SC junks petition vs mining on Sibuyan Island

THE Supreme Court (SC) has denied a petition for a Writ of Kalikasan filed against Altai Philippines Mining Corp. (APMC) and environmental regulators, ruling that the petitioners failed to prove that the mining operations posed a threat of sufficient magnitude to warrant the legal remedy.

In a 27-page decision penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, and made public Feb. 23, the High Court en banc found that the petitioners, representing the group Bantay Kalikasan ng Sibuyan, did not satisfy the jurisdictional requirement that environmental damage must affect “two or more cities or provinces.”

The case arose from APMC’s nickel ore exploration and attempt to export 50,000 wet metric tons of ore from its mineral production sharing agreement area in San Fernando, Romblon. Residents had barricaded the company’s port in early 2023, alleging illegal mining and potential “unquantifiable loss of natural heritage”

But because the mining area was confined within the municipality of San Fernando or, at most, the province of Romblon, and that APMC’s ore transport permit and mineral ore export permit had already expired in early 2023, the petition was deemed moot and academic.

The tribunal also noted that a joint order issued by the Department of Environment (DENR) and Natural Resources and the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) had directed APMC to cease and desist from constructing its causeway, effectively granting the principal reliefs sought by the petitioners.

In dismissing the case, the court said the residents’ claims regarding the alleged “potential for liquefaction” of nickel ore and threats to endemic species were unsupported by empirical evidence.

“Nonetheless, petitioners failed to show the environmental damage and its extent that would warrant the issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan,” the SC said in its ruling.

“This Court has consistently held that a Writ of Kalikasan will not be issued as a mere substitute to legal, administrative, or political remedies that may be available to parties,” it added

“This does not mean, however, that we condone the environmental issues hounding San Fernando, Sibuyan Island, Romblon,” the SC added.

While denying the petition, the court clarified that the residents did not commit forum shopping by simultaneously seeking relief from the DENR and the MGB, reversing an earlier finding by the Court of Appeals.

In a separate concurring opinion, Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen said the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases contain a systemic gap, noting that the “magnitude requirement” for a Writ of Kalikasan disadvantages small islands composed only of barangays or municipalities.

“With the Rules as presently worded, small islands in the Philippines… can never claim for a petition for a Writ of Kalikasan,” Mr. Leonen said. He proposed an “ecosystem approach,” under which damage to a unique ecosystem within a single province could still qualify if the impact is “sufficiently grave and wide-reaching.”

Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda, also concurring, underscored the need for courts to seriously engage scientific evidence, noting that “we cannot claim fidelity to the truth while willfully ignoring science.” — Erika Mae P. Sinaking