SC pursues its decision on Manila Bay cleanup
Published Jan 23, 2020 12:00 am
By Rey Panaligan
The Supreme Court (SC) has reconstituted its Manila Bay Advisory Committee (MBAC) which is tasked to monitor the implementation of its 2008 decision that directed practically all government agencies, including those in law enforcement, to speed up the cleanup, restoration, and preservation of Manila Bay.
Supreme Court of the Philippines (MANILA BULLETIN)
Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta, who is the chairperson of the MBAC, said the new members are SC Associate Justice Edgardo L. Delos Santos, Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez, and SC Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda as vice chairperson and working chairperson.
Peralta announced the new members of the MBAC during the 2nd Manila Bay Task Force Principal’s Meeting and Conference at the Diamond Hotel in Manila.
The Chief Justice said the “MBAC’s main function is to maintain the mandate of the continuing mandamus and to enable the Court to verify the reports of the government agencies tasked to clean up the Manila Bay.”
“The idea is not just to comply with this tall order, but to ensure that we are on track by way of periodic updates on our progress. Concededly, this could take years, but this duty is ours in the present, and we will not relent,” he stressed.
More than 10 years ago, the SC ordered several agencies of the government to undertake a speedy cleanup, restoration, and preservation of Manila Bay.
To assure compliance with its ruling, the SC even issued a continuing mandamus – an order that compels the agencies of the government to perform acts which the laws specifically require them to do or to comply as duties emanating from the nature and mandate of their offices.
Directed to undertake immediate action on the Manila Bay problem are the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Health (DoH), Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Department of Budget and Management ((DBM), the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), the Philippine National Police Maritime Group, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), and the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA).
These government agencies were directed by the SC to submit quarterly progressive report of the activities undertaken in accordance with the decision.
Earlier, the SC had created a committee, then chaired by the now retired Associate Justice Presbitero J. Velasco Jr. – who wrote the landmark decision -- with Court Administrator Marquez as vice chair, to monitor the implementation of the ruling.
Legal circles said that is only now that the government, under President Duterte, started decisive efforts to comply with the SC’s landmark decision.
President Duterte has approved a seven-year plan to cleanup Manila Bay. The efforts would cost the government about P47 billion.
“In the light of the ongoing environmental degradation, the court wishes to emphasize the extreme necessity for all concerned executive departments and agencies to immediately act and discharge their respective official duties and obligations,” the SC said in its 2008 decision as it pointed out that “time is of the essence.”
“Hence, there is a need to set timetables for the performance and completion of the tasks, some of them as defined for them by law and the nature of their respective offices and mandates,” it stressed.
The Manila Bay degradation issue started on Jan. 29, 1999 when Concerned Residents of Manila Bay filed a complaint before the regional trial court (RTC) in Imus, Cavite against several government agencies for the cleanup, rehabilitation, and protection of the Manila Bay.
The residents told the trial court that “the water quality of the Manila Bay had fallen way below the allowable standards set by law, specifically Presidential Decree No. 1152 or the Philippine Environment Code.”
Section 17 of PD 1152 states that “where the quality of water has deteriorated to a degree where its state will adversely affect its best usage, the government agencies concerned shall take such measures as may be necessary to upgrade the quality of such water to meet the prescribed water quality standards.”
On the other hand, Section 20 of the decree, states that “… it shall be the responsibility of the polluter to contain, remove and clean up water pollution incidents at his own expense. In case of his failure to do so, the government agencies concerned shall undertake containment, removal and clean up operations and expenses incurred in said operations shall be charged against the persons and/or entities responsible for the pollution.”
On Sept. 13, 2002, the trial court ruled in favor of the residents and directed several government agencies “to clean up and rehabilitate Manila Bay and restore its waters… to make it fit for swimming, skin-diving and other forms of contact recreation.”
The agencies, with DENR as the lead, were directed within six months from the date of the decision “to act and perform their respective duties by devising a consolidated, coordinated and concerted scheme of action for the rehabilitation and restoration of the bay.”
In 2005, the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the trial court’s decision. The CA ruled: “The decision rendered by the trial court does not require defendants-appellants to do task outside their usual functions. They are merely directed to come up with consolidated and coordinated efforts, each performing its basic functions, in rehabilitating and cleaning-up the waters of Manila Bay.”
Led by the MMDA, the agencies appealed the CA decision before the SC.
