G.R. No. 215988, April 10, 2019
CORDILLERA GLOBAL NETWORK, ET AL., Petitioners, vs. SECRETARY RAMON J.P. PAJE, ET AL., Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, a coalition of indigenous peoples, residents, and environmental advocates, sought to nullify the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) issued to SM Investments Corporation for its SM Pines Resort Project in Baguio City. The project involved the construction of a mixed-use development, including a shopping mall, on an 8.5-hectare area. The core controversy arose from SM’s subsequent application and the DENR’s grant of a permit to cut and earth-ball 182 trees, including 43 Alnus and 139 pine trees, to facilitate the project’s expansion. Petitioners contended that the tree-cutting permit violated environmental laws, particularly the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for projects with significant environmental impact. They argued that the expansion was a substantial modification of the original project, necessitating a new ECC and a proper EIS process, which was not undertaken.
The Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals upheld the validity of the permits. The lower courts found that the tree-cutting was ancillary to the already ECC-compliant project and that the procedures followed by the DENR were sufficient. Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari, asserting grave abuse of discretion and violations of their constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology.

ISSUE

Whether the Department of Environment and Natural Resources committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the tree-cutting and earth-balling permits without requiring a new or amended Environmental Compliance Certificate based on an Environmental Impact Statement for the project’s expansion.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition, reversing the lower courts. The Court held that the DENR committed grave abuse of discretion. The legal logic centered on the mandatory nature of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process under Presidential Decree No. 1586. The project’s scale, involving the removal of 182 trees, constituted a significant change or modification to the originally approved project. The law requires that any such expansion or modification must undergo a fresh evaluation through the EIS system to assess its new and cumulative environmental impacts. The Court found that the DENR improperly treated the tree-cutting permit in isolation, severing it from the larger project expansion it served. This was a fatal shortcut that circumvented the essential procedural safeguard of public participation and scientific study mandated by the EIA process. The permit was therefore issued arbitrarily, without the proper legal basis, and in violation of the State’s constitutional duty to protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology. The Court ordered the permanent cessation of any tree-cutting or earth-balling activities under the voided permit and mandated strict future compliance with the EIA process for any project modifications.