FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT 1

INTERGENERATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT AS

A JUDICIAL ARGUMENT FOR PUBLIC ACTION ON DEFORESTATION
OPOSA, ANTONIO A., JR.
Attorney, Philippine Ecological Network (PEN), 1807 Tower One, Cityland 10, Ayala
Avenue, Cor H. V. Dela Costa St., Salcedo Village, 1200, Makati, Philippines
1 INTRODUCTION
One of the basic principles stated and reiterated in the Agenda 21 is the concept of
.inter-generational responsibility.. It states that:
.Man ... bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the
environment for present and future generations..1
Essentially, the principle means that we hold the natural resource treasures of the earth
in trust for the benefit, enjoyment and use of the generations of humankind yet to come. It is
therefore a trust endowed upon us . as trustee and depository . to use and enjoy. While our
generation has the right to use the earth.s resources, as a trustee and depository, we are also
duty bound not to misuse or exhaust it, so that those of our species to come in much later years
will still have something to use. This, in simple terms is the meaning of .sustainable development.,
using natural resources without exhausting them.
The time frame is not limited to nor extending only until the generation of our children
and of our children.s children. Rather, it extends up to a horizon of reasonable perpetuity, i.e. up
to the time when the species homo sapiens is still around and that they will still need the lifesupport
systems of the natural resource treasures of the earth.
This concept was tested in the legal forum in the Philippines. On July 30, 1993, one
year after the Earth Summit that produced Agenda 21, the Philippine Supreme Court had the
occasion to rule on the legal standing of children to sue before a court of law on a question of
nationwide significance . the issue of deforestation.
2 GEOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS
The Philippines is an archipelagic country of 7100 islands with a total land area of 30
million hectares. Being an island ecology and given the slope and terrain of our islands, the
proper land use balance should be about 50-50, i.e. 50% for forest lands and 50% for other land
uses.
Lest we forget, the laws of man must follow the laws of nature.
It is estimated that approximately 50 years ago, the country had about 16 million hectares
of old-growth forest covering 53% of the land mass.
In 1988, it was determined through satellite imagery that the country had approximately
800,000 hectares of old growth forests left and about 3-4 million hectares of residual and/or
logged-over forests.
3 POLICY ADVOCACY THROUGH LEGAL ACTION
The Philippine mahogany was once famous worldwide. They were extracted from the
virgin forests of the Philippines. Because these forests were once lush and almost limitless, it
was the governmental policy to allow logging only in our virgin forests.
FOURTH 2 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT
To recall, there were only 800,000 hectares left. In 1989, data from the Government2
revealed that there were 92 logging corporations holding Timber License Agreements (TLA.s)
covering an area of 3.9 million hectares. There was even evidence that certain logging companies
did not have forested areas within their logging concessions. Something was wrong with the
arithmetic. It was estimated that about 100,000 hectares of old-growth forests were destroyed
every year. Thus, on its very face, total removal of the virgin forest cover may happen in less than
10 years.
If one were to seek a change in the policy, and the law was the only tool on hand, the
avenue for attempt, however modest, would be through a legal action. How to frame the problem
into a justiciable and litigable issue was the challenge.
4 STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
4.1 Choice of the parties:
4.1.1 Plaintiff:
While the present generation was and will continue to suffer the ecological malfunctioning
as a result of forest destruction, it is the generation of our children and those to follow that will
suffer what in legal parlance is called irreversible damage and irreparable injury. Under the rules

on procedure, they are the real parties in interest.