Earlier in 1993, the SC -- in a decision written by retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. – had granted the class suit filed by 44 children, through their parents, to stop the deforestation in the country for their generation as well as those generations yet unborn.
The children wanted the DENR to cancel all timber licenses agreement and to desist from issuing new ones as they invoked their right to a balanced and healthful ecology.
In granting the right of the children to sue, the SC ruled that “children had the legal standing to file the case based on the concept of ‘intergenerational responsibility,’ as their right to a healthy environment carried with it an obligation to preserve that environment for the succeeding generations.”
The SC’s ruling on the case of the children became a global landmark decision that has been invoked in several countries.
In the Manila Bay case, the SC ordered full coordination among several government agencies to restore the bay as “a place with a proud historic past, once brimming with marine life and, for so many decades in the in the past, a spot for different contact recreation activities.”
“The importance of the Manila Bay as a sea resource, playground, and as a historical landmark cannot be over-emphasized. It is not yet too late in the day to restore the Manila Bay to its former splendor and bring back the plants and sea life that once thrived in its blue waters,” the SC said.
But it said “the tasks ahead, daunting as they may be, could only be accomplished if those mandated, with the help and cooperation of all civic-minded individuals, would put their minds to these tasks and take responsibility. This means that the State, through petitioners, has to take the lead in the preservation and protection of the Manila Bay.”
The decision spelled out the participation and coordination of these various government agencies, namely:
1. The DENR to fully implement its “Operational Plan for the Manila Bay Coastal Strategy” for the rehabilitation, restoration, and conservation of the Manila Bay at the earliest possible time and to call regular coordination meetings with concerned government departments and agencies to ensure the successful implementation of the aforesaid plan of action in accordance with its indicated completion schedules.
2. The DILG to direct all local government units (LGUs) in Metro Manila, Rizal, Laguna, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan to inspect all factories, commercial establishments, and private homes along the banks of the major river systems in their respective areas of jurisdiction, such as but not limited to the Pasig-Marikina-San Juan Rivers, Tullahan-Tenejeros Rivers, the Meycauayan-Marilao-Obando (Bulacan) Rivers, the Talisay (Bataan) River, the Imus (Cavite) River, the Laguna De Bay, and other minor rivers and waterways that eventually discharge water into the Manila Bay; and the lands abutting the bay, to determine whether they have wastewater treatment facilities or hygienic septic tanks as prescribed by existing laws, ordinances, and rules and regulations. If none be found, these LGUs shall be ordered to require non-complying establishments and homes to set up said facilities or septic tanks within a reasonable time to prevent industrial wastes, sewage water, and human wastes from flowing into these rivers, waterways, esteros, and the Manila Bay, under pain of closure or imposition of fines and other sanctions.
3. The MWSS to provide, install, operate, and maintain the necessary adequate waste water treatment facilities in Metro Manila, Rizal, and Cavite where needed at the earliest possible time.
4. The Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), through the local water districts and in coordination with the DENR, is ordered to provide, install, operate, and maintain sewerage and sanitation facilities and the efficient and safe collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage in the provinces of Laguna, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan were needed at the earliest possible time.
5. The DA, through the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resource (BFAR), improve and restore the marine life of the Manila Bay and to assist the LGUs in Metro Manila, Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan in developing, using recognized methods, the fisheries and aquatic resources in the Manila Bay.
6. The PCG and the PNP Maritime Group to coordinate in apprehending violators of PD 979, RA 8550, and other existing laws and regulations designed to prevent marine pollution in the Manila Bay .
7. The PPA to immediately adopt such measures to prevent the discharge and dumping of solid and liquid wastes and other ship-generated wastes into the Manila Bay waters from vessels docked at ports and apprehend the violators.
8. The MMDA, as the lead agency and implementor of programs and projects for flood control projects and drainage services in Metro Manila, to dismantle and remove all structures, constructions, and other encroachments established or built in violation of RA 7279, and other applicable laws along the Pasig-Marikina-San Juan Rivers, the NCR (Parañaque-Zapote, Las Piñas) Rivers, the Navotas-Malabon-Tullahan-Tenejeros Rivers, and connecting waterways and esteros in Metro Manila. Also to establish, operate, and maintain a sanitary landfill within a period of one year from finality of this Decision. It is also ordered to cause the apprehension and filing of the appropriate criminal cases against violators of the respective penal provisions of Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (RA 9003), sec. 27 of RA 9275 (the Clean Water Act), and other existing laws on pollution.
