Tag Archives: demolition

Militants question P1.1 B billion MMDA budget for Manila Bay clean up

Militants question P1.1 B billion MMDA budget for Manila Bay clean up

The fisherfolk activist group Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya) on Tuesday vowed to question the P 1.1 billion budget allocated by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) in connection with the Manila Bay clean up.

Pamalakaya national chair Fernando Hicap said his group will prepare a position paper opposing the huge public fund allocated by Malacañang and will submit once the House of Representatives discusses the 2010 national budget pertaining to MMDA and the Manila Bay clean up.

“The clean up should be undertaken collectively and separately by local government units situated along the bay, together with concerned government agencies. The MMDA should be taken out of the picture since its functions overlap with the functions of government agencies and local government units. The best thing to do is to abolish the MMDA,” said Hicap.

“P 1.1 billion is P 1.1 billion. This will make the MMDA the government’s super agency in the National Capital Region. Given its notorious records of high crimes of corruption, daily political arrogance and extreme brutality, the proposed budget for MMDA’s Manila Bay clean up will make it an uncontrollable monster in 2010,” the Pamalakaya leader added.

Hicap said the huge budget allocated for the MMDA could be one the compelling reasons why the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) suddenly inked a pact with MMDA, to maximize not only its human resources, but as well the huge funds allocated to it for counter-insurgency operations and urban militarization.

“The P1.1 billion MMDA budget is really a mouth-watering banana for the AFP. The military can exploit the people of MMDA and its resources,” he added.

Pamalakaya said instead of giving MMDA the lion’s share in the budget for Manila Bay clean up, Metro Manila lawmakers and local government units representing all cities and municipalities in the National Capital Region should call for the abolition of the authority.

“National and local candidates who will call for the abolition of MMDA will earn the respect and the desired votes from Metro electorates. It is an electoral agenda voters from all classes A,B,C,D and E will support. It is winning electoral piece for 2010,” the group observed.

DBM Secretary Rolando Andaya said the government has allocated over one billion pesos, P 848 million for MMDA’s solid waste disposal and management and another P 250 million for the relocation of informal settlers on open waterways in Metro Manila for a grand total of P 1.098 billion for the clean up of Manila Bay.

Andaya said, the MMDA will spend P 223-million for operational support, maintenance, repair and rehabilitation of flood control systems, P 100 million for the mitigation of floods in the Gil Puyat Avenue-South Superhighway Area. The authority will also allot P 58 million for flood control and drainage projects in Metro Manila, and another P 50-million for urgent flood control projects.

The P 1.1 billion allocation for MMDA is part of the P 1.6 billion the government had alloted for the Manila Bay clean up. Pamalakaya said the P 1.1 billion for MMDA will be used to demolish fisherfolk and bay people, as well as hundreds of thousands of urban poor families along Pasig River in response to the Supreme Court ruling on Manila Bay. #

Leave a comment

Filed under corruption, environment

Bong Revilla told: “Stop telling Cavite folk of Kaps Amazing stories”

The left-leaning fisherfolk alliance Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya) on Thursday urged Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. to stop telling the people of Cavite of Kaps’ Amazing stories adding that the people affected by his father’s pet project—the P 4.3 billion 7-km road R-1 Expressway Extension Project should not be designated as subjects and objects of tall tale story telling.

Members of the Pamalakaya affiliated Samahang Magdaragat ng Bacoor, Cavite (SMBC) informed the group’s national headquarters in Quezon City that Senator Revilla went to Barangay Sineguelasan last week and promised to provide fisherfolk and urban poor residents with modest houses if the government proceeds with the demolition of their homes along the coastal shores of Bacoor to pave way for the national road project.

According to SMBC’s report to Pamalakaya, Senator Revilla told residents of Barangay Sineguelasan that his office will coordinate with the non-government organization group Gawad Kalinga in constructing a tenement type townhouse for the soon-to-be displaced fisherfolk and urban poor residents in Bacoor, Cavite.

“Senator Revilla is not responding to the main issues raised by the affected sectors. He is reducing the issue to mere charity concern with the touch of feel-good and tweetum acting. But this is real life, and really life-threatening compared to episodes of Kaps Amazing stories,” said Pamalakaya national chair Fernando Hicap, referring to Revilla’s weekly show in GMA-7.

