Veronica Louise D.

Mandi

JD III

February 9, 2017

Environmental Law: Chapter 3

Chapter 3 of Atty. Antonia Oposas book A Legal Arsenal for the

Philippine Environment talks about the Philippine laws on the subject of

air. It reiterated the framework for air pollution and regulation as stated

in Republic Act No. 8749 or the Philippine Clean Air Act as well as P.D.

No. 72 or Atmospheric Administration. In addition, several other laws

regulate the more common sources of air pollution, such the Republic

Act No. 9211 or the Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003.

The issue on air pollution has drawn international and domestic

concern as it relates to the health or welfare of individuals and the

environment as well. In 2015 it was reported that the air quality

situation in the National Capital Region in the first quarter of 2015 had

already worsened since the end of 2014, according to the latest data from

Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Environmental

Management Bureau (DENR-EMB). DENR-EMB assistant director Eva

Ocfemia said that the air pollutant concentration in the National Capital

Region reached 130 micrograms per normal cubic meter (g/Ncm) in

terms of total suspended particulates (TSP), up from 106 g/Ncm at

year's end in 2014. The maximum safe level of air pollutant

concentration is 90 g/Ncm.
 The Philippine Clean Air Act was passed by Congress in 1999 as a

consequence of its obligations under the United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change and other international agreements. It is

divided into seven chapters with fifty-six sections, beginning with general

provisions, air quality management system, fuels, additives, substances

and pollutants, institutional mechanism, actions, fines and penalties,

and final provisions. Its enactment was prompted by State recognition of

its obligation to protect the peoples rights to a balanced ecology, which

includes maintaining an adequate quality of air.

One of the provisions of the Act which struck me as well-crafted

and innovative is Section 10. It mandates that there should be a program

or mechanism set in place in areas where specific pollutants have already

exceeded ambient standards, which will prohibit new sources of exceeded

air pollutant without a corresponding reduction in existing resources. It

also provides relocation measures for purposes of protecting the health

and welfare of residents in the area. This provision stood out to me

because it is inclined towards mitigation of the pollution and prevention

of further harm. Laws always seem, at best, curative. Measures like this

have my appreciation because where the damage could be avoided, it

should be.

Another good provision is Section 13. It tasks the Deparment of

Environment and Natural Resources and the Department of

Transportation and Communications to impose and collect regular

emission fees from dischargers, it also provides tax incentives to

industries when they install pollution control devices or retrofit their

existing facilities with mechanisms that reduce pollution. I admire how

the law sought to encourage compliance by incentivizing industries for

resort to operations with due regard for the environment and decreasing

their pollution emissions. It is a manifestation of the policy of the Act to

balance development and environmental protection.

On to the more questionable parts of the Clean Air Act, we have

Section 11 which tasks the Department of Environmental and Natural

Resources to issue revise info on air pollution control techniques,

including best available technology and alternative methods of

prevention, management and control of air pollution. While I agree that

the Department possesses the most expertise and experience on the

matter, we must admit that it sometimes falls short of its obligations.

Whether we attribute this to external influence, or to the fact that our

economy is not yet developed enough to sustain the best available

technology as regards air pollution control, our law should impose

reasonable guidelines that can and will be complied with, otherwise, it is

doomed to be words sitting on a paper.

Another problem area of the law is Section 20. Notably, and Oposa

likewise acknowledges, that while this section prohibits incineration, it

does not extend such prohibition to traditional small-scale method of

community or neighborhood sanitation, siga. This one is rather close to

my heart, because my current neighbors are fond of burning their trash

and leaves and the smoke travels directly to my bedroom. As an

asthmatic person, this triggers several alarms for me. Accordingly, this

has been cured by the passage of the Solid Waste Management Law

which bans the open burning of waste.

Also another downfall of the law is that while it requires motor

vehicles to pass emission testing before motor vehicle registration can be

issued, it leaves the testing to be conducted to private proprietors. Also it

has already been found that due to lack in the monitoring of these

emission centers, technicians in testing center can manipulate the

results of the test with ease by making certain adjustments on the

engine. We see vehicles everywhere basically exhaling immense amounts

black smoke and wonder how they are able to even go a mile without

being impounded. It has been alleged that the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources makes the situation even graver

when it issued Department Administrative Order No. 51 dated October

2003. The effect of the order was the lowering of the allowable carbon

monoxide emission from the Euro1 standard of 0.35 percent to 0.5

percent. The department also managed to relax emission standards

indefinitely, which is clearly a step in the wrong direction for the air

pollution program in the Philippines.

