You are on page 1of 3

Practicality Speech

LIBRT open-pit mining is prohibited under Philippine laws.


University of Santo Tomas: Affirmative

Team stand:
Prospective prohibition
Non-renewal of licenses of existing open-pit mining operations
Rejection of future license applications for open-pit mining operations

Main legal anchor:


Environmental provisions of mining laws and the Constitution, particularly RA 7942 and DENR
Admin Orders.

Team Strategy:
Despite the lack of express prohibition of open-pit mining, the Constitution and various mining
and environmental laws describe prohibited means and effects of mining, and open-pit mining
squarely fits the description.

Team split:
Necessity: Constitutional prohibition, urgency to act on environmental matters
Beneficiality: Enviromental preservation and its benefits, community safety outweighing
business gains, protection of other industries that rely on natural resources
Practicability: Laws making procedure of the ban possible, sustainability, police power

Time budget for rebuttals <1 minute>

Greeting

Good evening. We remain firm on the affirmative side: existing laws prohibit open-pit mining.
As the last speaker for our side, I shall present to you its feasibility and practicality.

First point Feasibility: Constitution, RA 7942 and DENR Admin Orders empower
DENR and Mines and Geosciences Bureau

On the first point, it is feasible, for existing laws have granted government agencies power to
enforce the legislated prohibition of open-pit mines.
Article XII, Section 2 of no less than our 1987 Constitution mandates the State to exercise "full
control and supervision" over the exploration, development and utilization of natural resources.
This provision is echoed by the Philippine Mining Act or Republic Act 7942.

Concomitant to that power, Section 8 of RA 7942 provides the DENR's power of over-all
supervision and review for the conservation and proper use of the State's mineral resources.
Section 9 likewise tasks the Mines and Geosciences Bureau to monitor the compliance of the terms
and conditions of the mineral agreements. In fact, Section 67 provides the Bureau with the power
to issue orders in relation to violations.

Under Section 7 and Section 230 of DENR Administrative Order 1996-40, the Bureau has the
power to cancel or to recommend cancellation of mining rights and claims for noncompliance
with laws, rules and regulations. Section 27 provides the power of non-renewal of permits and
Section 28, the power of cancellation of permits. Section 179 provides for the imposition of
penalties for failure to abide by the terms and conditions of environmental compliance.

Therefore, the government is not helpless, but is empowered and mandated to effectively enforce
the existing environmental provisions of its mining laws.

Second point Practicability

On to my second point, is it practical to enforce such prohibition? A resounding yes from the
affirmative side.

Subpoint one under practicability Sustainability.

First, we emphasize the value of sustainability. The State must avoid the depletion of natural
resources in order to maintain an ecological balance in the long-term. Clearly, environmental laws
are geared towards sustainability such as RA 9729 or the Climate Change Act and RA 9003 or the
Ecological Solid Waste Management Act to name a few. In Republic v Marcopper Mining, the Court
even said that the Philippine Mining Law is intended to assure sustainability through judicious
use and systematic rehabilitation.

Your Honor, the environment is a fragile source of finite resources. Open-pit mining, as the
previous speakers have discussed, causes irreversible and irreparable damage to the
environment, incapable of rehabilitation, incapable of restoration.

Subpoint Two under Practicability Police Power.


Second, it is state responsibility to protect the environment against harmful activities pursuant to
its police power. In Acebedo Optical v CA, licenses and permits are not property, not a contract,
but a special privilege, a permission, which may be cancelled or revoked appropriately. In the
landmark case of Oposa v Factoran, for the protection of the environment, the Court granted the
revocation of all existing timber license agreements. We forward that, in the proper enforcement
of existing environmental provisions of mining laws, open-pit mining licenses be likewise
cancelled and prospectively prohibited.

Conclusion

The negative side forwards the protection of open-pit mining as a legitimate business activity,
turning a blind eye towards the glaring effects in contravention to substantive environmental
laws. They seek the victory of mining companies. We, on the side affirmative, beg to differ: we
seek the victory of the environment, we seek the victory of the Filipino people. Thank you.

You might also like