
Kalikasan, a remedy
which a large segment
of the community may
wish to avail of.

RULE ON WRIT OF
Filing of Pleading: Personal filing, filing by
KALIKASAN

mail, and in the case of memorandums, filing

electronically (email).

Effect of Filing of Writ of Kalikasan on

other judicial actions: The filing of a
petition for the issuance of the writ of
kalikasan shall not preclude the filing of
separate civil, criminal or administrative
actions. The separate actions may be filed
before or after the filing of the writ of
kalikasan.

RULE ON WRIT OF
KALIKASAN
Ultimate Reliefs to be prayed for/ granted:
Permanent Cease and Desist Order
Order for rehabilitation or Restoration of damage
Order for respondent to monitor strict compliance

with court orders and decisions

Order for respondent to make periodic reports on
strict compliance with court orders and decisions.
Such other reliefs (except award of damages to
individual petitioners)
NOTE: The Court will not grant an award for personal
damages which may be claimed in a separate civil
action.

THE PROCEDURE AT A
GLANCE

PROCEDURE: AT A
GLANCE

PROCEDURE: AT A
GLANCE

FEATURES OF WRIT OF
A homegrown judicial remedy available only in the
KALIKASAN

Philippines
Summary in nature; expedited disposition of cases
Liberal rule on locus standi; organizations can stand
in representation of communities or of those who
suffered actual damage.
No docket fee required to be paid by petitioner to
strike a balance between ecological and economic
development concerns.
Allows submission of memorandum through

email

FEATURES OF WRIT OF
Allows discovery procedure in gathering evidence ( such as
KALIKASAN
ocular inspection, production or inspection of documents or
things)
Applies PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: When human
activities
may lead to threats of serious and irreversible damage to the
environment that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions
shall be taken to avoid or diminish that threat and lack of full
scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing
cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
Thus, this principle modifies the rules on evidence in writ of
kalikasan cases where the burden is on the respondents to
prove that their activity that may cause damage to the
environment is not in fact damaging.

WRIT OF KALIKASAN: First

Philippine Industrial
Corporation (FPIC) Case
In July 2010, a persistent fuel leak began to well up in
the basement of the West Tower Condominium in Makati
City, forcing the condominium residents to temporarily
vacate the area. The leak was traced by experts to a 117
kilometer FPIC-operated pipeline which delivers
petroleum products from Batangas to Manila. Claiming
that pipeline leak causes a potential environmental and
security threat" to the condominium residents as well as
to people living in areas within two or more provinces
and cities under which the pipeline runs, the residents
filed a petition for a writ of kalikasan with the Supreme
Court.
In their petition, the residents prayed that the FPIC
permanently shut down and replace the damaged
pipeline.

The residents also prayed that the Supreme Court

compel the pipelines operator to rehabilitate and
restore the environment" affected by the oil leak,
and to open a special trust fund to answer for similar
incidents in the future. They also prayed for a TEPO
temporarily stopping the Lopez-owned First
Philippine Industrial Corp. (FPIC) from operating its
damaged pipeline.
The Supreme Court granted the writ the first time
it did so since the promulgation of the Rule on
Kalikasan- and directed FPIC to cease and desist
from operating the pipeline until further orders and
to check the structural integrity of the whole span of
the 117-km pipeline and give a report to the Court
within 60 days.
FPIC has been rehabilitating its pipelines. The TEPO
has been lifted. The SC has since remanded the
case to the Court of Appeals to determine if the

PENDING KALIKASAN
CASES
involving
mining

A petition filed by the Tribal Coalition of

Mindanao(TRICOM) and several tribal
communities for the immediate stop of alleged
illegal mining operations of 5 mining companies
in Surigao del Sur and Surigao del Norte.
A petition filed by a group of Subanens against
the the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Mines and Geosciences Bureau,
Protected Areas and Wildlife Management
Bureau and National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples to stop the issuance of mining permits
in the the Zamboanga Peninsula.