4.1.2 Defendant: Who should be the defendant/s?

The necessary defendants are:
a. The holders of the license.
b. The issuer of the license.
To unnecessarily pick a fight with 92 multimillion logging companies, with their battery
of topnotch lawyers and their massive political clout, may not be an act of heroism but of foolhardy
quixotism.
The art of war teaches us to choose the line of least resistance. Thus, the issuer, the
Government, was the easier target.3 Besides, under the Regalian doctrine, Government
(representing the State) is the owner of the country.s natural resources. Being the owner and
possessor of authority, Government is also bestowed with responsibility. As the temporal
representative of this generation, Government is duty bound to care for the natural resources of
the Philippines and to keep it in good, if not in a better, condition for the benefit of the present
and future generations of Filipinos.
In fact this line of thinking was already present in our existing environmental laws. An
environmental provision had even been recently enshrined in the 1987 Constitution.
4.2 Choice of the action:
A cause of action in an environmental legal action with a policy (a.k.a. political)
complexion must not only be sufficient, it must also appear sufficient, clear, unmistakable, and
palpable. Otherwise, it can suffer the setback of early dismissal for failing to state a cause of
action.
The clear and unmistakable cause of action was in the fact that:
. There were only 800,000 hectares left of virgin forests.
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT 3
. The Government had granted logging concessions to 3.9 million hectares (almost
five times more than was available).
. At the present rate of forest depletion, there will be nothing left for our children and
those of them to follow.
. If the generations to follow will suffer irreparable injury and permanent damage, they
are therefore the proper parties-plaintiff.
5 THE LEGAL ACTION
On March 20, 1990, (two years before Agenda 21) Civil Case No. 90-777 for mandatory
injunction was initiated before the Regional Trial Court of Makati, Metro Manila. The plaintiffs,
forty three children from all over the Philippines filed a legal action against the Secretary of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and prayed for the cancellation of
all logging concessions in the country. The legal and philosophical basis are as follows.
5.1. Constitution:
The 1987 Constitution states that, .The State shall protect and advance the right of the
people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
(Article 2, Section 16).
5.2 Common Law:
This generation, represented by the Government, is the trustee of the natural resource
treasures of the country. As such, it must properly care for these treasures so that succeeding
generations . the beneficiary . may still enjoy, use and benefit from these resources until and
up to an horizon of reasonable perpetuity. The Trustier, of course, is the Creator of Nature.
5.3 Civil Law:
Whoever does damage to another in a manner that is contrary to morals and public
policy shall be liable for the damage done. Public policy is contained in the Constitution and in
the various dormant environment laws of the country. All of them state, in effect, that we hold
these natural resources for the benefit of future generations. If this public policy is violated by our
act of willful and continued forest depletion, there is actionable damage.
5.4 Natural law:
Plaintiff minors alleged that the act of allowing the total decimation of the forest resources
of the country violated their right (and instinct) of self-preservation and self-perpetuation. It is an
at tantamount to generational genocide.
6 THE INITIAL SETBACK
The Government, as anticipated, filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of the failure to

state a cause of action, and that the issue was political in complexion. After about one year, the
Regional Trial Court dismissed the case on the following grounds:
1. Failure to state a cause of action on the part of the plaintiffs and lack of
personality to sue.
2. The issue is a political question and therefore, non-justiciable.

FOURTH 4 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

3. Canceling the timber license agreements will violate the constitutional protection
against infringement of contracts.
7 THE SUPREME COURT DECISION
The Supreme Court of the Philippines rendered an en banc and unanimous decision
on July 30, 1993.4 The following legal issues and clarifications may be of interest:
7.1 Class suit
.The subject matter of the complaint is of common and general interest
not just to several, but to all the citizens of the Philippines. Since the parties are
so numerous, it is impossible to bring them all before the court..
The case was ruled as a proper class suit. It was also ruled that the petitioners are
numerous and representative enough to ensure full protection of all the concerned interests. 5
7.2 Legal personality to sue:
The Supreme Court clarified the question of the children.s legal right of action, their
locus standi. It said:
.Petitioners minors assert that they represent their generation as well as
generations yet unborn. We find no difficulty in ruling that they can, for themselves,
for others of their generation and for the succeeding generations, file a class
suit..
.Their personality to sue in behalf of the succeeding generations can
only be based on the concept of inter-generational responsibility insofar as the
right to a balanced and healthful ecology is concerned. Such a right considers
the .rhythm and harmony of Nature..
.Nature means the created world in its entirety. Such rhythm and harmony
indispensably include, inter alia, the judicious disposition of the natural resources
to the end that their development be equitably accessible to the present as well
as future generations..
.Needless to say, every generation has a responsibility to the next to
preserve that rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced and
healthful
ecology..
.Put a little differently, the minors. assertion of their right to a sound
environment constitutes, at the same time, the performance of their obligation to
ensure the protection of that right for the generations to come..
The Court also clarified the legal status of the right to a sound environment. It noted that:
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT 5
.While the right to a balanced ecology is found under the Declaration of
Principles and State Policies and not under the Bill of Rights, it does not follow
that it is less important than any of the civil and political rights enumerated in the
latter..
.Such right belongs to a different category of right altogether for it
concerns nothing less than self-preservation and self-perpetuation the
advancement of which may be said to predate all governments and constitutions..
.As a matter of fact, these basic rights need not even be written in the
Constitution for they are assumed to exist from the inception of humankind..
.If they are now explicitly mentioned in the fundamental charter, it is
because of the well-founded fear of its framers that unless the rights are mandated
by the Constitution itself, the day would not be too far when all else would be lost
not only for the present generation, but also for those to come ..
.Generations which stand to inherit nothing but parched earth incapable
of sustaining life..
8 POST FACTO INCIDENTS
The Government has since prohibited logging in old growth forests.6 The number of
Timber License Agreement (TLA) holders has since been reduced to about 24. In effect, what

