THE Court of Appeals (CA) has denied the plea of some residents of Santa Cruz, Zambales to reverse its earlier ruling denying their petition for the issuance of a writ of “kalikasan” with permanent environmental protection order (Pepo) against all mining operations in the province.
In a five-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Renato Franciso, the CA’s Former Special 14th Division affirmed its May 22, 2017, decision that also lifted the provisional writ of kalikasan issued by the Supreme Court in June 2016 in favor of petitioner Concerned Citizens of Santa Cruz, Zambales (CCOSZ).
The appellate court did not give weight to the argument of the petitioner that it is the court’s duty to protect and advance the constitutional right of the people to healthful and balanced ecology.
The petitioner added it is also the court’s duty to make sure there is strict compliance to the suspension and closure orders issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources against mining operations in the province. It insisted that a Pepo should have been issued against respondent mining firms instead of a temporary environment protection order.
In the CA’s May 22, 2017, decision, the CA ruled the closure order issued by then-Environment Secretary Regina Paz L. Lopez against the operations of five mining companies in the province had rendered the petition moot and academic.
In its petition, the CCOSZ claimed their constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is being violated by five mining companies, namely Benguet-Corp. Nickel Mines Inc., Eramen Minerals Inc., LNL Archipelago Minerals Inc., Zambales Diversified Metals Corp. and Shangfil Mining and Trading Corp.
The petitioners noted their mining activities are destroying the irrigation system and the ecosystem in Santa Cruz, Zambales, and its neighboring municipality of Candelaria, Zambales, extending up to Infanta, Pangasinan.
The mining firms’ “unsystematic” mining practices, the petitioner said, are causing water, air and soil pollution, as well as heavy laterite siltation of river systems, coasts, farmlands, fishponds and residential areas.
Forest denudation caused by mining also could result in soil erosion and exacerbate flood problems, the petitioners said. The livelihood of residents is, likewise, adversely affected, they added.
In denying the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, the CA noted it failed to present new arguments that would warrant the reversal of its May 22, 2017, decision.
“A perusal of the motion for reconsideration reveals no new and meritorious arguments and yields mere rehashed arguments, which had already been exhaustively discussed and squarely passed upon by this Court in the Resolution sought to be considered,” the CA declared.
“Accordingly, petitioners motion for reconsideration is hereby denied for lack of merit,” it added.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Jose Reyes Jr. and Apolinario Bruselas Jr.