Pamalakaya’s petition to Supreme Court regarding Manila Bay ruling

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

METROPOLITAN MANILA G.R. Nos. 171947-48
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ET AL.,
Petitioners,

– versus –

CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF
MANILA BAY, represented and
joined by DIVINA V. ILAS, ET AL.,
Respondents.
x – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – x

PAMBANSANG LAKAS NG MGA MAMALAKAYA NG PILIPINAS (PAMALAKAYA) AND PAMBANSANG LAKAS NG MGA MAMALAKAYA NG PILIPINAS-SOUTHERN TAGALOG (PAMALAKAYA-ST), as represented by PEDRO GONZALES, ANAKPAWIS PARTYLIST as represented by CHERRY CLEMENTE, SAMAHANG MAGDARAGAT NG BACOOR CAVITE as represented and joined by MICHELLE P. GAYO, JIMBOY FRANCISCO, LUZAINE MILABO, ROGELIO CANTON, RENATO PRIETO, EDITO FERNANDEZ, EVELYN MARANA, SUSAN PAEZ, JESUS BALQUIN, DONATO VILLAFUERTE, ERLINDA QUILAPIO, ILUMINADA CABORNAY, CHARITO FRANCISCO, EDITO FERNANDEZ, GONDILINDA FERNANDEZ, REYNALDO SALAC, NENITA LAGARAN, SARAH CARNAJE, and RODOLFO TORRES
x – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – x
VERY URGENT AND RESPECTFUL MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

MOVANTS, by the undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable Court, most respectfully aver that:

Prefatory Statement:

1. Movants small fishermen of Manila Bay are one with the public in approving the Decision of the Honorable Court promulgated on December 18, 2008, for the clean-up and rehabilitation of the Manila Bay. Unfortunately, however, the decision was used and abused by the petitioners, making it the basis for the illegal and incessant demolition of their houses, fish traps and fish cages and the destruction of one of their livelihood which is growing of mussels.

2. Let it be told that the decision of the Honorable Court does not warrant or suggest that the rights of small fishermen in the Manila Bay be trampled upon. Nothing in the decision gives the petitioners, especially the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) the authority to demolish and destroy the houses and source of livelihood of the movants. They or the structures they have put up in Manila Bay were not the source of the pollution, toxic waste or contamination of the bay.
3. It is on this premise that movants hereto move that they be allowed to intervene and given the opportunity to be heard on this noble issue of cleaning, protecting and rehabilitating the Manila Bay. They should not bear the brunt of the decision but the real culprit behind the sorry state of the Manila Bay. They should not be deprived of life, livelihood and property by the erroneous interpretation and implementation of the petitioners of the Honorable Court’s decision. For rightly so, they are not the cause of the effluence of the Manila Bay but some other factors, which, unfortunately were not given much attention by the petitioners.

The Movants:

4. Movant Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (hereinafter referred to as PAMALAKAYA), represented by its Chairperson Fernando Hicap, with office address at No. 18-A Mabuhay St., Central District, Diliman, Quezon City, is a people’s organization and a national federation of forty-three (43) provincial fisherfolks organizations duly registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). It is filing this petition for and in behalf of its members comprising of the small fisherfolks of Manila Bay especially the victims of the illegal demolition of houses and the unauthorized destruction of fish traps, fish pens and cages because of the erroneous interpretation and application of the respondents of the Honorable Court’s decision. It can be served with notices, orders, resolutions and other process of the Honorable Court through the undersigned counsel at Sentro para sa Tunay na Repormang Agraryo (SENTRA), 161-B Chico St., Project 2, Quezon City;

5. Movant PAMALAKAYA-Southern Tagalog is the regional organization of PAMALAKAYA in the Southern Tagalog Region whose members especially those who are residing in the Province of Cavite are small fisherfolks in Manila Bay. It is being represented herein by its Secretary General Pedro Gonzales. It is filing this petition for and in behalf of its members, the small fisherfolks of Manila Bay, who are the victims of the illegal demolition of houses and the unauthorized destruction of fish pens and cages because of the erroneous interpretation and application of the respondents of the Honorable Court’s decision. It can be served with notices, orders, resolutions and other process of the Honorable Court through the undersigned counsel;

6. Anakpawis Partylist is a duly-accredited partylist organization that has currently one seat in the 14th Congress with address at Anakpawis Party-List National Headquarters, No. 56 K-9th Street, Quezon City. It is being represented herein by its Secretary General Cherry Clemente. It is filing this petition for and in behalf of the small fisherfolks of Manila Bay especially the victims of the illegal demolition of houses and the unauthorized destruction of fish pens and cages because of the erroneous interpretation and application of the respondents of the Honorable Court decision. It can be served with notices, orders, resolutions and other process of the Honorable Court through the undersigned counsel;

7. Samahang Mandaragat ng Bacoor Cavite is an organization of small fisherfolks in Bacoor, Cavite residing and fishing in the Manila Bay. It is a municipal chapter of PAMALAKAYA whose members are the ones directly affected and victimized by the illegal demolition of houses and the unauthorized destruction of fish pens and cages because of the erroneous interpretation and application of the respondents of the Honorable Court’s decision. It can be served with notices, orders, resolutions and other processes of the Honorable Court through the undersigned counsel;