“If Senator Revilla will not address this issue in accordance with the public interest, an electoral defeat in 2010 is highly predictable. The people will not give him another chance at the electoral box-office,” the Pamalakaya leader said.

Yesterday, 16 fisherfolk braved the murky waters of Manila Bay and staged a daring 10-kilometer swim protest from Bacoor, Cavite to the Philippine Senate to protest the construction of 7-kilometer R-1 Expressway Extension Project.

The 16 swimming fisherfolk activists started their swim protest in Barangay Maliksi 3, in Bacoor, one of the affected coastal villages by the ongoing reclamation and construction of the controversial road project of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo through the Philippine Reclamation Authority chaired by former Senator Ramon Revilla Sr.

Pamalakaya said the 10-kilometer swim protest across the Manila Bay Channel is a tune up for more daring and highly agitating “class action” in the near future. “This is just the beginning of more aggressive actions against another road to perdition project of President Arroyo and her partners in crime in and out of Malacañang,” the group said.

Pamalakaya said the Senate committee on environment, chaired by Senator Jamby Madrigal should look into the alleged involvement of PRA chair Revilla Sr., his sons– Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr, chair of the Senate Committee on Public Works and Highways and Bacoor Mayor Strike Revilla in controversial P 4.3 billion R-1 Expressway Extension Project.

“The old Revilla is the current chair of PRA, the main player in the phase 2 of the Cavite Coastal Road project, his son Strike is the mayor of Cavite, the starting point of the 7-kilometer expressway project and Bong Revilla is the current chair of the Senate Committee on public works and highways. Is this a coincidence? We don’t think so,” the group said.

Aside from Revillas, Hicap said Sen. Madrigal should also subpoena Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita to represent the Office of the President, DENR Secretary Joselito Atienza, DPWH Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane Jr, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Reforms (BFAR) Director Malcolm Sarmiento, MMDA chairman Bayani Fernando, health secretary Francisco Duque III, Cavite Gov. Ayong Maliksi, the mayors of Kawit, Binakayan, Noveleta, Rosario and Cavite City and officials of the construction firm UEM-Mara Philippine Corporation.

“If Mrs. Arroyo holds the key on the controversial and extremely detestable R-1 Expressway Extension Projects, her officials from the national levels down to the local levels of governance hold duplicate keys, and therefore partners in crimes of the ruling gangland in Malacañang,” said Pamalakaya.

The Pamalakaya leader recalled that on June 21, 2007, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed Executive Order No. 629 directing the PRA to develop Sangley Point in Cavite City into a logistical hub with modern seaport and an airport, citing the R-1 expressway extension project as enabling component. Hicap said the Sangley Point project was Mrs. Arroyo’s birthday gift to the old Revilla.

Pamalakaya said national and local government officials are using, abusing and misinterpreting the December 18 2008 Supreme Court ruling on Manila Bay clean up to effectively eliminate the livelihood of small fisherfolk and uproot the villagers from their coastal communities to pave way for reclamation and other government projects.

Pamalakaya said the R-1 extension project resulted to diminished fish catch and destruction of remaining corals and mangroves in Bacoor Bay. The same Cavite road project is also being blamed for the flooding in Bacoor and nearby coastal towns in the province. #

Leave a comment

Filed under environment

Pamalakaya memorandum to SC on 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
MEMORANDUM FOR INTERVENORS

INTERVENORS, by the undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable Court, most respectfully submit this Memorandum and aver that:

Prefatory Statement:

1. The task to clean up, rehabilitate and protect the Manila Bay is long overdue. Manila Bay is the source of livelihood of the intervenors and as such, they are one with the Honorable Court and the respondents in the pursuit of the goal to restore and maintain the Manila Bay to SB level not just to make it fit for swimming, skin-diving, and other forms of contact recreation but also to maintain it as the enduring source of livelihood of the fisherfolks therein.