9. The DPWH, as the principal implementor of programs and projects for flood control services in the rest of the country more particularly in Bulacan, Bataan, Pampanga, Cavite, and Laguna, to remove and demolish all structures, constructions, and other encroachments built in breach of RA 7279 and other applicable laws along the Meycauayan-Marilao-Obando (Bulacan) Rivers, the Talisay (Bataan) River, the Imus (Cavite) River, the Laguna De Bay, and other rivers, connecting waterways, and esteros that discharge wastewater into the Manila Bay;
10. The DoH, within one year from finality of this Decision, to determine if all licensed septic and sludge companies have the proper facilities for the treatment and disposal of fecal sludge and sewage coming from septic tanks. The DoH was further directed to give the companies, if found to be non-complying, a reasonable time within which to set up the necessary facilities under pain of cancellation of its environmental sanitation clearance.
11. The DepED to integrate lessons on pollution prevention, waste management, environmental protection, and like subjects in the school curricula of all levels to inculcate in the minds and hearts of students and, through them, their parents and friends, the importance of their duty toward achieving and maintaining a balanced and healthful ecosystem in the Manila Bay and the entire Philippine archipelago.
12. The DBM to consider incorporating an adequate budget in the General Appropriations Act of 2010 and succeeding years to cover the expenses relating to the cleanup, restoration, and preservation of the water quality of the Manila Bay, in line with the country’s development objective to attain economic growth in a manner consistent with the protection, preservation, and revival of our marine waters.
13. And the heads of petitioners-agencies MMDA, DENR, DepEd, DoH, DA, DPWH, DBM, PCG, PNP Maritime Group, DILG, and also of MWSS, LWUA, and PPA, in line with the principle of “continuing mandamus”, from finality of this Decision, to each submit to the Court a quarterly progressive report of the activities undertaken in accordance with this Decision.
The SC said: “It thus behooves the Court to put the heads of the petitioner-department-agencies and the bureaus and offices under them on continuing notice about, and to enjoin them to perform, their mandates and duties towards cleaning up the Manila Bay and preserving the quality of its water to the ideal level. Under what other judicial discipline describes as ‘continuing mandamus: the Court, may, under extraordinary circumstances, issue directives with the end in view of ensuring that its decision would not be set to naught by administrative inaction or indifference. In India , the doctrine of continuing mandamus was used to enforce directives of the court to clean up the length of the Ganges River from industrial and municipal pollution.”
Supreme Court of the Philippines (MANILA BULLETIN)
Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta, who is the chairperson of the MBAC, said the new members are SC Associate Justice Edgardo L. Delos Santos, Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez, and SC Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda as vice chairperson and working chairperson.
Peralta announced the new members of the MBAC during the 2nd Manila Bay Task Force Principal’s Meeting and Conference at the Diamond Hotel in Manila.
The Chief Justice said the “MBAC’s main function is to maintain the mandate of the continuing mandamus and to enable the Court to verify the reports of the government agencies tasked to clean up the Manila Bay.”
“The idea is not just to comply with this tall order, but to ensure that we are on track by way of periodic updates on our progress. Concededly, this could take years, but this duty is ours in the present, and we will not relent,” he stressed.
More than 10 years ago, the SC ordered several agencies of the government to undertake a speedy cleanup, restoration, and preservation of Manila Bay.
To assure compliance with its ruling, the SC even issued a continuing mandamus – an order that compels the agencies of the government to perform acts which the laws specifically require them to do or to comply as duties emanating from the nature and mandate of their offices.
Directed to undertake immediate action on the Manila Bay problem are the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Health (DoH), Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Department of Budget and Management ((DBM), the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), the Philippine National Police Maritime Group, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), and the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA).
These government agencies were directed by the SC to submit quarterly progressive report of the activities undertaken in accordance with the decision.
Earlier, the SC had created a committee, then chaired by the now retired Associate Justice Presbitero J. Velasco Jr. – who wrote the landmark decision -- with Court Administrator Marquez as vice chair, to monitor the implementation of the ruling.
Legal circles said that is only now that the government, under President Duterte, started decisive efforts to comply with the SC’s landmark decision.
President Duterte has approved a seven-year plan to cleanup Manila Bay. The efforts would cost the government about P47 billion.
“In the light of the ongoing environmental degradation, the court wishes to emphasize the extreme necessity for all concerned executive departments and agencies to immediately act and discharge their respective official duties and obligations,” the SC said in its 2008 decision as it pointed out that “time is of the essence.”
