Make Climate Justice a reality… for climate change, weakening political

commitments, and hindering the implementation

…by holding the big polluters to account for their of required solutions to help mitigate and avert
contribution to catastrophic climate change. future catastrophes.

The Philippine Movement for Climate Justice
(PMCJ) is a broad movement consisting of 103
national networks/alliances and local
organizations representing basic sectors,
grassroots communities, the marginalized and
most vulnerable, including women, indigenous
peoples, fisher folk and coastal communities,
farmers and rural communities, forest
communities, formal and informal workers,
environmental groups, urban poor, and others in
the Philippines that aims to lead the joint
struggles, campaigns and actions in putting
forward the climate justice framework as a
fundamental element of solving the climate crisis.
Climate change is fueling extreme weather events
that batter vulnerable nations like the
Philippines—a country that is least responsible for
the climate crisis—is facing the brunt of extreme
weather events in the form of ferocious super
typhoons or severe droughts. It is high time to
expose those responsible for climate change and
hold them to account for their harmful activities
that have taken a tremendous toll on humanity.
Just like the successful campaign in the US and
elsewhere against the big tobacco companies that
found themselves liable for harm caused by
cigarettes, and exposed how these companies
were deceiving the public (and policy makers)
about the realities of scientific research on
smoking, the Climate Justice campaign seeks to
hold the big polluters to account for their
contribution to the climate crisis.
These big corporate polluters have profited from
climate change and now must be made to stop
polluting the planet with their carbon emissions.
Instead, they must contribute to making
communities resilient and help pave the way for
an Energy [R]evolution that is already underway.

The United Nations has declared that the

Philippines is “A Nation at Risk” , ranking it as the
third-most vulnerable country in the world to
climate change. The country is also oftentimes
depicted as the poster child for the impacts of
climate change with freakish super typhoons
battering the country year on year, killing
thousands, displacing millions and costing billions
in damages. This is an injustice that should not be
inherited by our children and future generations.

For a long time, no one could pinpoint who

exactly is responsible for climate change and how
to hold them accountable. This is no longer the
case.

