Renewable Energy Act of 2008, REPUBLIC ACT NO.

9513
(a) Accelerate the exploration and development of renewable energy resources such
as, but not limited to, biomass, solar, wind, hydro, geothermal and ocean energy
sources, including hybrid systems, to achieve energy self reliance, through the
adoption of sustainable energy development strategies to reduce the country's
dependence on fossil fuels and thereby minimize the country's exposure to price
fluctuations in the international markets, the effects of which spiral down to almost
all sectors of the economy
(b) Increase the utilization of renewable energy by institutionalizing the
development of national and local capabilities in the use of renewable energy
systems, and promoting its efficient and cost effective commercial application by
providing fiscal and non fiscal incentives
(c) Encourage the development and utilization of renewable energy resources as
tools to effectively prevent or reduce harmful emissions and thereby balance the
goals of economic growth and development with the protection of health and the
environment and
(d) Establish the necessary infrastructure and mechanism to carry out the
mandates specified in this Act and other existing laws.
Oposa v. Factoran, Jr
FACTS:
A taxpayers class suit was filed by minors Juan Antonio Oposa, et al., representing
their generation and generations yet unborn, and represented by their parents
against Fulgencio Factoran Jr., Secretary of DENR. They prayed that judgment be
rendered ordering the defendant, his agents, representatives and other persons
acting in his behalf to:
1. Cancel all existing Timber Licensing Agreements (TLA) in the country
2. Cease and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, renewing, or appraising
new TLAs;
and granting the plaintiffs such other reliefs just and equitable under the
premises. They alleged that they have a clear and constitutional right to a
balanced and healthful ecology and are entitled to protection by the State in its
capacity as parens patriae. Furthermore, they claim that the act of the defendant in
allowing TLA holders to cut and deforest the remaining forests constitutes a
misappropriation and/or impairment of the natural resources property he holds in
trust for the benefit of the plaintiff minors and succeeding generations.
The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the following grounds:
1.
Plaintiffs have no cause of action against him;
2.
The issues raised by the plaintiffs is a political question which properly
pertains to the legislative or executive branches of the government.
ISSUE:
Do the petitioner-minors have a cause of action in filing a class suit to prevent the
misappropriation or impairment of Philippine rainforests?

HELD:
Yes. Petitioner-minors assert that they represent their generation as well as
generations to come. The Supreme Court ruled that they can, for themselves, for
others of their generation, and for the succeeding generation, file a class suit. Their
personality to sue in behalf of succeeding generations is based on the concept of
intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful
ecology is concerned. Such a right considers the rhythm and harmony of nature
which indispensably include, inter alia, the judicious disposition, utilization,
management, renewal and conservation of the countrys forest, mineral, land,
waters, fisheries, wildlife, offshore areas and other natural resources to the end that
their exploration, development, and utilization be equitably accessible to the
present as well as the future generations.
Needless to say, every generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that
rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology. Put
a little differently, the minors assertion of their right to a sound environment
constitutes at the same time, the performance of their obligation to ensure the
protection of that right for the generations to come.

Environmental Impact Assessment