Material Facts of the Case:

2. Manila Bay, prior to its deterioration was once the second most productive fishing ground in the Philippines. It is home to 23 million Filipinos, from Central Luzon-Bulacan, some parts of Pampanga, Bataan, National Capital Region and Cavite. Because of rampant reclamation projects in Manila Bay, its mangrove areas shrank from 54,000 hectares several decades ago, to 2,000 hectares in 1990 and further 794 hectares in 1995;
3. Almost 20,000 hectares of Manila Bay have already been reclaimed over the last 30 to 40 years to give way to special economic zone projects in Bataan and Cavite, the commercial spaces occupied by the Manila Film Center, the GSIS Building in Pasay City, the Cultural Center of the Philippines and Folk Arts Theater in Manila, and the SM Mall of Asia and other commercial companies in Pasay City and Parañaque City;

4. From 1992 to 1995, the demolitions of coastal shanties became an everyday ordeal in Pasay Reclamation area. Houses were uprooted on almost day-to-day basis. Small and big time bribery to divide the communities were conducted to facilitate the demolition of coastal communities. This scenario was lately resurrected when, after the decision of the Honorable Court was promulgated in December 18, 2008, the DENR caused the demolition and destruction of the houses, fish pens, fish cages and fish traps of small fisherfolks in the Manila Bay especially in Bacoor, Cavite supposedly as part of the cleanup drive of DENR of the bay;

5. During the year 1992-1995, some 3,500 small fisherfolk and their families in Pasay Reclamation Area and another 3,000 coastal and urban poor families along the coastal shores of Parañaque were evicted by the government of former President Fidel Ramos to give way to reclamation projects which is now home of the commercial buildings thereof;
6. Almost 60 percent of pollution entering Manila Bay comes through the Pasig River, and 80 percent of the pollution comes from industries and commercial establishments situated along the country’s major river system in the National Capital Region. Another 15 percent of the pollution that gets into Manila Bay comes from Pampanga River, which is colonized by big and small polluting factories;

7. Just recently, the DENR is blaming over fishing as a major factor in the degradation of Manila Bay but for the intervenors and fisherfolk groups it is a flimsy and ridiculous excuse.

8. In the year 2006, the national government through the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) and its contractor partner UEM-Mara Philippine Corp. are reclaiming an additional 7,500 hectares of coastal waters off Manila Bay for the R-1 Expressway Extension Project, which will be annexed to the Manila-Cavite Coastal Road Project;

9. On June 21, 2007, President Arroyo signed Executive Order No. 629 directing the PRA to develop Sangley Point in Cavite City into a logistical hub with modern seaport and an airport, citing the R-1 expressway extension project as enabling component;

10. The R-1 Extension Project resulted to diminished fish catch and destruction of remaining corals and mangroves in Manila Bay. The same Cavite road project is also being blamed for the flooding in Bacoor and nearby coastal towns in the province;

11. The PRA also plans to reclaim 5,000 hectares of coastal waters in Cavite City to expand Sangley port, and this undertaking together with the R-1 Expressway Extension Project will affect the livelihood and the housing of 26,000 fisherfolk and urban poor families in the coastal towns of Bacoor, Kawit, Binakayan, Noveleta and Cavite City;

12. On top of the R-1 Expressway Road Extension Project and the Sangley Port project, the Macapagal-Arroyo government has given the state-owned Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (Pagcor) the environmental clearance certificate and the big go-signal to develop the 15 billion dollar casino in the 90-hectare reclaimed area in Roxas Boulevard into a Las Vegas style casino and theme park complex in Manila Bay ($400-M investment in 2 years);

13. In February 2009, DENR caused the destruction of the mussels, fish cages and fish traps of the movants. Every week, eight hundred fourteen thousand pesos (P814,000.00) of public funds were used by DENR in demolishing fish traps and mussel growing structures in Manila Bay, including make-shift structures.

14. In the demolition of the fish traps and mussel growing structures of the small fishermen, the DENR were invoking the decision of the Honorable Court as basis thereof;

15. Also, supposedly based on the decision of the Honorable Court, the DENR intends to wipe out all fish traps inside the 4 hectare fishpen belt of Manila Bay to fast-track the reclamation in favor of the project R-1 Expressway. Malacañang, the DENR, the DPWH and the PRA in partnership with UEM-Mara Philippine Corporation are moving heaven and earth to jumpstart all the projects in Manila Bay and the affected fisherfolk and urban poor families are being offered compensation ranging from five thousand pesos (P5,000) to twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) displacement fees so they could move out of the areas targeted for the projects;

16. Moreover, the 7-kilometer R-1 extension project, which will involve the reclamation of 7,500 hectares of submerged public lands and mangrove areas in Manila Bay will connect the Manila-Cavite Road from Bacoor to Kawit, and it will continue inland up to Noveleta for a total of 11 kilometers. The project will further destroy the remaining coral and mangrove areas in the Cavite portion of Manila Bay. Aside from environmental destruction, the R-1 Expressway Project will remove 26,000 fisherfolk and urban poor families from their main source of livelihood and abode;

17. In addition, another 5,000 hectares of coastal waters will be reclaimed by PRA to develop and widen the land area of Sangley port to make it one of major and most modern logistical hubs not only in Southern Tagalog region, but in the entire country.

