Sunday, November 25, 2007 Groups disappointed over aerial spray ban TRO By Grace L. Plata
PRO-aerial spray ban groups in the city expressed disappointment over the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by the Court of Appeals on the aerial spray ban implemented in Davao since last September after the Regional Trial Court Branch 17 declared it valid and constitutional.
"It's definitely sad news especially for the communities who were looking forward to a toxic shower-free Christmas," Lia Jasmin Equillo, executive director of environmental non-government organization Interface and Development Interventions (Idis).
"Corporate greed prevailed but we remain firm and committed to fighting for the implementation of the ordinance all the way to the Supreme Court," Equillo added.
The TRO, however, is viewed as a "welcome relief" by the Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association (PBGEA) and the affected farms in Davao City.
In a statement sent to Sun.Star, PBGEA said the TRO will afford the Court of Appeals the time and opportunity it needs to properly appreciate the issues raised and the evidence presented to reach a just and fair conclusion of the case.
"PBGEA looks forward to a fair and sober resolution of the merits of this case by the Court of Appeals," PBGEA Spokesperon Anthony Sasin said.
The decision last September 23 by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) issued all farms to stop conducting aerial spraying in Davao City.
"This has jeopardized the livelihood of thousands of workers and their dependents. Added to these are the thousands more working on allied or dependent enterprises supported by the banana export industry, like trucking, shipping, packaging, insurance, security and finance," Sasin said.
One PBGEA member corporation has allegedly lost 200 of its employees due to the difficulties caused by the ban.
"With the TRO, perhaps the proponents of the ban will realize that this is not a case of profit vs. people but a case of fact vs. fiction," PBGEA said.
PBGEA says the aerial spraying ban, endangers the livelihood of people as no job alternative is provided, and has also compel the plantations to resort to ground spraying which has been proven to be inefficient, inaccurate and ineffective.
The farms were also forced to use more volumes and subject more workers to longer periods of exposure to the fungicides that they baselessly say are harmful.
PBGEA has asked the proponents of the ban, if indeed the fungicides are harmful as they claim.
But, City Councilor Wendel Avisado said: "We respect the order of the Court of Appeals but our City Legal Officer will look into the matter.
City Legal Officer J. Melchor Quitain, in a phone interview Friday said they will wait for PBGEA to put-up the 1 million bond required by court for the TRO to be effective.
In a Resolution issued on November 16, the Court of Appeals issued a TRO suspending the enforcement of the ban on aerial spraying for 60 days.