was sought to be achieved by protracted legal action was accomplished, at least partially, by
administrative action. This is not to say that the legal action was principally or even significantly
responsible for this development. If at all contributory, it served to merely stoke the fire of concern
over our vanishing forest resources.

9 LESSONS LEARNED
For all its jurisprudential value and implications in constitutional and political law, remedial
law and environmental law, the important lesson learned is that environmental controversies and
issues are not resolved by legal action and in the legal forum. After a 3-year battle all the way to
the Supreme Court, only the legalistic issue of the legal personality to sue had been resolved. If
a proactive environmental legal action can be of any value at all, it is in the fact that it serves to:
1. Force the issue and disturb the molecules of thought not only in the minds of
the concerned sectors (Government, logging operators, legislators, etc.), but
also the minds of the general public.
2. Oftentimes an environmental issue becomes a highly-charged emotional
controversy. Submitting it before a court of law will render it sub judice and
subject the controversy to the court.s dispassionate scrutiny. The issues can
be clarified in an orderly manner.
3. Given a sympathetic bureaucracy, the government administrators may just be
looking for additional ammunition with which they can enact a policy that they
wanted to do in the first place but could not on account of political considerations
and sensitivities.
FOURTH 6 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT
10 CONCLUSION
So far we have discussed a legal precedent on the issue of inter-generational
responsibility. What are the possible theoretical extensions of the principle?
1. If a generation is fully aware of its destructive behavior in such environmental
concerns as climate change, deforestation, and marine resource depletion,
yet continues to follow such conduct, is there malice and bad faith?7
If so, is the next generation entitled to inter-generational moral damages?
2. If a generation converts and misappropriates for its own use and benefit the
natural resource treasures which it holds in trust for succeeding generations
. the beneficiaries . can the former be held for, and is there a crime of,
generational swindling? The answers to these we shall leave to future
jurisprudence.
REFERENCES
1. Stockholm Declaration, Principle No. 1, and the Rio Declaration, Principle 3.
2. The agency of Government primarily mandated to protect the country.s natural resources
in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
3. To the credit of then DENR Secretary, F.S. Factoran, his administration was of similar
thinking. In fact, he was informed beforehand of the legal action which he gamely
encouraged and supported.
4. Minors vs. Secretary of the DENR, GR 101083, 224 SCRA 792. All quotations
hereinafter cited may be found in the decision.
5. The plantiffs-children were carefully selected to come from all the geographic regions of
the country.
6. DENR Dept. Admin. Order No. 24, Series of 1991.
7. It is a universal principle of law that when one knows that something is wrong yet goes
ahead and does it, there is premediated malice and evident bad faith.
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT 7

A consent decree is an agreement or settlement to resolve a dispute between two parties

without admission of guilt.

Guideline
Page 1 of 13 140701 EM1033 ABN 46 640 294 485

Environmental Protection Act 1994

Environmental Protection Order
This document is intended to assist Environmental Services officers (officers) to issue an environmental protection
order (EPO).

