Case Summary (G.R. No. 195466)
Petition and Reliefs Sought
Petitioners invoked a writ of Kalikasan with prayer for a Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO). They allege violations of R.A. 10067 (unauthorized entry, damage, failure to pay fees, obstruction, resource disturbance) and seek:
• Immediate cease-and-desist over grounding operations
• Demarcation of damaged area and buffer zone
• Suspension of US military port calls and exercises in absence of environmental guidelines
• Enforcement of civil, criminal and administrative suits for environmental law violations
• Declaration of Philippine criminal jurisdiction over US personnel
• Negotiation under VFA Article V for environmental accountability
• Compensation, restoration, rehabilitation programs and establishment of a trust fund
• Review and nullification of VFA immunity provisions
• Other reliefs “just and equitable” for environmental protection
Standing and Procedural Issues
The Court acknowledged petitioners’ status as “non-traditional plaintiffs” under Oposa v. Factoran and the Rules allowing citizen suits on environmental rights. It noted, however, that representative standing must be reconciled with Rule 3 of the Rules of Court governing real parties in interest, class suits and representation. The petitioners’ broad claim to represent minors, unborn generations and multiple provinces risked overextending res judicata and lacked precise identification of injured parties.
Mootness and TEPO
Because salvage operations were completed before the petition, the Court found the prayer for a TEPO (available only under “extreme urgency” and “irreparable injury”) moot. Notice to Mariners No. 011-2013 had already marked the damaged areas and imposed safety measures.
Sovereign Immunity of US Respondents
Under Article XVI, Sec. 3 of the 1987 Constitution (State may not be sued without consent) and international law (par in parem non habet imperium), the Court held US military commanders immune from Philippine jurisdiction for acts jure imperii—offical acts of their warship. Citing US v. Judge Guinto and Minucher v. Court of Appeals, it applied the restrictive doctrine: sovereign immunity bars suit for governmental acts; only commercial/proprietary acts (jure gestionis) or unauthorized/personal acts pierce immunity. Here, respondents were sued in their official capacity and judgment would require US government action and funds, constituting a suit against the US itself.
International Law and UNCLOS
In a concurring opinion, Justice Carpio observed that under UNCLOS Articles 30–32, warships generally enjoy immunity but flag States bear “international respon
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 195466)
Factual Background
- Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park (TRNP) comprises two major coral atolls and the Jessie Beazley Reef, part of Cagayancillo, Palawan.
- Proclaimed a National Marine Park (1988) and inscribed by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site (1993) for its pristine reefs and biodiversity.
- RA 10067 (2009) instituted a “no-take” policy, prohibited fishing and other extractive activities, and created the Tubbataha Protected Area Management Board (TPAMB).
- The USS Guardian, a U.S. Navy Avenger-class mine countermeasures ship, obtained clearance to enter Philippine waters for a Subic Bay port call and departed January 15, 2013.
- At 2:20 a.m. on January 17, 2013, while transiting the Sulu Sea, the Guardian ran aground on South Shoal, Tubbataha.
- No injuries or fuel leaks occurred; U.S. Navy-led salvage was completed by March 30, 2013.
Parties and Procedural History
- Petitioners: Most Rev. Pedro D. Arigo; Most Rev. Deogracias S. Iniguez, Jr.; representatives of Kalikasan-PNE, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), Party-list groups (Bayan Muna, Kabataan), Pamalakaya, labor and women’s organizations, public interest advocates, and academicians—filing on behalf of affected communities and future generations.
- Respondents: U.S. respondents (U.S. 7th Fleet Commander Scott H. Swift; USS Guardian CO Mark A. Rice; Lt. Gen. Terry G. Robling) and Philippine respondents (President Aquino III; DFA Secretary del Rosario; Executive Secretary Ochoa, Jr.; DND Secretary Gazmin; DENR Secretary Paje; AFP and Philippine Coast Guard commanders).
- Petition for a Writ of Kalikasan with prayer for a Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) filed April 17, 2013 under Rule 7 of A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC.
- Philippine respondents filed a consolidated comment; U.S. respondents did not answer; petitioners moved for early resolution and ex parte proceedings.
Petitioners’ Allegations and Reliefs Sought
- Claim that grounding, salvaging, and post-salvaging operations violated RA 10067, infringing constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology, harming multiple provinces.
- Alleged RA 10067 violations: unauthorized entry (Sec. 19); non-payment of conservation fees (Sec. 21); obstruction of enforcement officers (Sec. 30); reef damage (Sec. 20); resource disturbance (Sec. 26[g]).
- Sought nullification of certain Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) provisions on immunity.
- Prayer for reliefs including:
• Immediate TEPO and Writ of Kalikasan to cease all operations connected to the grounding incident
• Demarcation of damaged area and establishment of a buffer zone
• Halt to U.S. port calls and Balikatan exercises pending environmental safeguards
• Philippine-U.S. negotiation of environmental guidelines and liability under the VFA
• Civil, administrative, and criminal proceedings against culpable officers
• Declaration of exclusi