8. Michelle Gayo, Jimboy Francisco, Luzaine Milabo, Rogelio Canton, Renato Prieto, Edito Fernandez, Evelyn Marana, Susan Paez, jesus baquin, Donato Villafuerte, Erlinda Quilapio, Iluminada Cabornay, Charito Francisco, Edito Fernandez, Gondilinda Fernandez, Reynaldo Salac, nenita Lagaran, Sarah Carnaje and Rodolfo Torres are members of Samahang Mandaragat ng Bacoor Cavite. They are filing the instant motion as representatives of their organization and in their individual capacities being themselves the victims of the illegal demolition and the unauthorized destruction of their fish pens and cages because of the erroneous interpretation and application of the respondents of the Honorable Court decision.

Reason for the Intervention:

9. Movants have been adversely affected by the erroneous interpretation and implementation of the petitioners-agencies, especially the DENR, of the Honorable Court’s decision. They have no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. They are directly filing this motion to the Honorable Court as it was its very decision that has been used to justify the demolition and destruction of the source of livelihood of the movants by the petitioners-government agencies;

10. On December 18, 2008, the Honorable Court in the instant case rendered a decision directing the petitioners government agencies to clean up, rehabilitate, and preserve Manila Bay, and restore and maintain its waters to SB level (Class B sea waters per Water Classification Tables under DENR Administrative Order No. 34 [1990]) to make them fit for swimming, skin-diving, and other forms of contact recreation;

11. Supposedly pursuant to the above-stated decision, the DENR, in February caused the destruction of the mussels, fish cages and fish traps of the movants. Ostensibly, however, the decision of the Honorable Court was merely used as cloak to justify the intention of the DENR to get rid of the structures established and used by the movants to grow mussels and to catch fishes in Manila Bay in order to give way to the construction of R-1 Expressway Extension Project of the Philippine Reclamation Authority. Thus, on the guise of implementing the decision of the Honorable Court for the clean up, protection and rehabilitation of Manila Bay, the DENR has dismantled the structures used by the movants for growing mussels and for catching fishes in the Manila Bay. But it could not be denied that their real intent is to get rid these structures to allow the unhampered construction of R-1 Expressway Extension Project and reclamation of the portion of the Manila Bay without risk of civil, criminal and/or administrative suits and without compensating anything to the movants.

12. Let it be noted that the 7-kilometer R-1 Expressway Extension Project will involve the reclamation of 7,500 hectares of submerged public lands and mangrove areas in Manila. The project which is approximately 40 percent completed will further destroy the remaining coral and mangrove areas in the Cavite portion of Manila Bay and will remove 26,000 fisherfolk and urban poor families, including herein movants from their main source of livelihood and abode;

13. It must be said then, that the misplaced interpretation and interpretation of the decision of the Honorable Court by the DENR will defeat the significance and usefulness of the decision. The DENR has led its sight to the small fishermen, which includes herein movants, while turning a blind eye to the destructive effect of the construction of the reclamation projects in Manila Bay;

14. As it was already the case and because the clean up, protection and rehabilitation of Manila Bay is a continuing act, movants will be adversely affected by the acts of the petitioners. They are mistakenly being targeted as the source of the pollution that beset the Manila Bay for which reason petitioners are supposedly justified to dismantle their houses, fish pens or fish traps and the other structures used to grow mussels therein. On the otherhand, the petitioner-government agencies, especially the DENR, has not lifted any finger to stop, or even just to investigate the harmful effects of the reclamation activities undertaken in the Manila Bay.

15. As such, movants have the right to intervene as their rights have already been trampled upon, violated and adversely affected by the erroneous interpretation and implementation of the Honorable Court’s decision by the petitioner-agencies while they ignore the plea to study the effects of the on-going reclamation projects in the Manila Bay;
16. As they were directly affected and in fact are the actual victims of the erroneous interpretation and application of the respondents of the Honorable Court’s decision adverted to above, they have likewise the right to intervene to seek protection from the Honorable Court of their rights and interest. In the minimum, they expect clarification from the Honorable Court on the application of the decision to their right to life, property and livelihood.

17. As there is already an on–going construction of R-1 Expressway Extension Project, which directly affects their livelihood and will destroy the further destroy the remaining coral and mangrove areas in the Cavite portion of Manila Bay, movants who are directly affected thereof has also the right to bring to the attention of the Honorable Court that the reclamation of the Manila Bay is the first and foremost reason of the effluence and destruction of Marine Life thereof and not the fishing activities of the small fishermen thereon;

18. The task of this Intervention, therefore, is to enable movants to articulate their position on the noble purpose of cleaning, protecting and rehabilitating the Manila Bay; to seek clarification and protection from the Honorable Court on the scope of the decision to the small fishermen of the Manila Bay; to bring to the attention of the Honorable Court the misplaced interpretation and implementation of the decision by the government agencies; and the neglect to include the reclamation activities in the Manila Bay as the first and foremost reason for its destruction.