Table of contents
What is an environmental protection order?
....................................................................... 2
Is this the appropriate statutory tool? .................................................................................
2
Issuing an EPO ......................................................................................................................
2
When the department issues an EPO ..................................................................................
2
Consider the standard criteria ..............................................................................................
3
How does the department successfully issue an EPO?
..................................................... 4
Step 1Completion of the assessment report
............................................................................. 5
1. Grounds for issuing an EPO
..................................................................................................................... 5
2. Expand upon the grounds
......................................................................................................................... 5
3. Brief history of the matter
......................................................................................................................... 5
4. Detail the matters considered
................................................................................................................... 5
5. Proposed requirements
............................................................................................................................. 6
6. Provide for natural justice
......................................................................................................................... 7
7. Recommendation
....................................................................................................................................... 8
8. Approval
...................................................................................................................................................... 8

Step 2Drafting the EPO

............................................................................................................... 8
Recipient of an EPO...............................................................................................................
9
Service of an EPO ..................................................................................................................
9
Follow up required by the department ...............................................................................
10
Record keeping responsibilities .........................................................................................
10

Making changes to an issued EPO ....................................................................................

10
Finalisation of an EPO .........................................................................................................
10
Review of decisions and appeals .......................................................................................
11
Penalties for non-compliance with an EPO .......................................................................
12
Other penalties that exist ....................................................................................................
12 Guideline Environmental Protection Order
Page 2 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

What is an environmental protection order?

The Environmental Protection Act 1994 (the Act) is designed to protect the environment using a variety of
regulatory tools. Most of these aim to elicit a cooperative response from those who are damaging the
environment. However in some cases, where cooperation has failed, it is necessary to legally force
people and industry to undertake an activity or stop an activity. In such cases, an environmental
protection order (EPO) can be used.
An EPO is an order that may be issued by the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (the
department) to impose a reasonable requirement upon a person which is relevant to a matter or thing
mentioned in section 358. This can include requiring the person to:
from the
department;

The issue of an EPO is governed by chapter 7, part 5 of the Act.

Is this the appropriate statutory tool?

EPOs are a useful tool to use when it is known what action needs to be taken and the timeframe during
which the action needs to be undertaken. An EPO should not be used where extensive work is required
over a long period of time. A transitional environmental program (TEP) or an environmental evaluation
can be used to determine what is causing harm, what needs to be done to rectify it and the appropriate
regulatory tool to respond to, or manage, the issue.
An EPO is appropriate where there is a breach of an environmental condition or a need to ensure that an
activity is carried out in a way to meet the general environmental duty.

Issuing an EPO
A decision to issue an EPO must be made by a person with the delegated authority to do so. Decisions
made by individuals who do not have the delegated authority to make the decision may be invalid.

When the department issues an EPO

Section 358 of the Act specifies that an EPO can be issued to a person in the following circumstances:
comply with a requirement to conduct or commission an environmental
evaluation and submit it to the department;

out, or that is likely to be carried out, or is proposed to be carried out by the person, is causing, or is likely
to cause, unlawful environmental harm;
the general environmental duty;
an environmental protection policy (EPP);

Guideline Environmental

Protection Order

Page 3 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

 a condition of an environmental authority (EA) or a development approval (DA);

a prescribed condition for carrying out a small scale mining activity;
a condition of a site management plan;
an audit notice;
a surrender notice;
a rehabilitation direction;
a regulation; or
an accredited environmental risk management plan (ERMP); or
direction notices (section 363E);
noise standards (section 440Q);
depositing prescribed water contaminants in waters (section 440ZG);
releases from boats into non-coastal waters (chapter 8, part 3D);
air contamination (chapter 8 part 3E);
fuel standards (chapter 8, part 3F).