“Hence, there is a need to set timetables for the performance and completion of the tasks, some of them as defined for them by law and the nature of their respective offices and mandates,” it stressed.
The Manila Bay degradation issue started on Jan. 29, 1999 when Concerned Residents of Manila Bay filed a complaint before the regional trial court (RTC) in Imus, Cavite against several government agencies for the cleanup, rehabilitation, and protection of the Manila Bay.
The residents told the trial court that “the water quality of the Manila Bay had fallen way below the allowable standards set by law, specifically Presidential Decree No. 1152 or the Philippine Environment Code.”
Section 17 of PD 1152 states that “where the quality of water has deteriorated to a degree where its state will adversely affect its best usage, the government agencies concerned shall take such measures as may be necessary to upgrade the quality of such water to meet the prescribed water quality standards.”
On the other hand, Section 20 of the decree, states that “… it shall be the responsibility of the polluter to contain, remove and clean up water pollution incidents at his own expense. In case of his failure to do so, the government agencies concerned shall undertake containment, removal and clean up operations and expenses incurred in said operations shall be charged against the persons and/or entities responsible for the pollution.”
On Sept. 13, 2002, the trial court ruled in favor of the residents and directed several government agencies “to clean up and rehabilitate Manila Bay and restore its waters… to make it fit for swimming, skin-diving and other forms of contact recreation.”
The agencies, with DENR as the lead, were directed within six months from the date of the decision “to act and perform their respective duties by devising a consolidated, coordinated and concerted scheme of action for the rehabilitation and restoration of the bay.”
In 2005, the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the trial court’s decision. The CA ruled: “The decision rendered by the trial court does not require defendants-appellants to do task outside their usual functions. They are merely directed to come up with consolidated and coordinated efforts, each performing its basic functions, in rehabilitating and cleaning-up the waters of Manila Bay.”
Led by the MMDA, the agencies appealed the CA decision before the SC.
Earlier in 1993, the SC -- in a decision written by retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. – had granted the class suit filed by 44 children, through their parents, to stop the deforestation in the country for their generation as well as those generations yet unborn.
The children wanted the DENR to cancel all timber licenses agreement and to desist from issuing new ones as they invoked their right to a balanced and healthful ecology.
In granting the right of the children to sue, the SC ruled that “children had the legal standing to file the case based on the concept of ‘intergenerational responsibility,’ as their right to a healthy environment carried with it an obligation to preserve that environment for the succeeding generations.”
The SC’s ruling on the case of the children became a global landmark decision that has been invoked in several countries.
In the Manila Bay case, the SC ordered full coordination among several government agencies to restore the bay as “a place with a proud historic past, once brimming with marine life and, for so many decades in the in the past, a spot for different contact recreation activities.”
“The importance of the Manila Bay as a sea resource, playground, and as a historical landmark cannot be over-emphasized. It is not yet too late in the day to restore the Manila Bay to its former splendor and bring back the plants and sea life that once thrived in its blue waters,” the SC said.
But it said “the tasks ahead, daunting as they may be, could only be accomplished if those mandated, with the help and cooperation of all civic-minded individuals, would put their minds to these tasks and take responsibility. This means that the State, through petitioners, has to take the lead in the preservation and protection of the Manila Bay.”
The decision spelled out the participation and coordination of these various government agencies, namely:
1. The DENR to fully implement its “Operational Plan for the Manila Bay Coastal Strategy” for the rehabilitation, restoration, and conservation of the Manila Bay at the earliest possible time and to call regular coordination meetings with concerned government departments and agencies to ensure the successful implementation of the aforesaid plan of action in accordance with its indicated completion schedules.
2. The DILG to direct all local government units (LGUs) in Metro Manila, Rizal, Laguna, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan to inspect all factories, commercial establishments, and private homes along the banks of the major river systems in their respective areas of jurisdiction, such as but not limited to the Pasig-Marikina-San Juan Rivers, Tullahan-Tenejeros Rivers, the Meycauayan-Marilao-Obando (Bulacan) Rivers, the Talisay (Bataan) River, the Imus (Cavite) River, the Laguna De Bay, and other minor rivers and waterways that eventually discharge water into the Manila Bay; and the lands abutting the bay, to determine whether they have wastewater treatment facilities or hygienic septic tanks as prescribed by existing laws, ordinances, and rules and regulations. If none be found, these LGUs shall be ordered to require non-complying establishments and homes to set up said facilities or septic tanks within a reasonable time to prevent industrial wastes, sewage water, and human wastes from flowing into these rivers, waterways, esteros, and the Manila Bay, under pain of closure or imposition of fines and other sanctions.
