Zambales residents fail to secure writ of kalikasan vs mining firms
The Court of Appeals (CA) decided not to issue a writ of kalisan against mining companies in Sta. Cruz town, Zambales province.
In a five-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Renato Francisco, and concurred in by the Associate Justices Jose Reyes, Jr. and Apolinario Bruselas, Jr., CA’s Former Special Fourteenth Division, the CA denied the motion for reconsideration filed by the Concerned Citizens of Sta. Cruz, Zambales (CCOSZ) to reverse its earlier ruling to prevent all mining operations in the province by denying their petition for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan with permanent environmental protection order (PEPO) against the firms.
The resolution affirmed its May 22, 2017, decision that also lifted the provisional writ of kalikasan issued by the Supreme Court in June 2016 in favor of the petitioners.
Lack of new arguments from the petitioners is the reason for the CA’s decision.
“A perusal of the motion for reconsideration reveals no new and meritorious arguments and yields mere rehashed arguments, which had already been exhaustively discussed and squarely passed upon by this Court in the Resolution sought to be considered,” the CA declared.
“Accordingly, petitioners’ motion for reconsideration is hereby denied for lack of merit,” it added.
Last year, the CCOSZ filed the petition against five mining companies, namely, Benguet Corp Nickel Mines Inc, Eramen Minerals Inc, LNL Archipelago Minerals Inc, Zambales Diversified Metals Corp, and Shangfil Mining and Trading Corp., claiming that the firms violated their constitutional rights to a balanced and healthful ecology.
Click here to Reply or Forward
Recommended on other sites
Politiko Main Latest News
North Luzon Latest News
Metro Manila Latest News
South Luzon Latest News
Bicol Latest News
Visayas Latest News
Mindanao Latest News
The comments posted on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of POLITICS.com.ph. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.