Professional Documents
Culture Documents
power of the LGU to protect public interests and the public right to a balanced and
healthier ecology. The rights and privileges invoked by the petitioners are not
absolute. The general welfare clause of the local government code mandates for the
liberal interpretation in giving the LGUs more power to accelerate economic
development and to upgrade the life of the people in the community. The LGUs are
endowed with the power to enact fishery laws in its municipal waters which
necessarily includes the enactment of ordinances in order to effectively carry out the
enforcement of fishery laws in their local community.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES V CITY OF DAVAO
FACTS: On August 11, 2000, The City of Davao filed an application for a Certificate
of Non- Coverage (CNC) for its proposed project, the Davao City Artica Sports
Dome, with the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB), Region XI.
ISSUES: (1) Is an LGU like Davao exempt from the coverage of PD 1586?
(2) Is the project entitled to a Certificate of Non-Coverage (CNC)?
APPLICABLE LAWS:
Section 15 of Republic Act 7160,[5] otherwise known as the Local Government
Code, defines a local government unit as a body politic and corporate endowed with
powers to be exercised by it in conformity with law.
Section 4 of PD 1586 clearly states that no person, partnership or corporation
shall undertake or operate any such declared environmentally critical project or area
without first securing an Environmental Compliance certificate issued by the
President or his duly authorized representative
RULING: (1) NO, IT IS WITHIN THE COVERAGE OF PD 1586. Found in Section
16 of the Local Government Code is the duty of the LGUs to promote the people's
right to a balanced ecology. Pursuant to this, an LGU, like the City of Davao, cannot
claim exemption from the coverage of PD 1586. As a body politic endowed with
governmental functions, an LGU has the duty to ensure the quality of the
environment, which is the very same objective of PD 1586.
TANO VS SOCRATES
Facts: The Sangguniang Panlungsod of Puerto Princessa enacted ordinance no.
15-92 banning the shipment of live fish and lobster outside Puerto Princessa City for
a period of 5 years. In the same light, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan
also enacted a resolution that prohibits the catching, gathering, buying, selling and
possessing and shipment of live marine coral dwelling aquatic organisms for a
period of 5 years within the Palawan waters. The petitioners Airline Shippers
Association of Palawan together with marine merchants were charged for violating
the above ordinance and resolution by the city and provincial governments. The
petitioners now allege that they have the preferential rights as marginal fishermen
granted with privileges provided in Section 149 of the Local Government Code,
invoking the invalidity of the above-stated enactments as violative of their
preferential rights.
Issue: Whether or not the enacted resolutions and ordinances by the local
government units violative of the preferential rights of the marginal fishermen?
Held No, the enacted resolution and ordinance of the LGU were not violative of their
preferential rights. The enactment of these laws was a valid exercise of the police
(2) YES. The Artica Sports Dome in Langub does not come close to any of the
projects or areas enumerated above. Neither is it analogous to any of them. It is
clear, therefore, that the said project is not classified as environmentally critical, or
within an environmentally critical area. Consequently, the DENR has no choice but
to issue the Certificate of Non- Coverage. It becomes its ministerial duty, the
performance of which can be compelled by writ of mandamus, such as that issued
by the trial court in the case at bar.