G.R. No. 190582 - Ang Ladlad LGBT Party vs. Commission on Elections

International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Inc. (ISAAA) – promoter of agricultural biotechnology, including Bt eggplant (“Bt talong”).
Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI), Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA), Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) – Department of Agriculture (DA) and Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) agencies issuing permits for biotech field trials.
University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) and UPLB Foundation, Inc. – project proponents for Bt talong trials.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines), MASIPAG, legislators, scientists, local officials – filed petition for writ of kalikasan and continuing mandamus to enjoin Bt talong trials.

1977–1981: PD 1151 and PD 1586 established the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) System and identified “environmentally critical” projects/areas requiring Environmental Compliance Certificates (ECCs).
1990: EO 430 created the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP) to formulate biosafety policies and guidelines for contained biotechnology research.
1998: NCBP issued guidelines on the deliberate release of GMOs and potentially harmful exotic species.
2002: DA AO 8/2002 transferred regulation of GMO field testing from NCBP to BPI; defined stages—contained use, field testing, propagation.
2003: Philippines ratified the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.
2006: EO 514 established the National Biosafety Framework (NBF), strengthening NCBP, mandating transparency, public participation, precautionary approach, and coordination with EIS requirements.

2010–2012: BPI issued biosafety permits for multi-locational Bt talong trials at five sites (Laguna, Pangasinan, Camarines Sur, North Cotabato, Davao).
Local objections: lack of ECC under PD 1586; inadequate public consultation; potential contamination of non-GMO eggplant; health and environmental risks.
April 2012: Respondents petitioned for writ of kalikasan and continuing mandamus, seeking to stop field trials, uproot planted Bt talong, compel DA/BPI to comply with EIS Law, conduct independent risk assessments, and amend the biosafety framework.
May 2012: Supreme Court issued writ of kalikasan; parties filed returns and defenses, arguing full compliance with DA AO 8, non-applicability of EIS Law, lack of standing, mootness, and adequacy of risk assessments.
CA proceedings (2012–2013): CA held respondents had standing, controversy was justiciable and not moot, applied “hot-tub” expert hearing, and granted the petition in May 2013, enjoining further Bt talong trials and ordering environmental restoration.

Standing of respondents to invoke writ of kalikasan.
Mootness of the controversy due to expiration/termination of field trial permits.
Applicability of Philippine EIS System (PD 1151, PD 1586) to GMO field testing.
Violation of doctrines of primary jurisdiction and exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Compliance with EO 514’s National Biosafety Framework requirements (public participation, transparency, precautionary approach).
Validity of DA AO 8/2002 under the Constitution, Cartagena Protocol, and EO 514.
Proper application of the precautionary principle (Rule 20, Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases).