Case Summary (G.R. No. 137174)
Applicable Law
The case primarily involves the interpretation of Republic Act No. 3931, amended by Presidential Decree No. 984 (the National Pollution Control Decree of 1976), and the subsequent Philippine Mining Act of 1995 (Republic Act No. 7942). The laws govern the regulation of pollution from mining operations and the authority of the Pollution Adjudication Board and the Mines Regional Director.
Background of the Case
Marcopper Mining Corporation was granted a temporary permit to operate a tailings disposal system that expired in February 1987. Following environmental protests, MMC received a cease and desist order from the National Pollution Control Commission (NPCC) to stop discharging mine tailings into Calancan Bay. Subsequent to the NPCC's reorganization into the DENR, MMC was ordered to cease operations, which it had contested, leading to a complicated series of legal proceedings and orders regarding its obligations and compliance.
Legal Proceedings and Findings
After MMC ceased its tailings discharge, the PAB ruled in 1997 that MMC owed daily contributions to the ETF that had been established for the rehabilitation of Calancan Bay. However, the Court of Appeals ultimately set aside this ruling, concluding that the PAB had exceeded its authority under the law due to the transition of regulatory powers to the Mines Regional Director established by the Mining Act.
Discussion on Authority and Jurisdiction
The Court of Appeals asserted that the PAB could not enforce obligations on MMC given that the duties associated with pollution control had largely transitioned to the Mines Regional Director following the enactment of the Philippine Mining Act. The ruling was supported by the observation that the Mining Act established a framework wherein the regional director had significant power to ensure compliance with environmental regulations without an implication of overlapping authority with the PAB.
Cease and Desist Orders and Due Process
MMC contested the cease and desist orders issued by the PAB, arguing violations of procedural rights. However, the law permits ex-parte orders without a public hearing when imminent threats to health and safety are identified. The decision also reaffirmed that the PAB retained jurisdiction over pollution-related complaints prior to the implementation of the Mining Act.
Financial Contributions to the Ecology Trust Fund
The mandatory daily payments by MMC to the ETF were a focal point of dispute, with MMC stopping contributions after ceasing tailings disposal. The
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 137174)
Case Summary
- The case involves a petition for review on certiorari filed by the Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Pollution Adjudication Board (PAB) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
- The petitioner seeks to annul the Decision of the Court of Appeals which set aside the PAB’s Order concerning the Marcopper Mining Corporation (MMC) regarding its tailings disposal practices.
Background Facts
- Marcopper Mining Corporation was granted a temporary permit (TPO No. POW-85-454-EJ) to operate a tailings sea disposal system from October 31, 1985, to October 21, 1986.
- Prior to the expiration of this permit, MMC applied for a renewal but was ordered by the National Pollution Control Commission (NPCC) to cease discharging mine tailings into Calancan Bay after protests from religious groups.
- An Environmental Technical Committee was formed to explore alternative disposal methods, and a new temporary permit (TPO No. POW-86-454-EJ) was issued to MMC with a requirement to transfer the disposal system to San Antonio Pond.
- MMC requested the removal of this condition, citing the need to mine underneath the pond, and sought an extension of the permit.
Events Leading to Cease and Desist Orders
- On April 11, 1988, the Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, acting as PAB Chairman, issued a cease and desist order against MMC for failing to renew its permit which had expired on February 10, 1987.
- This order cited the absence of a permit renewal application and the immediate need to stop the tailings discharge due to environmental concerns.
- Foll