Issues:

I. WHETHER OR NOT THE DECEMBER 18, 2008 DECISION OF THE HONORABLE COURT JUSTIFIED OR AUTHORIZED THE DEMOLITION OF THE HOUSES OF SMALL FISHERMEN IN THE COAST OF THE MANILA BAY AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THEIR FISH PENS, FISH TRAPS AND FISH CAGES INCLUDING THE MUSSEL GROWING STRUCTURES THEREIN.

II. WHETHER OR NOT THE RECLAMATION OF THE SUBMERGE PUBLIC LANDS AND MANGROVE AREAS OF THE MANILA BAY INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE R-1 EXPRESSWAY EXTENSION PROJECT ARE COVERED BY THE CONTINUING MANDAMUS FOR THE CLEAN UP, REHABILITATION AND PROTECTION OF THE MANILA BAY.

Arguments/Discussion:

The structures used to grow mussels and to catch fish that were put up by the small fishefolks are not the cause of degradation of the Manila Bay.

18. The decision of the Honorable Court dated December 18, 2008 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.

19. Let it be noted that 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. It is the source of their livelihood and these activities of the small fisherfolks constitute passive fishing, and therefore not destructive to the environment and the Manila Bay but in fact, they are environment friendly;

20. More importantly, the fishing activities of the small fisherfolks are not the cause of the degradation of the Manila Bay but the toxic chemicals and industrial waste of factories and companies. They were sourced not from the Manila Bay itself. As stated in the material facts of the case, almost 60 percent of pollution entering Manila Bay comes through the Pasig River, and 80 percent of the pollution comes from industries and commercial establishments situated along the country’s major river system in the National Capital Region. Another 15 percent of the pollution that gets into Manila Bay comes from Pampanga River, is colonized by big and small polluting factories.

21. Prescinding from the above, there is no justification whatsoever for the demolition of the houses of the small fisherfolks of Manila Bay and the destruction of the mussel-growing structures, fish traps or cages that they have put up therein;

22. Ostensibly, therefore, 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. The same decision will later on be used by the petitioners to justify the further demolition of the houses of small fishermen and the destruction of the mussel-growing structures, fish traps and fish cages to give way to further reclamation activities in the bay. 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 and will dismantle 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.

23. It must be said then, that the misplaced interpretation and interpretation of the decision of the Honorable Court by the petitioners especially the DENR will defeat the significance and usefulness of the decision. They have led their sight to the small fishermen, while turning a blind eye to the destructive effect of the conversion and reclamation projects in Manila Bay;

The massive reclamation, privatization and conversion of the public lands and coastal communities along the Manila Bay should be covered by the decision and continuing mandamus to ensure the complete clean up, rehabilitation and protection of the bay.

24. The material facts of the case should be taken seriously. It shows that the massive privatization and conversion of public lands and coastal communities along the bay since the Marcos dictatorship up to present administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in the form of reclamation and subsequent lease or sell out to private companies is the principal reason why Manila Bay is under the Intensive Care Unit, and suffering from environmental comatose. Unfortunately, however, the decision of the Honorable Court seemed not to have covered or included it on the activities that need to be enjoined or regulated in the bay.

25. Restating the facts, it is clear that almost 20,000 hectares of Manila Bay have already been reclaimed over the last 30 to 40 years to give way to special economic zone projects in Bataan and Cavite, the commercial spaces occupied by the Manila Film Center, the GSIS Building in Pasay City, the Cultural Center of the Philippines and Folk Arts Theater in Manila, and the SM Mall of Asia and other commercial companies in Pasay City and Parañaque City. These activities resulted to ecological imbalance in the Manila Bay are not to mention that it has destroyed a fertile fishing ground and decreases the area of the bay.

26. In addition, there is the on-going construction of the R-1 Expressway Extension Project which has already resulted to diminished fish catch and destruction of remaining corals and mangroves in Manila Bay. The same is also being blamed for the flooding in Bacoor and nearby coastal towns in the province;

27. 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;

28. As was already stated, the R-1 project has also already caused the destruction not only of the corals of the Manila Bay but also of the livelihood and fishing activities of small fishermen in the coastal town of Cavite especially in Bacoor.