Climate Justice seeks to challenge the influential

role of the big polluters, alongside their host
governments, for refusing to take responsibility
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE and nutritional quality of local Alaskan berries
that are an important source of traditional diets.
Environmental Justice for Indigenous Populations
A prime example of environmental injustice is
Climate change has an inordinate effect on
that American Indian/Alaska Native infants are
vulnerable populations. The EPA has published
more likely to be hospitalized with diarrhea than
multiple fact sheets outlining the effects of
other infants in the U.S. Many remote tribal
climate change on various vulnerable populations,
households, primarily in western Alaska Native
all of which are populations that social workers
Villages and the Navajo Nation, do not have
encounter.
adequate drinking water or wastewater
As just one example the health of indigenous treatment infrastructure, increasing the risk of
peoples are affected by climate conditions water-borne diseases like diarrhea.
because their culture relies on their local
Current revival of the Dakota
environment and natural resources for food,
Pipeline construction may pollute the water
cultural practices, and income. Many live in
supply of several indigenous tribal communities.
isolated or low income communities such as rural
In addition, projected increases in large wildfires,
areas with limited access to public services and
as a result of changing weather patterns, threaten
healthcare, or they live in places most affected by
air quality for tribes in Alaska and the western
climate change like communities along the coasts.
United States.
The people of several Alaskan tribal villages are
facing relocation due to rising sea levels and Although the health and welfare of children,
coastal erosion. elders, indigenous peoples, and persons living in
poverty are disproportionately affected by
The EPA cites examples of food, water, air, land
environmental negligence, we all will be
and infrastructure, and health risks to tribal
struggling for survival if we don’t prioritize climate
populations. In the Upper Great Lakes Region,
change and environmental collapse as the
Ojibwe communities may be affected by the
ultimate social justice issue.
impacts of rising temperatures and changing
precipitation patterns on rice-growing conditions The National Association of Social Workers
in lakes and rivers. (NASW) recently published five social justice
priorities outlined in a new initiative for 2017
Indigenous people along the West and Gulf Coasts
which are:
rely on fish and shellfish for food, livelihoods, and
certain ceremonial or cultural practices. Higher  Voting rights
sea surface temperatures increase the risk that
 Criminal justice
certain fish and shellfish will become
contaminated with mercury, harmful algal toxins,  Juvenile Justice
or naturally-occurring bacteria.
 Immigration reform
For Alaska Native communities, rising
temperatures and permafrost thaw threaten  Economic justice/Equality
traditional methods of safe food storage in ice
Although each of the priorities are important,
houses, and increase risk of food contamination.
they mean nothing if environmental justice is not
Climate change may also affect the abundance
achieved. Similar to Maslow’s hierarchy, if basic
needs, in this case, air, water and sustainable
resources, are not protected, other priorities
become less exigent.
There is a small faction of our profession
dedicated to ecologically conscious social work,
but the profession has been slow to jump on the
environmentalist band wagon, as exemplified by
NASW’s social justice priorities. It’s urgently time
to reconsider. If you are interested in the nexus of
social work and environmentalism, check out the
Facebook page Ecologically Conscious Social
Workers. Learn more about the effect of climate
damage on the populations you serve.
The health impact of environmental crises varies
with age, life stage and location. And consider the
environment as one of the filters you use to
assess the person or situation you are facing. Yes,
we know all about person-in-environment…but
let’s also focus on the environment-in-person!
The fight for environmental justice
By: Atty. Gloria Estenzo Ramos- @inquirerdotnet
Cebu Daily News / 12:20 PM July 15, 2013
He is the first to admit he became an
environmental activist by accident. As a priest, he
saw the anguish of his parishioners, notably the
Mangyan community in Mindoro. The ecosystems
upon which they and their forebears primarily
relied on for sustenance for generations had been
vastly degraded. Mining had become a scourge in
their lives.
According to Fr. Edwin Gariguez, Mindoro Island is
one of the largest food producing provinces in the
Philippines and the seventh most important
biodiversity hotspot in the world. Agriculture,
biodiversity protection, human rights and mining
simply do not mix.
Fr. Edu, as he is fondly called, is one of the six
2012 Goldman Prize awardees and is the
executive secretary of the Catholic Bishops’
Conference of the Philippines’ National
Secretariat for Social Action. He is among the
growing number of Filipinos leading the fight for
environmental justice and ecological integrity,
opposing a highly destructive activity such as
mining, as so much is at stake, including food
security, human rights, and yes, our own survival
in this climate challenged era.
Fr. Edu Gariguez was in town and joined the panel
of distinguished resource speakers from the legal,
scientific and grassroots communities in sharing
their learnings in the recently-concluded
Environmental Law Symposium at West Gorordo
Hotel, with the theme ”Integrating Legal
Remedies to Protect Natural Resources in the
Philippines”. Co-organized by the Philippine Earth
Justice Center, Inc., and the Foundation for
Philippine Environment, the important event
aimed to enhance the environmental lawyers’
network in the country consisting of legal
practitioners in the field of environmental law and
sharing of insights and lessons in environmental
legal defense. It definitely attained the objectives,
capped by a highly inspiring visit to the
Renewable Energy (RE)-powered house of
Councilor Nestor Archival and the stand-alone
solar housing unit which, if replicated nationwide,
will revolutionize the slow RE Program of the
administration.
We oppose mining as it has caused more
heartaches, destroyed ecosystems and has
potential to exacerbate disasters. The Philippines
is a mega-diversity country, but now saddled with
low forest cover. It has very high geo-hazard risks
from flooding, landslides, siltation and the
destruction of important biodiversity areas.
Alarmingly, according to the United Nations
Report on Mining in the Philippines, over half of
the active mining concessions and two-thirds of
exploratory concessions are located in areas of
high seismic risk where earthquakes are
considered likely.
Pursuant to the study by the United Nations
University’s Institute for Environment and Human
Security and the German Alliance Development
Works, the Philippines ranks third in the list of
countries most vulnerable to climate change.
“Factors, such as land conversion, deforestation,
and mining activities, worsen the effects of
climate change and have a multiplier effect on
disasters.” (A quote from Rodne Galicha,
Philippine country district manager of The Climate
Reality Project (TCRP),
Unfortunately, despite the devastating impacts
and the laws and policies promoting sustainability
and ecological integrity, which prioritize the
quality of life of the people, and our unique high
biodiversity endemism, the policy on
unsustainable projects such as mining was
continued by the present Aquino administration.
The law, RA 7942, Philippine Mining Act of 1995, is
treated as cast in stone, seemingly impermeable
to the continuing destruction of ecosystems and
properties, death, and damages suffered by the
people and the clearly strong legal framework for
environmental protection, public participation
and local autonomy under the 1987 Constitution,
environmental laws and the more recent statutes
on climate change and disaster risk reduction.
It is true that President Benigno Aquino III
launched the National Greening Program and
issued Executive Order No. 79 committing to
