MA.
FLORINA G CUREG POLI REV
LOCUS STANDI
OPOSA VS FACTORAN
G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993
FACTS: In a broader sense, this petition bears upon the right of Filipinos to a balanced and
healthful ecology which the petitioners dramatically associate with the twin concepts of "inter-
Page | 1
generational responsibility" and "inter-generational justice." Specifically, it touches on the issue of
whether the said petitioners have a cause of action to "prevent the misappropriation or impairment"
of Philippine rainforests and "arrest the unabated hemorrhage of the country's vital life support
systems and continued rape of Mother Earth."
The principal petitioners, are all minors duly represented and joined by their respective parents.
Impleaded as an additional plaintiff is the Philippine Ecological Network, Inc. (PENI), a domestic,
non-stock and non-profit corporation organized for the purpose of, inter alia, engaging in concerted
action geared for the protection of our environment and natural resources.
The original defendant was the Honorable Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr., then Secretary of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). His substitution in this petition by the
new Secretary, the Honorable Angel C. Alcala, was subsequently ordered upon proper motion by the
petitioners.1
The complaint2 was instituted as a taxpayers' class suit3 and alleges that the plaintiffs "are all
citizens of the Republic of the Philippines, taxpayers, and entitled to the full benefit, use and
enjoyment of the natural resource treasure that is the country's virgin tropical forests."
The same was filed for themselves and others who are equally concerned about the preservation of
said resource but are "so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all before the Court." The
minors further asseverate that they "represent their generation as well as generations yet unborn.
Plaintiffs further assert that the adverse and detrimental consequences of continued and
deforestation are so capable of unquestionable demonstration that the same may be submitted as a
matter of judicial notice. This act of defendant constitutes a misappropriation and/or impairment of
the natural resource property he holds in trust for the benefit of plaintiff minors and succeeding
generations. Plaintiff have exhausted all administrative remedies with the defendant’s office. On
March 2, 1990, plaintiffs served upon defendant a final demand to cancel all logging permits in the
country. Defendant, however, fails and refuses to cancel the existing TLA’s to the continuing serious
damage and extreme prejudice of plaintiffs.
ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioners have the right to bring action /LOCUS STANDI to the judicial
power of the Court.
HELD:
The case at bar is subject to judicial review by the Court. Justice Davide, Jr. precisely identified in
his opinion the requisites for a case to be subjected for the judicial review by the Court. According to
him, the subject matter of the complaint is of common interest, making this civil case a class
suit and proving the existence of an actual controversy. He strengthens this conclusion by citing
in the decision Section 1, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution.
MA. FLORINA G CUREG POLI REV
The petitioners can file a class suit because they represent their generation as well as
generations yet unborn. Their personality to sue in behalf of the succeeding generations can
only be based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a
balanced and healthful ecology is concerned. Such a right, as hereinafter expounded,
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, utilization,
Page | 2
management, renewal and conservation of the country’s forest, mineral, land, waters, fisheries,
wildlife, off-shore areas and other natural resources to the end that their exploration, development
and utilization be equitably accessible to the present as well as future generations.
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.
