Mining firms settle聽tribal rights lawsuit
Court of Appeals website
MANILA, Philippines — The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed the writ of kalikasan petition against government agencies and mining firms in Mt. Mantalingahan in Palawan, following its withdrawal by petitioners after the companies agreed to settle royalties owed to indigenous peoples.
The CA also denied the motion of Romeo Melnocan and Ronald Combang seeking to be named as petitioners after the original petitioners chose to drop the case. Melnocan and Combang identified themselves as traditional leaders of the Palawan indigenous peoples/indigenous cultural communities.
In a 15-page resolution dated Dec. 3, the CA’s Fifteenth Division ruled that if there are still tribal leaders or members of the Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) of Bicamm in Brooke’s Point, Palawan, who are opposed to the mining activities of the private respondents, a new petition for writ of kalikasan must be filed.
READ:
“Sadly, their plight cannot be continued in this present petition, which is prayed by movants to be continued by them,” the appellate court said in the decision written by Associate Justice Marietta Brawner-Cualing.
Article continues after this advertisementThe Supreme Court had issued the writ of kalikasan, a legal remedy intended to protect one’s constitutional right to a healthy environment, last year against the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Mines and Geosciences Bureau, Ipilan Nickel Corp., and Celestial Nickel Mining and Exploration Corp.
Article continues after this advertisementIrreversible damage
The high tribunal said their operations could cause “serious and irreversible” damage to the environment and the ICCs’ ancestral domain.
The petitioners in the citizen’s suit were the ICCs of the Bicamm ancestral domain, originally represented by Julhadi Carim Titte and Renila Culay.
In a resolution dated Jan. 23 in G.R. No. 268140, the Supreme Court referred the case to the CA, which denied the application for a temporary environmental protection order.
A preliminary conference for the petition for writ of kalikasan was initially scheduled for March 21, but the parties noted initial talks toward a possible settlement, leading to its rescheduling to May 6.
During the pretrial conference on May 6, Titte and Dulay informed the CA of their decision to withdraw the petition after the mining companies, through counsel, revealed the Bicamm executed a “pangkalahatang resolusyon,” withdrawing all complaints against Ipilan and Celestial, including the current petition, and consenting to the mining operations.
On March 22, Melnocan and Combang requested the CA to allow them to intervene in the case or to be named as copetitioners, claiming they were authorized by a resolution with 47 signatories as legitimate IP leaders and members of the directly affected communities where the mining companies operate.
Melnocan and Combang said Titte admitted to withdrawing the petition due to the mining companies’ “willingness to pay royalties due to the IPs.”
Petitioner’s consent
In denying the petition for writ of kalikasan, the CA ruled the withdrawal “was with the knowledge and conformity of the petitioner, ICC of the Bicamm Ancestral Domain of Brooke’s Point, Palawan, which included as members therein Titte and Dulay.”
The appellate court said Melnocan and Combang failed to demonstrate their authority to represent the petitioners, particularly the signatories to the supplemental agreement and resolution, had retracted their signatures, and were now proceeding with the petition through them as representatives.