29. Prescinding from the above, the intervenors submit that the Honorable Court should also look at the reclamation projects undertaken in the Manila Bay and include the same in the activities that should regulated if not discontinued to ensure the success of the clean up, rehabilitation and protection of the Manila Bay so as not to put the landmark decision naught and useless.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most respectfully prayed from the Honorable Court to:
1. ORDER the petitioners, especially the DENR to cease and desist from the demolition of the houses of the small fishermen in the coastal towns of Manila Bay;

2. ORDER the petitioners, especially the DENR to cease and desist from destroying the mussel-growing structures, fish pens, fish traps and/or fish cages of the small fishermen in the Manila Bay;

3. ENJOIN the reclamation activities in the Manila Bay;

4. ENJOIN the construction of the R-1 expressway Construction Project unless it is shown that it will not destroy the ecological balance of the Manila Bay, the livelihood of the small fisherfolks thereon, and that it will not pollute and contribute to the further degradation of the bay;

OTHER RELIEF, just and 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 memorandum; 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 and the attached memorandum 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

Leave a comment

Filed under environment

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

Leave a comment

Filed under environment

Fishers dumped 10 sacks of mussel shells in DENR to protest demolition

Fishers dumped 10 sacks of mussel shells in DENR to protest demolition

Fisherfolk and mussel growers in Bacoor, Cavite, whose small mussel aquaculture pens were demolished by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) staged a “mussel flexing” protest at the office of Secretary Joselito Atienza and demanded an immediate halt on future demolition of their pens along Manila Bay.

Sixty (60) fisherfolk and mussel growers identified with the Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya), its regional affiliate Pamalakaya-Southern Tagalog and the Samahang Magdaragat ng Bacoor, Cavite dumped 10 sacks of empty mussel shells at the gate of the DENR national office in Visayas Avenue, Quezon City to warn Atienza of forthcoming social volcano.

Pamalakaya-Southern Tagalog secretary general Pedro Gonzalez called Sec. Atienza, the Butcher of Manila Bay for destroying the livelihood of small fishermen and mussel growers in Manila Bay. He said more than 50 percent of all small fish traps and mussel pens in Bacoor and adjacent coastal towns were already “cleaned up” of small fish trap and mussel pens.

“The Supreme Court ruling on Manila Bay rehabilitation put to task Atienza to clean up the bay of solid wastes and treat water wastes dumped into the bay. The high court decision does not give him the license to destroy the people’s livelihood. He is cannibalizing and prostituting the high tribunal ruling on Manila Bay,” Gonzalez added.

For his part, Pamalakaya national chair Fernando Hicap revealed that Sec. Atienza and other government agencies like the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA), the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) and other government agencies will be named respondents to the group’s plan to question all the government development projects, reclamation and demolition activities in Manila Bay.

The Pamalakaya leader said on Monday, Pamalakaya and around 3,000 small fisherfolk and mussel growers in Bacoor, Cavite will march from Bacoor to the Supreme Court in Manila to file the petition seeking for declaratory relief and clarificatory action on Manila Bay clean up.
“We want to know if under the SC ruling, DENR government agencies are allowed to kill the livelihood of the people and send them away from their coastal villages. At the same time, we want to know if the Supreme Court decision allows destructive and anti-environment projects like reclamation and road expansion to proceed at the expense of people’s rights to livelihood and abode,” added Hicap.

Pamalakaya theorized that Atienza was actively engaged in demolition of fish traps and small mussel aquaculture pens in Manila Bay to fast-rack the reclamation of 7,500 hectares of submerged public lands along the bay and pave way for the completion of the 11-kilometer R-1 Expressway Extension Project.

Pamalakaya and SMBC asserted that the R-1 expressway extension project will displace 26,000 fisherfolk families and urban poor residents in the coastal towns of Bacoor, Kawit, Binakayan, Noveleta and Cavite City. Last year, around 1,000 fishing and urban poor families were demolished and relocated to Tanza. The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) promised to give P 15,000 to each family whose houses were demolished.

Pamalakaya blamed the ambitious Sangley dream of former Senator and PRA chair Ramon Revilla Sr. as the main culprit behind the looming demolition of fisherfolk communities in many coastal towns of the province.

