PRA: Petition vs reclamation, quarrying 鈥榰nscientific鈥�
Inquirer file photo
MANILA, Philippines — The Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) has asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the “unscientific” petition seeking to stop reclamation and seabed quarry projects in Manila Bay.
In a 46-page comment filed on May 20, the PRA said the petitioners’ arguments were based on “generalized fears and hypothetical scenarios that lack credible, science-based evidence of actual or imminent environmental damage.”
“While petitioners made general averments on the supposed adverse effects, such as changes in the circulation and retention of pollutants, and organic materials in the Manila Bay, as well as the alleged combined and compounded effects [on] the fish, birds, mangrove wetlands, and seafloor habitats, they miserably failed to provide relevant data to support their claims,” the PRA said.
READ:
The perceived harms, it added, were “speculative, hypothetical, and circumstantial (if not imaginary)” and should not prevail over regulatory compliance and rigorous application procedures.
Filed in December 2024, the petition by cause-oriented groups and activists urged the Supreme Court to stop all reclamation and seabed quarrying applications in Manila Bay until the projects are proven safe for the environment, climate, and communities.
Procedural lapses
In its comment submitted to the Supreme Court, the PRA said the petition had procedural lapses and involved political questions that were inappropriate for judicial review.
“Simply put, the petition is an indiscriminate and unfounded attack against the government’s policies on planning, approval, evaluation, implementation, and monitoring of reclamation projects,” said the PRA, which is a government-owned and-controlled corporation under the Office of the President.
Citing the doctrine of separation of powers, it added that the high court cannot assume jurisdiction over the political questions raised in the petition.
“The government’s stance on the importance of reclamation projects does not equate to the government not being mindful of the risks posed by the reclamation to the environment,” the PRA said.
The agency argued that it was not neglectful in performing its duties under its legal mandate, specifically when it processed, approved, and issued the relevant reclamation permits.
“These actions were undertaken in full compliance with Executive Order No. 543, Series of 2006, and its implementing rules, particularly PRA Administrative Order No. 2007-2,” the PRA said.
‘Manila Bay is alive’
Reclamation activities in Manila are currently on hold after President Marcos imposed a moratorium on such activities pending a cumulative impact assessment by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
But, in a statement in April, the DENR itself said that while its assessment showed that Manila Bay is “alive,” 21 ongoing reclamation projects could threaten marine ecosystems, fishermen’s livelihood and could worsen flooding in urban centers. /cb
