MAARK ANTHONY V. ZABAL, et al. v. RODRIGO DUTERTE, et al.

PETITIONERS’ ARGUMENTS

G.R. 238467; Feb 12, 2019 - Proc. 475 is an invalid exercise of legislative powers
o That its issuance is in truth a law-making exercise since the
PETITIONERS: Mark Anthony Zabal (builds sandcastles) and Thiting Estoso
proclamation imposed a restriction on the right to travel
Jacosalem (driver for tourists and workers) are both residents of Boracay,
and therefore, substantially altered the relationship
earning a living from tourist activities; Odon S. Bandiola (a non-resident)
between the State and its people by increasing the former’s
occasionally visits Boracay for business and pleasure
power over the latter
- Proc. 475 is unconstitutional for infringing on constitutional rights to
travel and to due process
FACTS o RE RIGHT TO TRAVEL: Although Art III Section 6 of the
- Duterte, after claiming Boracay has become a cesspool, made public Constitution explicitly allows the impairment of the right to
his plan to shut down Boracay. This was followed by several travel, 2 conditions must concur:
speeches and news releases stating that he would place Boracay 1. There is a law restricting the said right; and
under a state of calamity 2. The restriction is based on national security, public
o Ordered the shutting down in a cabinet meeting on April 4, safety, or public health
2018 o Accdg to petitioners, neither of these conditions have been
- Petitioners contend that around 630 police and military personnel complied with
were readily deployed to Boracay including personnel for crowd 1. Proc 475 does not refer to any specific law
dispersal management restricting the right to travel
o DILG also released guidelines for the closure 2. It has not been shown that the presence of tourists
- Fewer tourists had been engaging the services of Zabal and in the island poses any threat or danger to national
Jacosalem and their earnings were barely enough to feed their security, public safety, or public health
families. They feared the closure would cause them to suffer grave o RE DUE PROCESS: that the same covers property rights and
and irreparable damage. these include the right to work and earn a living. That while
o Before government was able to release a formal issuance on Proc 475 cites various violations of environmental laws in
the matter, petitioners filed their petition on April 25, the island, these do not justify disregard of the rights of
praying for TRO and writ of preliminary prohibitory thousands of law-abiding people. They contend that
injunction environmental laws provide for specific penalties intended
- April 26 (day after petition was filed): Duterte issued Proclamation only for violators. Verily, to make those innocent of
No. 475 declaring a state of calamity in Boracay and ordered its environmental transgressions suffer the consequences of
closure for 6 months Boracay closure is tantamount to violating their DP rights
o Petitioners filed a Supplemental Petition to declare the - That the closure could not be anchored on police power because
Proclamation unconstitutional police power must be exercised not by the executive but by
- On October 26, Boracay was reopened to tourism (6 months after legislative bodies
Proclamation issued)
 - Proc 475 unduly impinges upon the local autonomy of affected of acts, review, approve, reverse or modify acts and
LGUs since it orders the said LGUs to implement the closure of decisions of subordinate officials or units, and prescribe
Boracay and ban tourists and non-residents therefrom standards, guidelines, plans and programs.
o While petitioners acknowledge the President’s power of o Duterte’s issuance of Proc 475 was precipitated by his
supervision over LGUs, they nevertheless point out that he approval of the recommendation of the National Disaster
does not wield the power of control over them. As such, Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) to
Duterte can only call the attention of the LGUs concerned place Boracay under a state of calamity
with regard to rules not being followed, which is the true 1. Thus Duterte merely exercised his power of control
essence of supervision, but he cannot law down the rules over the executive branch
himself as this already constitutes control - In any case, the President has residual powers which are implied
- That the case does not simply revolve on the need to rehabilitate form the grant of executive power and which are necessary for him
Boracay, but rather, on the extent of executive power and the to coply with his duties under the Constitution
manner by which it was wielded by Duterte - The right to travel is not an absolute right and may be impaired or
o That necessity does not justify the President’s abuse of restricted in the interest of national security, public safety or health
power - RE DUE PROCESS: that as a sandcastle maker and as a driver,
petitioners are freelances and thus belong to the informal economy
sector which means their source of livelihood is never guaranteed
RESPONDENTS’ ARGUMENTS and is susceptible to changes in regulations and over-all business
climate
- There is no real justiciable controversy in this case - Proc 475 does not unduly transgress upon the local autonomy of
o There is no clash between the right of the State to preserve the LGUs concerned.
