Facts
This case is unique in that it is a class suit brought by 44children, through their parents, claiming that they bringthe case in the name of “their generation as well asthose generations yet unborn.” Aiming to stopdeforestation, it was filed against the Secretary of theDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources, seeking to have him cancel all the timber licenseagreements (TLAs) in the country and to cease anddesist from accepting and approving more timber licenseagreements. The children invoked their right to abalanced and healthful ecology and to protection by theState in its capacity as parens patriae
. The petitionersclaimed that the DENR Secretary's refusal to cancel theTLAs and to stop issuing them was "contrary to thehighest law of humankind-- the natural law-- andviolative of plaintiffs' right to self-preservation andperpetuation." The case was dismissed in the lower court, invoking the law on non-impairment of contracts,so it was brought to theSupreme Courton certiorari.
Issue
Did the children have the legal standing to file the case?
Ruling
Yes. The Supreme Court in granting the petition ruledthat the children had the legal standing to file the casebased on the concept of “intergenerationalresponsibility”. Their right to a healthy environmentcarried with it an obligation to preserve that environmentfor the succeeding generations. In this, the Courtrecognized legal standing to sue on behalf of futuregenerations. Also, the Court said, the law on non-impairment of contracts must give way to the exercise of the police power of the state in the interest of publicwelfare.
Relevance
The case of
Oposa vs. Factoran has been widely citedworldwide for its concept of intergenerationalresponsibility, particularly in cases related to ecologyand the environment. For example:
•
Oposa vs. Factoran' s concept of "intergenerational responsibility"