comply with existing laws to protect the
environment and establish a no-go areas for
mining (section 1), and put in place an Integrated
Map System to include Mining Related Maps, to
guide “all planning and decision-making process”
(section 16). However, the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources lifted the
mining moratorium even without the committed
maps and the failure to identify specifically the
No-Go areas for mining.
It is time to review our priorities if we are to
consider the needs of the present and future
generations. Will we leave them a barren earth or
one capable of nurturing life for both humans and
non-humans?
Let us ponder Fr. Edu’s Acceptance Speech as
Goldman Prize awardee and reflect how we can
help in the fight for environmental justice for all:
“I was taught by the Mangyan indigenous peoples
to care for the earth. For them nature is likened to
a womb that sustains us with life. One of these
leaders is Badang, a Mangyan woman that went
on hunger strike with me. She was ready to die to
save the watershed threatened by mining. For
her, once the forest is destroyed, we too will
perish. She helped me understand that what is at
stake in the campaign is the survival of our planet,
of which we are merely a part.
“Protecting the rights of the poor must take
precedence over corporate greed. Genuine
development must prioritize the need to ensure
ecological sustainability over market profitability.
We should never sacrifice people and the
environment for short-term benefit of the few.
“I also believe that in our effort to save our
environment, we need to promote global
solidarity. We have only one world to care for and
to protect, and every small initiative matters.”
In the Philippines, environmental justice is a
guaranteed state policy affiliated to Section 16,
Article II of the 1987 Constitution which states
that “the State shall protect and advance the right
of the people to a balanced and healthy ecology in
accordance with the rhythm and harmony of
nature.”32 In applying this provision, the seminal
landmark case was Oposa v. Factoran decided in
1993, in which the petitioners were a group of
minors, represented by their parents.33 The
petitioners filed a class suit for themselves, for
others of their generation, and for the succeeding
generations. They wanted to stop deforestation
by asserting that specific permits granted by the
Government to license holders to cut trees in the
country’s forests violated the right of citizens to a
balanced and healthy environment. The
petitioners asked that the Government be
ordered to cancel all existing licenses in the
country and desist from granting and renewing
new ones. The Supreme Court in Oposa ruled that
minors could file a class action lawsuit, for
themselves, others of their generation and for
future generations. This was the first time globally
that future generations were recognized as having
standing to bring claims, and the first time that
environmental rights of future generations had
been considered and upheld by a country’s apex
court, and to this day serves as a milestone in the
process of granting access to justice in
environmental matters and upholding
environmental rights. The Philippine Supreme
Court has explicitly invoked the interests of future
generations in other cases as well, most notably
Metro. Manila Dev. Auth. v. Concerned Residents
of Manila Bay, in which the court described an
“obligation to future generations of Filipinos to
keep the waters of Manila Bay clean and clear as
humanly possible.”34 In addition to a number of
other legal cases and policy responses in the years
that followed, a notable landmark was the
establishment of new Environmental Courts.
Through the lead role of the Supreme Court, a
decision was enacted in 2008 designating 117 trial
courts as ‘green courts’ with intended special
competency and jurisdiction to oversee cases
concerning the environment.35 This was followed
in 2009 with a national forum on Environmental
Justice and Upholding the Right to Balanced and
Healthy Environment, convened by the court and
partners to explore further means of empowering
the poor through systems of environmental
justice. The 2009 Environmental Justice forum was
organized to validate new draft Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases seen as a legal
innovation to further support the goal of
environmental justice. In 2010, the Court
approved new Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases, regarded as the first of its
kind in the world and a significant reform in
support of access to justice in environmental
matters by the poor. The Rules also adopted the
Oposa approach with a broad interpretation of
the doctrine of legal standing towards future
generations. A citizen’s suit provision in the Rules
was enacted to empower communities to ask for
suspension or stoppage of destructive activities
that threaten communities rights to a healthy
environment. This was coupled with a new
procedure, the Writ of Kalikasan (nature) enacted
to empower the Supreme Court and/or the Court
of Appeals to issue temporary or permanent
orders to protect the environmental rights of
communities, where a threatened damage is of
such magnitude that it prejudices the
environment of two or more cities or provinces.36
To ensure the effective implementation of the
new rules, the Supreme Court also launched a
capacity building initiative covering all duty-
bearers and claim-holders in the realm of
environmental justice, including judges, clerks of
courts, prosecutors, law enforcement, NGOs, civil
society and community representatives. Among
other things the rules specifically aim to advance
the constitutional rights of citizens to a healthy
and balanced environment and to provide a
simplified, speedy, and inexpensive procedure for
increased access to environmental justice. To
complement institutional responses and build
knowledge and capacity, a sourcebook on
environmental justice entitled “Access to
Environmental Justice: A Sourcebook on
Environmental Rights and Legal Remedies” was
issued in 2011 alongside a “Citizen’s Handbook on
Environmental Justice.” 37 A process was also
commenced to develop a roadmap for further
strengthening the implementation of
environmental justice in the country. This Philippines: Mining impacts on Subanon
included a review of environmental justice indigenous peoples’ rights
experiences in the criminal justice system and the
state of implementation of the Rules of Procedure
on Environmental Cases and the status of the A family home after mining starts; Photo
cases submitted to designated ‘green courts’ credit: Philippines Fact Finding Mission report
nationwide. 38 The Asia-Pacific region stands as a
In 2005 a coalition of researchers began a human
dynamic context for the evolution of
rights impact assessment of TVI Resources’
environmental justice challenges and responses.
Canatuan mine on the Mindanao island of the
Re-emerging at the center of global growth, the
Philippines. The research was designed to
region has seen the dramatic rise of civil society
investigate the social, economic, political, and
movements as issues of equity and sustainability
environmental impacts of the mine on the
arise, institutional and legal innovations in
Subanon indigenous peoples living on the land
response to the call for greater access to
and addressed six core human rights principles:
participation and remedy, and attempts to
the right to self-determination, to security, to an
strengthen the nexus between traditional norms
adequate standard of living, to adequate housing,
of resource use and formal systems for
to work and to education. The assessment
environmental governance. These challenges and
involved eight focus groups and 97 individuals
innovations are important to learn from and
from the community, as well as 35 key
scale-up in the region itself. Meanwhile as the
representatives from Philippine Government
region rises in importance in the global economy,
agencies involved with the mine, including the
these new experiences and lessons will be of great
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, the
value to both government and civil society actors
Mines and Geosciences Bureau, the Department
around the world.
of Environment and Natural Resources, and
officials from the Canadian embassy.