Consider the standard criteria

When making a decision about issuing an EPO, officers must consider the standard criteria set out in the
Act. This ensures transparency of the process and fairness in application of EPOs. Some guidance on the
standard criteria is set out below.
nmental policy as set out in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the
Environment (IGAE);
the precautionary principle. This principle is often applied where the consequences of harm are not
known and means that when the health of humans and the environment is at stake, it may not be
necessary to wait for scientific certainty to take protective action. When considering this principle in the
context of standard criteria, decisions should be guided by:
o careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment;
and
o an assessment of the risk-weighted consequence of various options.
intergenerational equity. The present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and
productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations.
conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity. This should be a fundamental consideration.
environmental protection or ecologically sustainable development. Ecologically sustainable development
is defined in the object of the Act and embodies the principles of the quality of life now and in the future,

Guideline Environmental

Protection Order

Page 4 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

and maintaining ecological processes. Would the EPO be consistent with environmental protection
policies on water, air, noise or waste for example? Consider other documents such as state or regional
coastal plans.

Any relevant environmental impact study, assessment or report.

value includes a quality or physical characteristic of the environment that is conducive to ecological health
or public amenity or safety. Does the EPO have sufficient regard to the receiving environment?

community involvement on the issues that affect them? Have any submissions by the applicant and
anyone else who makes a properly made submission about the EPO been considered?

instrument, as follows:
an environmental authority;
a transitional environmental program;
an environmental protection order;
a disposal permit;
a development approval.
In managing the activity (to achieve an ongoing minimisation of the activitys environmental harm), are the
measures cost effective when compared to measures used nationally and internationally for the activity?
Officers should consider section 21 of the Act.
proposed instrument, mentioned
above as they would relate to the type of activity or industry carried out, or proposed to be carried out,
under the instrument. Consider the cost effectiveness and flexibility of the requirement.
it in the interests of the community that the EPO be approved?
(approved under Chapter 7, Part 8 of the Act), is the EPO consistent with the plan. If not, is the
inconsistency necessary for addressing the matters under the EPO? How will any inconsistency be
reconciled? Consult with the Contaminated Land Unit as early as possible when there are any
contaminated land issues.
environmentally relevant activity or activities means a system for the management of the environmental
impacts of the carrying out of the activity or activities.

How does the department successfully issue an EPO?

Officers must complete an assessment report to document the decision as well as completing the EPO.

Guideline Environmental

Protection Order

Page 5 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

Step 1Completion of the assessment report

Before completing the EPO, officers are required to complete an environmental protection order
assessment report , which sets out the facts and circumstances relating to the matter and documents the
decision making process used by the department in determining to issue an EPO.
The assessment report is not intended to replicate the department file. Rather it is designed to capture all
critical aspects that have led to the departments decision. Accordingly, officers are encouraged to limit
the information included to relevant points only.
1. Grounds for issuing an EPO
The Act states that an EPO can only be used in certain circumstances. Please identify the relevant
situation or grounds upon which the decision to use an EPO is based.
Administrative decisions, such as the decision to issue an EPO, are made based upon the balance of
probabilities. This means that the decision-maker must be able to determine whether, based upon the
information available, it was more likely than not that the events relevant to the issue of the EPO
occurred.
2. Expand upon the grounds
The purpose of this section is to clearly identify what the department must prove before deciding to use
an EPO and should be used to expand upon the grounds which have previously been identified. This can
include:
atutory requirement listed in the Act which must be met by the department prior to issuing an
EPO; or
-compliance.
In instances where one action has resulted in multiple breaches each breach should be listed
independently. For example, a site inspection could potentially detect a number of breached conditions
associated with a single EA. In this situation each breach would need to be proven on its own merits and
should be listed separately.
Each ground (including breaches or requirements) should be allocated a separate number.
3. Brief history of the matter
Please briefly outline any historical information relevant to this decision. This information should be
presented in succinct chronological dot points and should include how the department became aware of
the alleged breach.
This can include (but is not limited to) the following details:
-compliances in respect to any of the above;
of the
public, routine department inspection); and

4. Detail the matters considered

The purpose of the table in the assessment report is to link the elements of the breach to the evidence
gathered and the conclusions formed. This is achieved by identifying: Guideline Environmental

Protection Order
Page 6 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

ation sourced.
When documenting the evidence considered, officers are encouraged to limit the information to relevant
points only. This can include:
lab reports;

