- CA’s TEPO denial further harms marine life, residents: group
THE COURT of Appeals’ denial of a temporary environmental protection order (TEPO) would cause irreparable damage not only to marine life but also to the constituents, an environmental group said.
Petitioners in the writ of kalikasan case against the Samal Island–Davao City Connector (SIDC) Project expressed dismay over the CA’s denial of their prayer for a TEPO.
According to petitioners, the TEPO would have immediately halted construction activities that have already caused irreversible damage to coral reef ecosystems in Paradise Reef (Samal) and the Hizon Marine Protected Area (Davao City), according to marine scientists and field documentation.
A TEPO is an order issued by a court directing or enjoining a person or entity to cease doing an act that may cause environmental damage, ensuring preservation of the environment, pending final resolution of a case.
“We are deeply saddened by the court’s refusal to issue even temporary protection for reefs that took centuries to grow and now face destruction in a matter of weeks,” Carmela Marie Santos, petitioner, environmental advocate, and member of the Sustainable Davao Movement, said.
“This decision allows continued harm to ecosystems that sustain not only marine life, but the livelihoods and food sources of coastal communities,” Santos added.
The Supreme Court on July 1 issued a Writ of Kalikasan against the Department of Public Works and Highways, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Samal Island Protected Landscape and Seascape Protected Area Management Board, and the China Road and Bridge Corporation, and gave them 10 days to file a verified return on the petition.
The High Court referred the payer for a TEPO to the CA in Cagayan de Oro for action. The CA acted upon it on July 11, denying the prayer.
The CA decision was published by Samal Mayor Lemuel Reyes in his social media page with the caption: “Kini ang pinakanindot nga balita… PADAYON ang TULAY… thank you Lord.
In the decision, CA said issuing TEPO at this stage “would cause undue disruption to a government infrastructure project already in progress and may potentially harm the greater public interest.”
Despite the denial, petitioners said they remain committed to pursuing justice and upholding the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology.
“We did not come to court to obstruct development. We came to defend the law, protect biodiversity, speak up with our fisherfolks, and hold public institutions accountable for failing to consider less harmful alternatives,” Santos said.
The petitioners maintained that scientific findings submitted in the case documented the destruction of live coral colonies, sedimentation impacts, and declining fish catch but CA said the petitioners “failed to demonstrate that the case pertains to matters of extreme urgency and that grave injustice and/or irreparable injury will arise if no TEPO is issued at this stage of the proceedings.”
“This setback only strengthens our resolve. We are not giving up on our reefs, our local communities/fisherfolks, our laws, or our future,” she stressed.
A photo of the Paradise Coral Reef courtesy of marine biologist Dr. John Michael Lacson
