Ex parte
cease and desist orders are permitted by law and regulations in
situations like that here presented precisely because stopping the
continuous discharge of pollutive and untreated effluents into the
rivers and other inland waters of the Philippines cannot be made to wait
until protracted litigation over the ultimate correctness or propriety
of such orders has run its full course, including multiple and
sequential appeals such as those which Solar has taken, which of course
may take several years. The relevant pollution control statute and
implementing regulations were enacted and promulgated in the exercise of
that pervasive, sovereign power to protect the safety, health, and
general welfare and comfort of the public, as well as the protection of
plant and animal life, commonly designated as the police power. It is a
constitutional commonplace that the ordinary requirements of procedural
due process yield to the necessities of protecting vital public
interests like those here involved, through the exercise of police
power. The Board's ex parte Order and Writ of Execution would, of
course, have compelled Solar temporarily to stop its plant operations, a
state of affairs Solar could in any case have avoided by simply
absorbing the bother and burden of putting its WTP on an operational
basis. Industrial establishments are not constitutionally entitled to
reduce their capitals costs and operating expenses and to increase their
profits by imposing upon the public threats and risks to its safety,
health, general welfare and comfort, by disregarding the requirements of
anti- pollution statutes and their implementing regulations.
It should perhaps be made clear the Court is not here saying that the correctness of the ex parte
Order and Writ of Execution may not be contested by Solar in a hearing
before the Board itself. Where the establishment affected by an ex parte cease and desist order contests the correctness of the prima facie
findings of the Board, the Board must hold a public hearing where such
establishment would have an opportunity to controvert the basis of such ex parte
order. That such an opportunity is subsequently available is really all
that is required by the due process clause of the Constitution in
situations like that we have here. The Board's decision rendered after
the public hearing may then be tested judicially by an appeal to the
Court of Appeals in accordance with Section 7(c) of P.D. No. 984 and
Section 42 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations. A subsequent
public hearing is precisely what Solar should have sought instead of
going to court to seek nullification of the Board's Order and Writ of
Execution and instead of appealing to the Court of Appeals. It will be
recalled the at the Board in fact gave Solar authority temporarily to
continue operations until still another inspection of its wastewater
treatment facilities and then another analysis of effluent samples could
be taken and evaluated.
No comments:
Post a Comment