BACOLOD CITY, Philippines - The Office of the President may just become the newest respondent to the case filed by environmentalists against the Energy Development Corporation (EDC), Environment Secretary Lito Atienza, and the Protected Area Management Board.
In a hearing of motions at the sala of Judge Rodney Bolunia, the Solicitor General's office represented by Senior State Solicitor Thomas Laragan, acting as counsel to Atienza, said the local courts has no jurisdiction to even hear the case since "indispensable parties" to the case, including the President, is absent as respondents.
The case was filed by members of the Save Mt. Kanlaon Coalition, seeking a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to prevent EDC from entering the buffer zone of Mt. Kanlaon Natural Park for their geothermal expansion program.
Bolunia ordered the petitioners, represented by lawyer, Andrea Si, to file a position paper amending their case and include in their pleadings so-called "indispensable parties" or answer the motion of dismissal filed by the Solicitor General (Solgen) within seven days.
Agreeing with the argument of the respondents, Bolunia said there were procedural matters that were not followed and had the petitioners insisted for a ruling, the case would have been dismissed outright.
Indispensable parties apart from the President in this case to be represented by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita may also include the Department of Energy, the Provincial Government and the localities of Murcia and Bago City for endorsing the entry of EDC into the buffer zone.
The case filed by Si questioned the constitutionality of the law allowing the entry of EDC into the 169-hectare buffer zone.
The law was created and signed by then President Fidel Ramos, through Presidential Proclamation 1005 in May 1997 declaring portions of Negros Occidental as part of Mt. Kanlaon Natural Park, of which 1,437 hectares shall be allocated and devoted to exploration, development and utilization of geothermal energy resources.
The Solgen said this makes the President "an indispensable party," but because of the right to immunity by the office, if the opposition will include indispensable parties as respondents, it will be Ermita who will represent the President in the case.
"Indispensable parties are those with such an interest in the controversy that a final decree would necessarily affect their rights, so that the court cannot proceed without their presence," the Solgen's motion cited.
"The absence of an indispensable party renders all subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of authority to act," Laragan added.
Laragan also asked the petitioners to clarify what acts do the complainant feel are illegal or unconstitutional so their counsels can prepare their answers.
"The parties concerned are not here so how can we proceed," Laragan said, adding that it is a mandatory obligation of the accuser to bring in parties concerned in this case.
Si however said they will re-think their position as "we have no quarrel with the provincial government" nor with other indispensable parties that may be needed to be cited as part of the case.
During the hearing, Si countered that the Solgen's motion is simply another delaying tactic "and meanwhile, trees are being cut down at the buffer zone" to pave the way for EDC's civil works.
But Bolunia said the court could not issue even a 72-hour TRO as sought by the petitioners as "the non-presence of parties here prohibits this court from acting on the matter."
Meanwhile, counsels for Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) and EDC said they have not filed any individual motion as they are joining the Solgen's manifestation.
EDC counsel Alexis Jacoma said contrary to the claims of the petitioners, "we are not violating the law, we are in fact complying with it and it took us more than seven years to comply with the law's requirements."
Si, clearly dejected said "we tried our best to save the forest," but would not comment when asked whether they got a fair day in court. - Sun.Star Bacolod