The group recalled that on June 21, 2007, President Arroyo signed Executive Order No. 629 directing the PRA to develop Sangley Point in Cavite City into a logistical hub with modern seaport and an airport, citing the R-1 expressway extension project as enabling component. The Pamalakaya leader said the Sangley Point project was Mrs. Arroyo’s birthday gift to Revilla.

“The R-1 extension project which is directly link to old Revilla’s Sangley escapade is an exchange deal between the Arroyos and the old Revilla. They don’t mind about their collaborations killing impact to the livelihood of the fisherfolk and Manila Bay’s fragile environment,” said Pamalakaya

The group said the R-1 extension project resulted to diminished fish catch and destruction of remaining corals and mangroves in Bacoor Bay. The same Cavite road project is also being blamed for the flooding in Bacoor and nearby coastal towns in the province. #

Leave a comment

Filed under environment

10,000 Bacoor fishers set People’s March, Fluvial protest vs. Cavite Road Project

10,000 Bacoor fishers set People’s March, Fluvial protest vs. Cavite Road Project

Some 10,000 fisherfolk and urban poor residents along the 15 coastal villages of Bacoor town in Cavite will stage a “People’s March” and fluvial protest on Monday against the R-1 Expressway Extension Project of the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) and the UEM-Mara Philippine Corp.

Organizers led by the Samahang Magdaragat ng Bacoor, Cavite and Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya) announced that fisherfolk and urban poor residents from 15 coastal barangays will march from their respective points of origin to the reclamation site.

They will meet around 300 fishermen aboard 50 small fishing boats on their way to the reclamation site in the boundary of Zapote and Bacoor, some 5 kilometers from the Manila-Cavite toll gate plaza.

SMBC spokesperson Trina Shavez said the R-1 extension project, which will involve the reclamation of 7,500 hectares of coastal waters and mangrove areas will connect the Manila-Cavite Road from Bacoor to Kawit, and it will continue inland up to Noveleta for a total of 11 kilometers.

“This project is a curse. It will not only kill our livelihood. The R-1 road project is also meant to remove us from fishing communities. Where we will go from here? This government is not after our rights and welfare. It is only after the interest of big investors and real estate money makers in exchange for fat kickbacks,” the SMBC spokesperson said in a press statement.

Shavez said the R-1 expressway extension project will displace 26,000 fisherfolk families and urban poor residents in the coastal towns of Bacoor, Kawit, Binakayan, Noveleta and Cavite City. Last year, around 1,000 fishing and urban poor families were demolished and relocated to Tanza. The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) promised to give P 15,000 to each family whose houses were demolished.

“We want an end to his corporate takeover and plunder. We want our fishing and housing rights back and guaranteed. We will not leave,” the SMBC spokesperson added.

For his part, Pamalakaya national chair Fernando Hicap urged President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, former Senator and PRA chair Ramon Revilla Sr. and the private contractor of the project to stop pursuing the R-1 Expressway Extension Project, warning them of bigger protest and strong resistance the Cavite fishermen and residents if the national government will not cease and desist from implementing the destructive project.

“President Arroyo and the old Revilla must stop this corporate led and corruption driven project. They should quit from mortgaging the livelihood and future of small fisherfolk in Cavite and cease and desist from further destroying the environment of Manila Bay, said Hicap.

Hicap recalled that on June 21, 2007, President Arroyo signed Executive Order No. 629 directing the PRA to develop Sangley Point in Cavite City into a logistical hub with modern seaport and an airport, citing the R-1 expressway extension project as enabling component. The Pamalakaya leader said the Sangley Point project was Mrs. Arroyo’s birthday gift to Revilla.

Pamalakaya said the R-1 extension project resulted to diminished fish catch and destruction of remaining corals and mangroves in Bacoor Bay. The same Cavite road project is also being blamed for the flooding in Bacoor and nearby coastal towns in the province.

The militant group said the reclamation activities conducted by the PRA and the UEM-Mara Philippine Corp. violated the recent Supreme Court decision on the rehabilitation of Manila Bay adding that the reclamation is destructive to the marine environment.

“We cannot bring Manila Bay back to its pristine state and historic glory if the Arroyo government continues to sanction the anti-environment and anti-people business activities of the PRA and the UEM-Mara Philippine Corp. The R-1 extension project and the Sangley big ticket item project of Revilla Sr. are in violations of the high court’s ruling on the environment,” it said. #

Leave a comment

Filed under environment