Finally, another daunting revelation for me is that the Clean Air Act

actually mandates a nationwide ban on smoking. It is surprising to me

that since 1999 this has already been in place and yet smoking has been
a sight we see in every other corner. While most Local Government Units

have ordinances for this purpose, and compliance is compelled although

lightly, there should no longer be a need for this when the law itself

imposes the restriction or the ban. Again this proceeds from a problem of

implementation.

Another regulation pertaining to Air which was also discussed in

the material is the Atmospheric Administration, or Presidential Decree

No. 52. This Presidential Decree adopted the establishment of the

Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical Astronomical Services

Administration or the PAGASA. While originally passed by Congress, the

President Ferdinand Marcos attached even more responsibilities on the

agency. It is aimed at providing environmental protection and utilizing

scientific knowledge as an effective instrument to ensure the safety, well-

being, and economic security of all the people, and for the promotion of

national progress. One of the major successes of the Agency is when it,

together with the Department of Science and Technology and others,

launched Project NOAH "in response to President Aquinos instructions to

put in place a responsive program for disaster prevention and mitigation,

specifically, for the Philippines warning agencies to be able to provide a 6

hour lead-time warning to vulnerable communities against impending

floods and to use advanced technology to enhance current geo-hazard

vulnerability maps. I truly believe that this is a worthy investment in all

respects. Disasters have been afflicting our country in the recent years

and our manner of response has always been restricted or delayed. With
this program in place, we can avoid all the unnecessary damage that

disasters bring. It was reported, however, that the project was shut down

for lack of funding, but I truly believe this is a worthy pursuit and that

our present executive should resume it.

Our laws have been quite generous with prohibiting acts which

contribute to air pollution but it appears that implementation presents

the greatest hurdle.

Veronica Louise D. Mandi

JD III

February 9, 2017

Environmental Law: Chapter 4

 The fourth chapter of Atty. Oposas book A Legal Arsenal for the

Philippine Environment talks about the Philippine laws on the subject of

water. Recent events have made us well aware that water is not an

infinite resource, it is up to States to regulate and ensure its equitable

use and access so as not to deprive the generations to come.

Water pollution has been documented as a contributor to a wide

range of health problems and disorders in humans. It has also been

shown to have drastically negative impacts on wild animals and the

environment as a whole. The United Nations Committee on Economic,

Social and Cultural Rights first recognized the individual right to water in

General Comment No. 15. Governments have the obligation to ensure

that each individual has equal and safe access to clean water for

personal and domestic uses. It is established that water is indispensable

to the exercise other fundamental human rights such as the right to an

adequate standard of living, right to health, and that it should be

protected as such by every stake holder.

Atty. Oposas discussion begins with the easement zones pertaining

to seashores and riverbanks. The Water Code prohibits any construction

along the margins of the rivers, waterways and seashores. The zone

created by the prohibition is designated as the easement zone of

recreation, salvage, and navigation. Its size depends on the land use. For

instance, for forested and protected areas, the size of easement zone is

forty meters. Any violation of this easement zone is punished by

imprisonment or a fine. Private individuals owning lands which are must

respect the easement zones established and cannot acquire ownership of

the zone because the latter is technically classified as public land.

The problem with this arrangement is that individuals and

corporations have an inclination to disregard this prohibition. They

install structures to privatize a portion of the seashore and prevent the

public from making use of the same. Oposa recognized this and

attributed its propagation to political will of the primary enforcers of the

law, the local government units, who, despite the presence of a mandate,

refuse to discharge it.

Presidential Decree No. 1067 which established the easement zone

provides the power to establish easement zones Department of Public

Works and Highways. However, in practical application this power is now

with the local governments municipal engineer or building official.

This practice is essentially flawed because of the delegation to Local

Government Units. While it is a worthy consideration that they are

equipped with the expertise to decide on these matters, bearing the most

proximity to the land, we must acknowledge that Local Government Units

are not free of inherent defects. First, Local Government Units are often

plagued with partisan or political influence. Second, LGUs have already

too much responsibilities on their shoulders especially in the

administration of their government. Third, there is a likelihood that the

concern would shift from being centered on the environment to other

concerns. Lastly, because of the nature of Local Government Units,

continuity of operations and the achievement of goals might be

suppressed by changing leaders. The Department of Public Works and

Highways is the most capable to implement the law. The role the Local

Government Unit can play is to collaborate with the agency. This

presents a solution to the problem of lack of awareness as regards local

issues and concerns.