and protect its natural resources and the right of petitioners o Under RA 10121, it is actually the Local Disaster Risk
to earn a living Reduction Management Council concerned which, subject
o Proc. 475 does not prohibit anyone from being gainfully to several criteria, is tasked to take the lead in preparing for,
employed responding to, and recovering from the effets of any
- Issuance of Proc 475 is a valid exercise of delegated legislative disaster when a state of calamity is declared.
power, it being anchored on Sec 16 of RA 10121 (Philippine Disaster o In any case, the devolution of powers upon LGUs pursuant
Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010) authorizing the to the constitutional mandate of ensuring their autonomy
President to declare a state of calamity does not mean that the State can no longer interfere in
- Proc 475 was issued pursuant to the President’s executive power their affairs
under Art VII Section 1 of the Constitution. o This is especially true in this case since Boracay’s
o That in order to effectively discharge the enforcement and environmental disaster cannot be treated as a localized
administration of the laws, the President is granted problem that can be resolved by the concerned LGUs only.
administrative powers over bureaus and offices, which The magnitude and gravity of the problem require the
includes the power of control. intervention and assistance of different national
o The power of control, in turn, refers to the authority to government agencies in coordination with concerned LGUs
direct the performance of a duty, restrain the commission
 LONG ASS PA-POETIC HANASH YOU CAN QUOTE TO SIR TO MAKE IT LOOK
LIKE YOU READ THE ORIGS:
ISSUE RELEVANT TO DISCUSSION:
There is an obvious similarity in Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
W/N there is an intrusion into the autonomy of the LGU? [NO]
v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay and in the present case in that both
involve the restoration of key areas in the country which were once glowing
with radiance and vitality but are now in shambles due to abuses and
RULING exploitation. What sets these two cases apart is that in the former, those
- Contrary to petitioners’ argument, RA 10121 recognizes and even mandated to act still needed to be enjoined in order to act. In this case, the
puts a premium on the role of the LGUs in disaster risk reduction bold and urgent action demanded by the Court in Metropolitan Manila
and management as shown by the fact that a number of the Development Authority is now in the roll out. Still, the voice of cynicism,
legislative policies set out I the subject statute recognize and aim to naysayers, and procrastinators heard during times of inaction can still be
strengthen the powers decentralized to LGUs. This role is echoed in heard during this time of full action – demonstrating a classic case of "damn
the questioned proclamation. if you do, damn if you don't". Thus, in order for the now staunch
o The fact that other government agencies are involved in the commitment to save the environment not to fade, it behooves upon the
rahab work does not create the inference that the powers courts to be extra cautious in invalidating government measures meant
and functions of the LGUs are being encroached upon. The towards addressing environmental degradation. Absent any clear showing
respective roles of each government agency are particularly of constitutional infirmity, arbitrariness or grave abuse of discretion, these
defined and enumerated in EO 53 and all are in accordance measures must be upheld and even lauded and promoted. After all, not
with their respective mandates much time is left for us to remedy the present environmental situation. To
- The situation in Boracay can in no wise be characterized or labelled borrow from Oposa, unless the State undertakes its solemn obligation to
as a mere local issue as to leave its rehabilitation to local actors preserve the rights to a balanced and healthful ecology and advance the
o Boracay is a prime tourist destination which caters to both health of the people, "the day would not be too far when all else would be
local and foreign tourists. Any issue thereat has lost not only for the present generation, but also for those to come –
corresponding effects, direct or otherwise, at a national generations which stand to inherit nothing but parched earth incapable of
level sustaining life."
o Also, the Proclamation recognizes the mandated roles and
involvement of LGUs in the rehabilitation, as it directed
“[a]ll departments, agencies and offices, including
government-owned or controlled corporations and affected
local government units x x x to implement and execute x x x
the closure [of Boracay] and the appropriate rehabilitation
works, in accordance with pertinent operational plans and
directives, including the Boracay Action Plan."