Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ISSUE:
Whether or not the DENR Secretary validly refused the application for the IFMA.
HELD:
YES.
Sec. 2, Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution provides that the State shall have full control and
supervision regarding exploration development and utilization of its natural resources. It also
provides that the State may enter into joint exploration activities with qualified Filipino citizens
or corporations. However, such joint activities are limited to a 25-year contract, and renewable
for not more than another 25 years.
PICOP postulates that the presidential warranty is a vested right, given to them by
President Marcos before the 1987 Constitution was ratified; thus, the State is contract-bound to
accord them the necessary permits. They likewise argued that the new application was an IFMA,
not a TFA.
The Court struck down such arguments because first, any laws or government acts
contrary to, or inconsistent with the 1987 Constitution was declared by the latter expressly to be
inoperative. Second, the IFMA nevertheless secured the same purpose as that of the TFA, which
was for lumber concessions. The Constitution is clear that any contracts for joint activities should
only be for a maximum of 25 years and may only be renewed for another 25 years. By merely
changing the name of the contract and attempting to secure another license, PICOP tried to do
indirectly what it could not do directly by Constitutional fiat.
-o0o-