Over the course of ten months, the research team

reviewed existing material on the topic, organised
a workshop for farmers, fishers, small-scale
miners and various communities, orally translated
the research guide into language the communities
would understand, solicited their ideas, and tried
to gauge their understanding of human rights.
This involved a combination of storytelling,
making maps of the area, and constructing
timelines.
The results of the assessment reveal the mine has
had a negative impact on their right to self-
determination and on their system of governance.
Additionally, forced evictions and militarisation of
the area surrounding the Canatuan mine has had
a negative impact on the ability of the Subanon
peoples to enjoy the right to security and housing,
while mining activity appears to have increased
the levels of sediment and metals in some local
waterways, threatening human right to an
adequate standard of living. The assessment’s
concluding recommendations were to: 1)
encourage the Government of the Philippines to
assume responsibility for investigating the current
conflict in Canatuan and for adopting procedures
that would ensure such examples do not reoccur
in future; and 2) give local communities capacity
training on human rights so that they can identify
abuses and assert their rights; and 3) require
companies to make all efforts to resolve the many
issues and conflicts in Canatuan before
proceeding with expansion of its operations in
adjacent areas.
Following the assessment, the Commission on
Human Rights of the Philippines conducted
investigations into incidents at the mine and
British MP led a further international fact finding
mission.In 2007, the Subanon people along with
NGOs submitted a complaintto the United Nations
Committee on the Elimination of all forms of
Racial Discrimination to raise concerns about the
right to free, prior & informed consent
(see here for an analysis of decision-making
around this complaint versus other remedy
options). In 2011, the community decided to
enter negotiations with the company – as part of
the process, TVI admitted fault to recognize
Subanon leaders and committed to paying fins to
the community under an indigenous justice
trial. The mine ended operation in 2014 after ore
reserves were exhausted but farmers and
fishermen continue to experience negative
impacts of mining.
Timeline
 1997: TVI and Benguet Corp. sign Mineral
Production Sharing Agreement
 2002: TVI starts mining operations
 2004: TVI stops cyanide exploration
 2005: New mining projects begin; Human
rights impact assessment starts
 2006: Two-day conference with
community representatives for final inputs
 2007: Subanon & NGOs submit complaint
to UN Committee on the Elimination of all
forms of Racial Discrimination
 2007-2010: UN CERD issues various
communications to Government of
Philippines raising concerns about impacts
on Subanon rights
 2011: Community enters negotiations with
company; company engaged in traditional
cleansing ritual and admits fault in
recognizing Subanon leaders
 2014: Mining operation ends; Subanon
continue struggle for remedies