19. Considering the foregoing, and the imperative need to bring to the attention of the Honorable Court the above-matters, which are matters of fundamental importance in the clean up, rehabilitation and protection of Manila Bay, movants most respectfully beg leave of the Honorable Court to allow them to intervene in these proceedings;

20. Movants is not unaware that Intervention, as provided under Rule 19 of the Rules of Civil Procedure should be filed at any time before rendition of judgment. But they submit that the rules is applicable only when the case is pending before the trial court but not before the Honorable Court that has the all-encompassing power to relax the rules and set aside technicalities all in the interest of justice and due process. More importantly, movants submit that the case has not yet been concluded with finality as the orders it has issued to the government agencies concerned were not yet followed and implemented. As was already stated above, the clean up, rehabilitation and protection of Manila Bay is a continuing process and would take a long period of time to be materialized. As such, legally and technically, this case did not end with the promulgation of the decision.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most respectfully prayed that the movants be allowed to intervene in these proceedings and that the memorandum hereto attached be admitted and considered.

OTHER RELIEF, just and equitable under the premises, is likewise prayed for.

February 23, 2009, Quezon City for Manila.

JOBERT I. PAHILGA
Counsel for the Intervenors
PTR No. 0631912/03-06-2008/Navotas
IBP No. 748133/03-17-2008/Antique
MCLE Compliance No. II-0012413/09-08-2008
Roll No. 48289

SENTRO PARA SA TUNAY NA REPORMANG AGRARYO (SENTRA)
161-B Chico St., Project 2, Quezon City

Copy furnished:

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL
134 Amorosolo St., Legaspi Village
Makati City

ATTY. ANTONIO OPOSA
Counsel for the Respondents
6-J Westgate Tower, Investment Drive
1780 Alabang, Muntinlupa City
Republic of the Philippines )
Quezon City ) s.s.

VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION

WE, FERNANDO HICAP, CHERRY CLEMENTE, MICHELLE GAYO, JIMBOY FRANCISCO, LUZAINE MILABO, ROGELIO CANTON, RENATO PRIETO, EDITO FERNANDEZ, EVELYN MARANA, SUSAN PAEZ, JESUS BAQUIN, DONATO VILLAFUERTE, ERLINDA QUILAPIO, ILUMINADA CABORNAY, CHARITO FRANCISCO, EDITO FERNANDEZ, GONDILINDA FERNANDEZ, REYNALDO SALAC, NENITA LAGARAN, SARAH CARNAJE and RODOLFO TORRES, all of legal age, Filipino, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state that:

1. We are the intervenors in this case;

2. We have caused the preparation of this motion; have read and understood the contents thereof; and that the same are true and correct of my personal knowledge and based on authentic records.

3. We further certify that we have not commenced any other action or proceedings involving the same case in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or in any other tribunal or agency; and that to the best of our knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending therein except the instant case. Furthermore, should we thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending, we undertake to report such fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court or agency in which the original pleading and sworn certification have been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have set our hands this 23rd day of February 2009 at Quezon City, Metro Manila.

FERNANDO HICAP PEDRO GONZALES
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

CHERRY CLEMENTE JIMBOY FRANCISCO
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

LUZAINE MILABO ROGELIO CANTON
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

RENATO PRIETO EDITO FERNANDEZ
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

EVELYN MARANA SUSAN PAEZ
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

JESUS BAQUIN DONATO VILLAFUERTE
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

ERLINDA QUILAPIO ILUMINADA CABORNAY
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

CHARITO FRANCISCO EDITO FERNANDEZ
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

GONDILINDA FERNANDEZ REYNALDO SALAC
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

NENITA LAGARAN SARAH CARNAJE
TIN/ID No._______________ TIN/ID No. _________________

RODOLFO TORRES MICHELLE GAYO
TIN/ID No. ______________ TIN/ID No.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 23rd day of February 2009, affiants personally known to me and exhibited their Taxpayer’s Identification No./Identification No. indicated below their names and signature.

Doc. No. ____;
Page No. ____; NOTARY PUBLIC
Book No. ____;
Series of 2009
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

I, ATTY. JOBERT I. PAHILGA, of legal age, Filipino, married and with office address at Sentro para sa Tunay na Repormnag Agraryo (SENTRA) after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law hereby depose and state that:

1. On February 23, 2009, I have cause the service of the foregoing motion to the above-named counsel for the respondent by registered mail with return card by depositing the same at the Quezon City Post Office with the following particulars:

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
134 Amorosolo St., Legaspi Village
Makati City
Registry Receipt No. _____________

ATTY. ANTONIO OPOSA
6-J Westgate Tower, Investment Drive
1780 Alabang, Muntinlupa City

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 23rd day of February 2009, affiants personally known to me and exhibited their Taxpayer’s Identification No./Identification No. indicated below their names and signature.

Doc. No. ____;
Page No. ____; NOTARY PUBLIC
Book No. ____;
Series of 2009

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under environment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s