Saturday, July 26, 2008 SC asked to reverse injunction on aerial spray
MEMBERS of communities affected by aerial spraying of pesticides in banana plantations in Davao trooped Friday to the Supreme Court together with their lawyers and support groups under the Task Force Against Aerial Spray to file a petition for certiorari.
In their motion, they asked the court to reverse the preliminary injunction issued by the Court of Appeals on the local ordinance banning the aerial spray.
Lawyer Arnold de Vera of the Sentro ng Alternatibong Lingap Panligal (Saligan), an alternative law group rendering free service to affected Davao residents, said the injunction prevented the local government from enforcing the ordinance that took effect on March 23, 2007.
"The ordinance enjoys the presumption of legality. Hence, its continued enforcement cannot and should not be stopped by injunction," de Vera said, adding that the requirements for a Writ of Preliminary Injunction are absent in the conduct of aerial spraying in Davao City.
De Vera explained a writ of injunction is, in essence, a protective measure against irreparable injury. But the owners and operators of banana plantations who are grouped as the Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association (PBGEA) could not prove to the appellate court that stopping aerial spraying will cause irreparable damage to their business because the ordinance does not prohibit the use of pesticides but the method by which they use aircrafts as spraying machines.
He added the injunction is causing the continued, irreversible harm to the health of the people and the environment.
"Hindi na namin makakaya pang tiisin ang ilang dekada nang mai-spray-an ng pestisidyo. Marami na sa amin ang nagkakasakit. Apektado rin ang aming mga pananim at inuming tubig [We can no longer bear being sprayed on with pesticides for decades. Many of us are already getting sick, our crops and drinking water damaged]," said Corazon Sabinada, one of the affected residents seeking the reversal from the Supreme Court.
Records showed that PBGEA, assailing the ordinance as unconstitutional, filed a civil case against the City Government to stop the implementation of the ordinance.
On September 22, 2007, the Davao City Regional Trial Court upheld the constitutionality and validity of the ordinance. But on October 18, 2007, PBGEA filed an urgent motion for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction at the 22nd Division of the Court of Appeals in Cagayan de Oro City.
On November 26, 2007, PBGEA immediately resumed its aerial spraying operations after the appellate court granted its motion for a TRO and preliminary injunction last November 16, 2007 and January 28, 2008, respectively.
On May 22, 2008, the court also denied the motion for reconsideration earlier filed by the City Government.
The appellate court, through a June 3, 2008 resolution, also required the comment of the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) on the constitutionality of the ordinance.
On June 20, 2008, the OSG upheld the RTC's ruling and recommended that the appealed decision be affirmed in toto for being in conformity with law, evidence on record, and prevailing jurisprudence.
TF Against Aerial Spray is composed of the Alternative Law Group (ALG), Clear Communicators for the Environment (Clear), Concerned Citizens Against Pollution (Cocap), Interface Development Interventions (Idis), Kaisahan, Mamamayan Ayaw sa Aerial Spray (Maas), Partido Kalikasan Institute, Saligan, Salika, and World Environment Day-Philippines. (Press release)
