Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Didipio Earth-Savers' Multi-Purpose Association, Inc. (DESAMA) Et Al.v Elisea Gozun, Et Al. G.R. No. 157882 March 30, 2006
Didipio Earth-Savers' Multi-Purpose Association, Inc. (DESAMA) Et Al.v Elisea Gozun, Et Al. G.R. No. 157882 March 30, 2006
* FIRST DIVISION.
587
587
588
589
589
590
590
Same; Same; Mines and Mining; The holders of mining rights enter
private lands for purposes of conducting mining activities such
as exploration, extraction and processing of minerals.—The entry
591
591
592
592
Same; Same; Same; There is no basis for the claim that the Mining
Law and its implementing rules and regulations do not provide for
just compensation in expropriating private properties.—There is
also no basis for the claim that the Mining Law and its
implementing rules and regulations do not provide for just
compensation in expropriating private properties. Section 76 of
Rep. Act No. 7942 and Section 107 of DAO 96-40 provide for the
payment of just compensation.
593
593
Mines and Mining; Statutes; R.A. No. 7942 provides for the
state’s control and supervision over mining operations.—
Petitioners charge that Rep. Act No. 7942, as well as its
Implementing Rules and Regulations, makes it possible for FTAA
contracts to cede over to a fully foreign-owned corporation full
control and management of mining enterprises, with the result
that the State is allegedly reduced to a passive regulator
dependent on submitted plans and reports, with weak review and
audit powers. The State is not acting as the supposed owner of
the natural resources for and on behalf of the Filipino people;
it practically has little effective say in the decisions made by
the enterprise. In effect, petitioners asserted that the law, the
implementing regulations, and the CAMC FTAA cede beneficial
ownership of the mineral resources to the foreign contractor. It
must be noted that this argument was already raised in La Bugal-
594
594
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
This petition for prohibition and mandamus under Rule 65 of the
Rules of Court assails the constitutionality of Republic Act No.
7942 otherwise known as the Philippine Mining Act of 1995,
together with the Implementing Rules and Regulations issued
pursuant thereto, Department of Environment and
595
595
596
596
597
597
Didipio Earth-Savers’ Multi-Purpose Association, Incorporated
(DESAMA) vs. Gozun
WHETHER OR NOT REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7942 AND THE CAMC FTAA ARE VOID
BECAUSE THEY ALLOW THE UNJUST AND UNLAWFUL TAKING OF PROPERTY
WITHOUT PAYMENT OF JUST COMPENSATION, IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 9,
ARTICLE III OF THE CONSTITUTION.
II
WHETHER OR NOT THE MINING ACT AND ITS IMPLEMENTING RULES AND
REGULATIONS ARE VOID AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR SANCTIONING AN
UNCONSTITUTIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS OF DETERMINING JUST
COMPENSATION.
III
WHETHER OR NOT THE STATE, THROUGH REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7942 AND THE
CAMC FTAA, ABDICATED ITS PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY TO THE FULL
CONTROL AND SUPERVISION OVER NATURAL RESOURCES.
IV
V
WHETHER OR NOT THE 1987 CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS SERVICE
CONTRACTS.1
_______________
598
598
_______________
5 Guingona, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, 354 Phil. 415, 425; 292 SCRA
402, 412-413 (1998).
599
_______________
600
600
_______________
601
601
_______________
602
602
603
603
_______________
604
605
605
_______________
26 Id.
27 Id., p. 421.
28 Id.
29 Id.
606
606
_______________
607
607
_______________
33 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, Cruz, p. 66 (1995 ed.).
608
608
609
609
Section 76 provides:
610
611
611
612
612
_______________
613
613
_______________
41 Id.
42 Heirs of Juancho Ardona v. Reyes, 210 Phil. 187, 197; 125 SCRA
220 (1983).
43 Id.
614
614
That public use is negated by the fact that the state would be
taking private properties for the benefit of private mining firms
or mining contractors is not at all true. In Heirs of Juancho
Ardona v. Reyes,46 petitioners therein contended that the
promotion of tourism is not for public use because private
concessionaires would be allowed to maintain various facilities
such as restaurants, hotels, stores, etc., inside the tourist
area. The Court thus contemplated:
47 Id., p. 201.
615
615
The provision of the FTAA in question lays down the ways and
means by which the foreign-owned contractor, disqualified to own
land, identifies to the government the specific surface areas
within the FTAA contract area to be acquired for the mine
infrastructure.48 The government then acquires ownership of the
surface land areas on behalf of the contractor, through a
voluntary transaction in order to enable the latter to proceed to
fully implement the FTAA. Eminent domain is not yet called for at
this stage since there are still various avenues by which surface
rights can be acquired other than expropriation. The FTAA
provision under attack merely facilitates the implementation of
the FTAA given to CAMC and shields it from violating the Anti-
Dummy Law. Hence, when confronted with the same question in La
Bugal-B’Laan Tribal Association, Inc. v. Ramos,49 the Court
answered:
_______________
49 Id., p. 150.
616
616
There is also no basis for the claim that the Mining Law and its
implementing rules and regulations do not provide for just
compensation in expropriating private properties. Section 76 of
Rep. Act No. 7942 and Section 107 of DAO 96-40 provide for the
payment of just compensation:
617
617
_______________
618
618
_______________
619
VOL. 485, MARCH 30, 2006
619
620
620
621
622
623
624
624
625
626
626
Again, this issue has already been succinctly passed upon by this
Court in La Bugal-B’Laan Tribal Association, Inc. v. Ramos.55 In
discrediting such argument, the Court ratiocinated:
x x x x
_______________
627
627
Didipio Earth-Savers’ Multi-Purpose Association, Incorporated
(DESAMA) vs. Gozun
628
628
Again, this contention is not well-taken. The mere fact that the
term service contracts found in the 1973 Constitution was not
carried over to the present constitution, sans any categorical
statement banning service contracts in mining activities, does
not mean that service contracts as understood in the 1973
Constitution was eradicated in the 1987 Constitution.56 The 1987
Constitution allows the continued use of service contracts with
foreign corporations as contractors who would invest in and
operate and manage extractive enterprises, subject to the full
control and supervision of the State; this time, however, safety
measures were put in place to prevent abuses of the past
regime.57 We ruled, thus:
_______________
56 Id.
57 Id.
629
629
Didipio Earth-Savers’ Multi-Purpose Association, Incorporated
(DESAMA) vs. Gozun
x x x x
630
630
x x x x
x x x x
_______________
631
631
Didipio Earth-Savers’ Multi-Purpose Association, Incorporated
(DESAMA) vs. Gozun
SO ORDERED.
632
632