Title
Cordillera Global Network vs. Paje
Case
G.R. No. 215988
Decision Date
Apr 10, 2019
Dispute over SM City Baguio expansion involving tree removal; Supreme Court ruled permits violated environmental laws, prioritizing ecological protection over development.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200418)

Applicable Law and Procedural History

The case was decided under the 1987 Philippine Constitution on April 10, 2019. It involved multiple environmental and zoning laws, DENR Administrative Orders, as well as Baguio City's local zoning ordinances and Executive Orders related to land use. The petitioners challenged the validity of permits issued to SMIC for its “Expansion Project” on Luneta Hill, Baguio City.

Background of the Environmental Compliance Certificate and Expansion Project

On September 13, 2001, the DENR issued an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) to SM Investments Corporation for the SM Pines Resort Project, covering an 8.5-hectare mixed-use development including shopping mall, hotel, and other facilities. SM City Baguio mall, part of this project, was completed in November 2003. Subsequently, SMIC planned to expand the mall (Expansion Project) to increase commercial and parking spaces.

Application for Permit Amendments and Tree-Cutting Operations

In late 2010, SMIC submitted an Environmental Performance Report and Management Plan seeking amendment of the ECC to accommodate the Expansion Project. Additional information was requested and submitted concerning the inventory of affected trees. The DENR granted the amendment on September 22, 2011. On October 27, 2011, the DENR-Cordillera Administrative Region issued a permit allowing the cutting and earth-balling (transplanting) of Benguet pine, Alnus trees, and saplings affected by the project, subject to conditions including public consultations and prior acquisition of an ECC.

Legal Actions Filed by Petitioners

Petitioners filed two consolidated environmental cases and a contempt petition in Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 5, Baguio City. They sought to enjoin SMIC from cutting or earth-balling 182 Benguet pine and Alnus trees, alleging environmental and health damage and procedural irregularities in the issuance of permits. SMIC and government respondents argued that all permits were issued in strict compliance with legal requirements and that the project included environmental mitigation measures.

RTC and Court of Appeals Decisions

The RTC dismissed the cases on procedural grounds for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and found petitioners' evidence insufficient to establish irreparable environmental damage or irregularities in permit issuance. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision, rejecting claims that exceptions to the exhaustion rule applied and upholding the presumption of regularity of official acts. Both courts held that technical matters were within the special knowledge of administrative agencies.

Issues Presented for the Supreme Court Review

  1. Defectiveness of the Petition's verification and certification against forum shopping.
  2. Appropriateness of raising factual questions in a Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari.
  3. Whether failure to exhaust administrative remedies and the doctrine of primary jurisdiction warranted dismissal.
  4. Validity and regularity of the permits issued to private respondents for the Expansion Project.

Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping

Despite only 30 of approximately 200 petitioners signing the Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping, the Supreme Court applied the substantial compliance rule. It held that the petitioners shared a common interest, thus the signatures of some sufficed. Non-signing petitioners were dropped as parties but this did not warrant outright dismissal.

Review of Factual Questions in the Petition

The Court emphasized that Rule 45 petitions should raise only questions of law, with limited exceptions established by jurisprudence when judgments are wholly speculative, absurd, or based on misapprehension of facts. The Court found that here, the case fell under exceptions since some findings appeared to lack evidentiary basis or were based on misapprehension.

Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies and Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction

The general rule requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before judicial review was recognized but the Court noted exceptions such as when question is purely legal, when acts are patently illegal or without jurisdiction, or urgency requires judicial intervention. DENR Administrative Order No. 2003-30 provides for appeal procedures but only for parties to the application. Petitioners were not parties to SMIC’s applications and hence were not bound to exhaust administrative remedies. However, questions on locational clearances and zoning should properly be raised before the HLURB, which retains appellate jurisdiction despite devolution of certain powers to local government units.

Validity of Zoning Clearance and Compliance

The Court examined the Baguio City Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, which divides the city into commercial zones (C-1 low-density, C-2 medium-density, C-3 high-density). Petitioners claimed that the expansion should fall under a high-density (C-3) zone, not low-density (C-1) where it was located. The evidence showed that the Planning Development Office issued locational clearance based on conformity with the zoning ordinance and comprehensive land use plan. The Court underscored that zoning questions are within the expertise of the HLURB, whose appellate jurisdiction petitioners failed to invoke.

Requirement of Separate Environmental Compliance Certificate for Tree Cutting

The Court found that the removal or earth-balling of 182 additional trees for the Expansion Project was not covered by the original ECC, which authorized removal of 112 trees. The amended ECC approved in 2011 did not specifically contemplate the additional tree removal. The DENR required a separate ECC and tree-cutting permit for the operation, as reflected in an October 17, 2011 DENR memorandum imposing various conditions including public consultations, mitigation measures, and replanting requirements.

Executive Order No. 23 and Protection of Natural Residual Forests

The Court highlighted the importance of EO No. 23 (2011) which declared a moratorium on cutting and harvesting timber in natural residual forests and mandated strict controls. The environmental compliance process failed to distinguish between planted trees and natural residual forests, a significant omission given the special ecological status of indigenous Benguet pine trees involved.

Failure of Lower Courts and DENR to Adequately Protect the Environment

The Supreme Court underscored that the lower courts and DENR overlooked critical details concerning the nature of the trees and the necessity of a separate ECC for their cutting or earth-balling. The Court stressed the constitutional mandate under Article II, Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution to protect and advance the right to a balanced and healthful ecology. S

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.

    About Privacy Terms