1 / 13

Citizen’s Suits and Environmental Protection in the Philippines

Citizen’s Suits and Environmental Protection in the Philippines. Prof. Marvic M.V.F. Leonen A.B. (Econ), J.D., Ll.M. Associate Professor of Law University of the Philippines. Citizen’s Suits. The Problem. Citizen’s suits are not brought Citizen’s suits do not move forward. Reasons.

shani
Download Presentation

Citizen’s Suits and Environmental Protection in the Philippines

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Citizen’s Suits and Environmental Protection in the Philippines Prof. Marvic M.V.F. Leonen A.B. (Econ), J.D., Ll.M. Associate Professor of Law University of the Philippines

  2. Citizen’s Suits

  3. The Problem • Citizen’s suits are not brought • Citizen’s suits do not move forward

  4. Reasons • “Externalities” • Costs in relation to the possibility of gaining the benefits provided by law • Strategic Lawsuits against public participation

  5. “Externalities • Costs and gains suffered or enjoyed by third parties to a transaction (lawsuit) • Healthy Environment (positive externality): example car batteries and lead poisoning • Consumer reaction (sometimes negative externaltiy): example effluents in manila bay

  6. Weighing Costs and Possiblity of Benefit • S = f(p, D) - c ; never f(p,D) < c • Where • S: success in litigation • P: probability of going on to the next stage of the process (as a result of the stature of client, reputation of lawyer, vulnerabilities of the judge, accountability of the system) • C: financial resources expended • D: amount of damages or penalties provided

  7. Some Illustrative Cases • La Bugal Case • Oposa v Factoran • Coerced passive smoking case, Fortune Tobacco et al v InterAgency Committee and FCAP

  8. Challenges: Citizen’s Suits from SWMA • Provision: “SECTION 52. Citizen Suits. — For purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Act or its implementing rules and regulations, any citizen may file an appropriate civil, criminal or administrative action in the proper courts/bodies against: • “(a) Any person who violates or fails to comply with the provisions of this Act or its implementing rules and regulations; or • “(b) The Department or other implementing agencies with respect to orders, rules and regulations issued inconsistent with this Act; and/or • “(c) Any public officer who willfully or grossly neglects the performance of an act specifically enjoined as a duty by this Act Sor its implementing rules and regulations; or abuses his authority in the performance of his duty; or, in any manner, improperly performs his duties under this Act or its implementing rules and regulations: Provided, however, That no suit can be filed until after thirty-day (30) notice has been given to the public officer and the alleged violator concerned and no appropriate action has been taken thereon.”

  9. Challenges: Citizen’s Suits, Section 52 • “The Court shall exempt such action from the payment of filing fees and shall, likewise, upon prima facie showing of the non-enforcement or violation complained of, exempt the plaintiff from the filing of an injunction bond for the issuance of a preliminary injunction.” • “In the event that the citizen should prevail, the Court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, moral damages and litigation costs as appropriate.”

  10. SLAPPs • Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation • Counter suits • Counter charges

  11. Challenges: SLAPPs • Section 43, Rep. Act No. 8749 Clean Air Act • Section 53, Rep. Act No. 9003 (2001) Solid Waste Management Act • Rule 34, Summary Judgments

  12. Challenges:SLAPPs • Provision: “SECTION 53. Suits and Strategic Legal Action Against Public Participation (SLAPP) and the Enforcement of this Act. — Where a suit is brought against a person who filed an action as provided in Sec. 52 of this Act, or against any person, institution or government agency that implements this Act, it shall be the duty of the investigating prosecutor or the Court, as the case may be, to immediately make a determination not exceeding thirty (30) days whether said legal action has been filed to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle such legal recourses of the person complaining of or enforcing the provisions of this Act. Upon determination thereof, evidence warranting the same, the Court shall dismiss the case and award attorney's fees and double damages.” • “This provision shall also apply and benefit public officers who are sued for acts committed in their official capacity, there being no grave abuse of authority, and done in the course of enforcing this Act.”

  13. Thank You

More Related