Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 3
The Chairman and Executive Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development v.
Lim, 801 SCRA 304 (2016) - Explain the grant of the explicit authority to PCSD to fill in the details as to how to carry out the objectives of R.A. No. 7611 in protecting and enhancing Palawan's natural resources.
Chairman, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development vs. Lim
G.R. No. 183173 Aug 24, 2016
The Supreme Court reverses the decision of the Court of Appeals and upholds the authority of the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) to issue regulations on the transport of live fish in Palawan, declaring the regulations and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order valid and effective.
Facts: The case involves the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) and its officials, Executive Director Winston G. Arzaga and Chairman Vicente A. Sandoval, as petitioners. The respondent is Ejercito Lim, doing business as Bonanza Air Services, represented by his attorney-in-fact, Capt. Ernesto Lim. The dispute centers around Administrative Order (A.O.) No. 00-05, Series of 2002, and Resolution No. 03-211, issued by the PCSD. These orders mandated that the transport of live fish from Palawan could only be conducted by traders and carriers accredited by the PCSD. Lim continued his operations without securing the required accreditation. The PCSD issued a Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order to Lim. Lim filed a petition for prohibition with the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA granted Lim's petition, declaring the PCSD's orders null and void and enjoining their enforcement. The PCSD appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that their orders were within their authority under Republic Act No. 7611 (Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan Act).
Issue: Did the Court of Appeals err in declaring A.O. No. 00-05, Series of 2002; Resolution No. 03- 211; and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order null and void for being issued in excess of the PCSD's authority?
Ruling: The Supreme Court granted the petition for review on certiorari. The Court annulled and set aside the CA's decision. The Court declared A.O. No. 00-05, Series of 2002; Resolution No. 03-211; and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order valid and effective. The Court lifted the permanent injunction issued by the CA. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the suit.
Ratio: The Supreme Court held that the PCSD had explicit authority under R.A. No. 7611 to issue regulations necessary for the implementation of the Strategic Environmental Plan (SEP) for Palawan. The PCSD's powers included the authority to adopt, amend, and rescind rules and regulations, and to impose penalties for their effective implementation. The Court found that the PCSD's issuance of A.O. No. 00-05 and Resolution No. 03-211 was within its statutory authority. The Chairman and Executive Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development v. Lim, 801 SCRA 304 (2016) - Explain the grant of the explicit authority to PCSD to fill in the details as to how to carry out the objectives of R.A. No. 7611 in protecting and enhancing Palawan's natural resources.
The issuance did not encroach upon the legislative functions of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan. The Court noted that the proper remedy to challenge the validity of administrative orders issued in the exercise of quasi-legislative functions is a petition for declaratory relief filed in the appropriate Regional Trial Court, not a petition for prohibition. In the interest of substantial justice, the Court decided to rule on the merits of the case.
Background and Parties Involved
The petitioner in this case is the Chairman and Executive Director of the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD). The respondent is a domestic air carrier doing business as Bonanza Air Services, primarily transporting live fish from Palawan to fish traders. The PCSD is a government agency responsible for the governance, implementation, and policy direction of the Strategic Environment Plan (SEP) for Palawan.
Issuance of Administrative Order (A.O.) No. 00-05
In 2002, the PCSD issued A.O. No. 00-05, which required that the transport of live fish from Palawan be allowed only through traders and carriers who had sought and secured accreditation from the PCSD. The Air Transportation Office (ATO) later communicated to the PCSD that ATO-authorized carriers should be exempt from the PCSD accreditation requirement. The respondent continued his business without securing the PCSD-required accreditation.
Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order. As a result of the respondent's failure to secure accreditation, the PCSD issued a Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order.
Petition for Prohibition and Court of Appeals Decision
The respondent filed a petition for prohibition in the Court of Appeals, seeking to nullify A.O. No. 00-05, Resolution No. 03-211, and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order. The Court of Appeals granted the petition and declared the challenged administrative issuances null and void. The Court of Appeals also issued a permanent injunction against the PCSD from enforcing these issuances.
Main Issue: Excess of Authority
The main issue in this case is whether the Court of Appeals erred in declaring the challenged administrative issuances null and void for being issued in excess of the PCSD's authority.
Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the PCSD. The Court stated that the petition for prohibition should have been brought in the appropriate Regional Trial Court as a petition for declaratory relief. Prohibition is not the proper remedy to challenge an administrative order issued in the exercise of a quasi-legislative function. The Chairman and Executive Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development v. Lim, 801 SCRA 304 (2016) - Explain the grant of the explicit authority to PCSD to fill in the details as to how to carry out the objectives of R.A. No. 7611 in protecting and enhancing Palawan's natural resources.
Authority of the PCSD
The Court held that the PCSD had the authority to issue the challenged administrative issuances as part of its function to implement the SEP. The PCSD was established as the administrative machinery for the SEP's implementation. The PCSD's functions included formulating plans and policies, coordinating with local governments, and enforcing the provisions of the SEP.
Validity of Administrative Issuances
Therefore, the Court declared the administrative issuances valid and effective. The permanent injunction against the PCSD was lifted. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the suit.
1.) What was the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case? The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioners and reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals.
2.) What was the basis for the Supreme Court's ruling in the case? The Supreme Court based its ruling on the interpretation of Republic Act No. 7611.
3.) What law was cited as the basis for the PCSD's authority in issuing regulations on the transport of live fish in Palawan? Republic Act No. 7611 (Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan Act).
4.) What was the PCSD's role in relation to Republic Act No. 7611? The PCSD was the implementing agency of Republic Act No. 7611.
5.) What did the Court emphasize regarding the PCSD's actions in the case? The Court emphasized that the PCSD's actions were within its statutory authority and consistent with the objectives of Republic Act No. 7611.
6.) What opportunity did the respondent have before any penalty or sanction was imposed? The respondent had the opportunity to explain his actions and present his side before any penalty or sanction was imposed.
7.) What did the Supreme Court find regarding the PCSD's actions and due process? The Court found no basis for the Court of Appeals' declaration that the PCSD's actions were null and void.
8.) What was the focus of the PCSD's regulations in the case? The focus of the PCSD's regulations was to protect and conserve the environment in Palawan, known for its rich biodiversity.
9.) What was the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision on the PCSD's regulations and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order? The Supreme Court upheld the authority of the PCSD to issue regulations on the transport of live fish in Palawan and declared the regulations and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order valid and effective.
