This is no longer a time to question resilience (katatagan). Matatag (hindi nadadaan sa kurikulum) ang bawat naninirahan sa tabing-dagat bilang bantay-dagat at bawat taga-bundok bilang tagapangalaga ng bundok. Their resilience and contribution to the environment every day are priceless.
If there is a question that is napapanahon at dawit ang panahon, here is one: Why do we love the Philippines but continue to destroy and ignore (magbale-wala) nature?
With climate change, it is no longer enough to clean one’s yard. Persons who care are different from those who care about those who do not clean (iba yung pakialamero/a sa may pakialam), those who do not follow the standards, the ordinances, the laws to protect the river, the sea, the mountains, and the whole environment. Because of the broadened burden, it will reach the point of pagdidiin or dutifully condemning and accusing the people, factories, small or large buildings that trample on the right of the majority to live with clean air to breathe, streams to swim in, strong bridges to cross, and state-owned gardens, mountains, and forests to walk. It is right to report suspicious personalities to the authorities and investigate unlawful activities; it is not to be feared that what they are doing may be legal, but it is obvious to the eyes and common sense that they are destroying the environment and pretending to be legal and right.
Speaking of state ownership, there is a trade-off occurring in the government under the old and new administrations that instead of allowing land to be owned by people who do not have their own, it goes to powerful politicians and businessmen (usually combined; that is, a businessman, yet a politician). Kung sino pa ang edukado, siya pa ang kayang kayang mangwasak o magpawasak ng kapaligiran or the more educated one is the one who can effortlessly destroy the environment such as clearing (read: kalbuhin) the mountain instead of reforestation, grabbing parts of the lake or sea instead of letting go (magpaubaya) and supporting the livelihood of the fishermen and their kapus-palad families, as well as the farmers who have less and less cultivated and farmed land. They are defeated and lost even more (palugi) by the trend of brokers that whether they do not want to or do not want to deal with the brokers, are just there around them. It is because the brokers’ clout is strong (malalakas ang kapit).
If the roads in the countryside, towns, and cities used to be flooded, have we also given up our love for the motherland? Many have emigrated. Still more remain. That means such love continues (wait, OFWs also love the country). Love contains the true spirit of caring for nature. It is getting to the point where nature itself reminds us of our disregard for it. It is time to prompt ourselves about taking care of the environment; man to man, not storm to man (tao sa tao, hindi bagyo sa tao).
Let us, for that matter, remember (for others the fear and dread will return) the scourge of nature through typhoons named Nitang (1984), Uring (1991), Rosing (1995), Winnie (2004), Reming (2006), Frank (2008), Ondoy (2009), Sendong (2011), Pablo (2012), and Yolanda (2013). Ten on the list and it will be longer. There are certainly many others; we also mentioned Paeng in this column in 2022, and now Carina.
With the increase of thieves in society (pati ba naman sa gobyerno?) and with typhoons and other natural disasters becoming more frequent and stronger, it is only appropriate to radicalize the protection of nature.
How strict is the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in overseeing laws on the few reclamation projects in Metro Manila? Wait, there are not few but more and more projects which are pahinto-hinto, hinto-tuloy and, of course, tuloy-tuloy. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, land reclamation is “an irreversible form of environmental degradation.” That is not true of businessmen and politicians who have evil plans to monetize the environment; for them, they must pursue all this in the name of development which, in reality, only brings a temporary smile to their fans or mga tagahanga (the “n” is said to be missing).
WRIT LESSONS
Thanks to the modern approach of the Supreme Court (SC) in the preservation of nature through the innovative writ of kalikasan. It is issued by the court when there is a demonstration of actual or imminent danger and when the inaction to protect nature is evident. Recent examples: Writs of Kalikasan “on Genetically Modified Rice and Eggplant Products” (April 2023) and “against DENR and Mining Operators in Mt. Mantalingahan, Palawan” (August 2023).
It is pleasing and heartening for those who truly love the country and value nature that there is still hope for environmental justice in the SC’s decision in 2021 which has this clear explanation:
“Here, it is not disputed that the ECC in favor of PTK2’s project was issued without the submission of the required EIS. For lack of the EIS, the possible adverse (and, as claimed by private respondents, grave and serious) effects of the project on the surrounding environment were not thoroughly assessed and studied by the concerned government agencies, in this case, the DENR and NWRB. Without the safeguards provided by the conduct of an EIA (as evidenced by the EIS), the implementation of the project can conceivably actually violate or threaten to violate the right to a healthful and balanced ecology of the inhabitants near the vicinity of the rivers is very present. The environmental impact of the project is not properly assessed. Thus, We find that We can resolve the issue on the validity of the ECC (and, by parity of reasoning, the permits granted by the NWRB) in this case.
“Additionally, We underscore that the power of the courts to nullify an ECC existed even before the promulgation of the Rules on the Writ of Kalikasan for judicial review of the acts of administrative agencies or bodies has long been recognized subject to the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies.” (G.R. No.218416. November 16, 2021)
A clear explanation, indeed. Compare the judiciary’s account to that of the executive department. There was “a sweeping and convenient explanation for an old problem,” reading “Varieties of Ecological Communication” by David (2024).
In the court decision and the subsequent writs of kalikasan, here is the additional lesson: As long as there is complaint from those who continue living their lives brought by nature, there is hope (habang may reklamo ang nabubuhay dala ng kalikasan, may pag-asa).