Another discussion of interest in the fourth chapter is the Republic

Act No. 9275 or the Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004. As early as 1996,

monitoring of the countrys rivers showed that only 51% of the classified

rivers still met the standards for their most beneficial use. The rest were

already polluted from domestic, industrial and agricultural sources. Most

studies point to the fact that domestic wastewater is the principal cause

of organic pollution (at 48%) of our water bodies. Yet, only 3% of

investments in water supply and sanitation were going to sanitation and

sewage treatment. A recent World Bank report pointed out that Metro

Manila was second to the lowest in sewer connections among major cities

in Asia. Thirty-one percent (31%) of all illnesses in the country are

attributed to polluted waters. Clearly, to ensure access to clean water for

all Filipinos, it was imperative that government put together a

comprehensive strategy to protect water quality.1

The main aim of the Clean Water Act is to protect the countrys

water bodies from pollution from land-based sources. It provides for a

comprehensive and integrated strategy to prevent and minimize pollution

1 http://www.philexport.ph/barterfli-philexport-file-
portlet/download/environment/About_Clean_Water_Act.pdf
through a multi-sectoral and participatory approach involving all the

stakeholders.2

I particularly appreciated the provisions on the decentralization

and incentives. The fact that the Department of Environment and

Natural Resources is burdened with too many functions at present

presents it misgivings. The Act, by making the protection of water

resources an obligation shared by the Department with the Department

of Health, the Philippine Coastguard, the Department of Agriculture, the

Department of Education, the Department of Public Works and

Highways, provided a more efficient means of implementing the act. The

coordination with these bodies is indispensable to its successful and

overall implementation.

Another admirable provision provides that anyone discharging

wastewater into a water body will have to pay a wastewater charge and

allowing effluent trading per management area. Also, it rewards those

whose wastewater discharge is better than the water quality criteria of

the receiving body of water. Fiscal and non-fiscal incentives will also be

given to LGUs, water districts, enterprise, private entities and individuals

who develop and undertake outstanding and innovative projects in water

quality management. Here, we see that the Act incentivizes compliance

as much as it penalizes non-compliance.

Another law discussed in this chapter is the Philippine Water Code.

The issue on conflicts of use and water allocations remains the major
2 R.A. No. 9725
cause of the problems faced by the water sector. Allocation issues and

conflicting rights over limited water supply arise from the escalating

population, the ever aggravating water pollution, and the want of

infrastructure and facilities. The first in time, priority in right principle

stated in the Water Code may no longer be an equitable approach in

resolving such conflicts. National policy also dictates that domestic water

supply gets priority over all others within the limits of its water rights in

times of drought or emergency.3 Conflicts arise, as in the case of the

Angat Reservoir, when the MWSS withdraws water from the reservoir

over and above its existing water rights, and in the process expropriating

a portion of the National Irrigators Associations (NIA) water rights. 4 In a

news report, former DENR Secretary Angelo Reyes mentions that there is

now a need to review this policy in the light of sectoral conflicts in the

use of water resources.5

Another faulty provision of the Water Code is that it grants juridical

persons an equal rights as natural persons to secure water appropriation

permits. This creates undue competition between corporations and

individuals for the control and use of available freshwater resources

especially since the former tend to consume more than individuals and

have the financial capacity to purchase the permits. For instance,

3 National Water Resources Board, 1976, as cited in Jose, A. and Cruz,

N., 1999

4 Jose, A. and Cruz, N., 1999

5 Gaylican, 2007
Benguet Corporation, a U.S. mining firm which is now venturing into the

water business, holds 65 water appropriation permits issued by the

NWRB. The permits cover major creeks, springs, and rivers in the

municipality of Itogon in Benguet province that communities use for their

domestic and agricultural needs. In San Pablo City, Laguna, farmers and

residents complain of declining water availability and blame the

operation of a mineral water plant by Nestle Philippines, Inc. 6

All our laws on water have reasonable and admirable pursuits. However,

they must adapt to the changing times and the changing demands in

order to meet the needs of the people without sacrificing the availability

of a resource for the generations to come.

Other sources: http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/state_of_water.pdf

6 Padilla, A., 2007