3. The MWSS to provide, install, operate, and maintain the necessary adequate waste water treatment facilities in Metro Manila, Rizal, and Cavite where needed at the earliest possible time.
4. The Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), through the local water districts and in coordination with the DENR, is ordered to provide, install, operate, and maintain sewerage and sanitation facilities and the efficient and safe collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage in the provinces of Laguna, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan were needed at the earliest possible time.
5. The DA, through the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resource (BFAR), improve and restore the marine life of the Manila Bay and to assist the LGUs in Metro Manila, Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan in developing, using recognized methods, the fisheries and aquatic resources in the Manila Bay.
6. The PCG and the PNP Maritime Group to coordinate in apprehending violators of PD 979, RA 8550, and other existing laws and regulations designed to prevent marine pollution in the Manila Bay .
7. The PPA to immediately adopt such measures to prevent the discharge and dumping of solid and liquid wastes and other ship-generated wastes into the Manila Bay waters from vessels docked at ports and apprehend the violators.
8. The MMDA, as the lead agency and implementor of programs and projects for flood control projects and drainage services in Metro Manila, to dismantle and remove all structures, constructions, and other encroachments established or built in violation of RA 7279, and other applicable laws along the Pasig-Marikina-San Juan Rivers, the NCR (Parañaque-Zapote, Las Piñas) Rivers, the Navotas-Malabon-Tullahan-Tenejeros Rivers, and connecting waterways and esteros in Metro Manila. Also to establish, operate, and maintain a sanitary landfill within a period of one year from finality of this Decision. It is also ordered to cause the apprehension and filing of the appropriate criminal cases against violators of the respective penal provisions of Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (RA 9003), sec. 27 of RA 9275 (the Clean Water Act), and other existing laws on pollution.
9. The DPWH, as the principal implementor of programs and projects for flood control services in the rest of the country more particularly in Bulacan, Bataan, Pampanga, Cavite, and Laguna, to remove and demolish all structures, constructions, and other encroachments built in breach of RA 7279 and other applicable laws along the Meycauayan-Marilao-Obando (Bulacan) Rivers, the Talisay (Bataan) River, the Imus (Cavite) River, the Laguna De Bay, and other rivers, connecting waterways, and esteros that discharge wastewater into the Manila Bay;
10. The DoH, within one year from finality of this Decision, to determine if all licensed septic and sludge companies have the proper facilities for the treatment and disposal of fecal sludge and sewage coming from septic tanks. The DoH was further directed to give the companies, if found to be non-complying, a reasonable time within which to set up the necessary facilities under pain of cancellation of its environmental sanitation clearance.
11. The DepED to integrate lessons on pollution prevention, waste management, environmental protection, and like subjects in the school curricula of all levels to inculcate in the minds and hearts of students and, through them, their parents and friends, the importance of their duty toward achieving and maintaining a balanced and healthful ecosystem in the Manila Bay and the entire Philippine archipelago.
12. The DBM to consider incorporating an adequate budget in the General Appropriations Act of 2010 and succeeding years to cover the expenses relating to the cleanup, restoration, and preservation of the water quality of the Manila Bay, in line with the country’s development objective to attain economic growth in a manner consistent with the protection, preservation, and revival of our marine waters.
13. And the heads of petitioners-agencies MMDA, DENR, DepEd, DoH, DA, DPWH, DBM, PCG, PNP Maritime Group, DILG, and also of MWSS, LWUA, and PPA, in line with the principle of “continuing mandamus”, from finality of this Decision, to each submit to the Court a quarterly progressive report of the activities undertaken in accordance with this Decision.
The SC said: “It thus behooves the Court to put the heads of the petitioner-department-agencies and the bureaus and offices under them on continuing notice about, and to enjoin them to perform, their mandates and duties towards cleaning up the Manila Bay and preserving the quality of its water to the ideal level. Under what other judicial discipline describes as ‘continuing mandamus: the Court, may, under extraordinary circumstances, issue directives with the end in view of ensuring that its decision would not be set to naught by administrative inaction or indifference. In India , the doctrine of continuing mandamus was used to enforce directives of the court to clean up the length of the Ganges River from industrial and municipal pollution.”