When developing the facts and circumstances, officers are encouraged to consider the accuracy and
relevance of available evidence, historical details, professional expertise and the weight attributed to any
direct testimony provided.
5. Proposed requirements
In instances where it is recommended that requirements are imposed upon the affected person, the
officer is responsible for developing proposed requirements for consideration by the delegate. The Act
provides that the department may impose a reasonable requirement relevant to the reason why the EPO
is issued (section 358). Without limiting those requirements, section 360(2) provides that the EPO may:
notice from the department;
r subject to stated
conditions; or

When drafting the requirements, officers should consider how they will contribute to preventing or
minimising environmental harm and whether the requirements are reasonable. As the recipient of the
EPO is able to seek a review of a decision to impose one or more requirements, it is necessary for
officers to provide justification for the inclusion of each requirement.
In accordance with the departments Regulatory Strategy, requirements should be outcome-focussed,
except in certain defined circumstances where it is necessary to prescribe how the requirement should be
carried out. Requirements must be SMART: specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and time specific.
Requirements must be relevant to the reason why the EPO is issued.
Example
An outcome-focussed requirement:
Immediately upon receipt of this EPO, contaminated water must not be released from the site.
If it is necessary to prescribe how this requirement should be carried out: Guideline

Protection Order
Page 7 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

Environmental

You are required to do the following things:

(1) As soon as practicable but by no later than 5pm on 31 January 2013, you are required to transfer 20
mega litres of contaminated water contained within the stormwater pond system into secure tanks
currently located on the site so as to prevent the release of contaminated water in contravention of
conditions D1-1 and D1-2 of environmental authority ABC87654321.
(2) As soon as practicable but no later than 5pm on 7 February 2013, you are required to ensure that the
water within the stormwater pond system meets either:
(a) the water quality limits set out in Schedule D Table 5 (end of pipe contaminant release limits) of
environmental authority ABC87654321; or
(b) the mandatory reporting level set out in the environmental authority ABC87654321.
(3) From 5pm on 7 March 2013 you must prepare and implement an action plan to ensure that:
(a) at a minimum all storages on site meet the design storage allowance by 30 September 2013 pursuant
to condition D1-4 of environmental authority ABC87654321;
(b) adequate treatment and pumping options are available on the said premises prior to 1 December
2013 to prevent the release of contaminated during the wet season in breach of condition D1-1 and
condition D2-2 of the environmental authority ABC8765432; and
(c) monthly water reduction targets are set and provided to the department by 7 March 2013.
6. Provide for natural justice
Prior to the department making a decision which may adversely impact on an individual or group the
department must:
Notifynotify the individual that the department is considering making adverse findings;
Respondprovide the individual with an opportunity to respond to the allegation; and
Considerconsider any representations made by the affected person before finalising the decision.
The seriousness of the matter will dictate the process by which natural justice is provided and is likely to
vary from case to case. Accordingly, officers are encouraged to use their discretion in determining how to
best ensure natural justice is afforded and the amount of time provided to the affected person to respond.
While in some circumstances it may be appropriate for an officer to discuss the above information with the
affected person during a site inspection or a telephone interview and to take contemporaneous notes, in
more serious circumstances a written notification which includes a specific closing date for submissions
should be used.
Regardless of the manner in which natural justice is afforded, any information provided by the affected
person is to be documented. The summary of information should include how natural justice was provided
as well as any representations or submissions provided by the affected person. Guideline

Environmental Protection Order

Page 8 of 13 140701 EM1033 Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

7. Recommendation
The investigating officer is required to make a recommendation in relation to the alleged breach.
Example
It is the opinion of the department that ABC Pty Ltd failed to comply with its EA conditions by allowing
storm water to leave 24 Jones Road and enter Murphy Creek. It is recommended that an EPO be
issued.

The precautionary principle or precautionary approach to risk management states that if an

action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the
absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it
is not harmful falls on those taking an action.
The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there
is the possibility of harm from taking a particular course or making a certain decision when
extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a
social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation
has found a plausible risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific findings
emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result.
A Writ of Kalikasan is a legal remedy under Philippine law that provides protection of one's
Constitutional right to a healthy environment, as outlined in Section 16, Article II of the Philippine
Constitution, which says the "state shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and
healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature."[1] "Kalikasan" is a Filipino word for
"nature".[1]