As we discussed in Part 1, the first challenged Ordinance (No. 8027) – which reclassified the Pandacan area from Industrial to Commercial and ordered industrial businesses like the oil industries maintaining depots in the area to cease and desist from operating – was held as constitutional by the SC.
In an about-face, Manila city hall then issued Ordinance No. 8187
for the purpose of reclassifying (again) the Pandacan area by creating a Medium
Industrial Zone and Heavy Industrial Zone thus allowing oil depots to continue
to exist in Pandacan.
If your first ordinance was upheld by the Supreme Court as a valid
exercise of police power because it aimed “to safeguard the rights to life,
security and safety of the inhabitants of Manila”, why not issue another
ordinance to repeal it, completely contradict it and forget about that small
concern regarding the life, security and safety of the inhabitants of Manila.
Let us allow the SC to explain why –
“… the
position of the Sangguniang Panlungsod on the matter has thrice changed,
largely depending on the new composition of the council and/or political
affiliations. The foregoing, thus, shows that its determination of the “general
welfare” of the city does not after all gear towards the protection of the
people in its true sense and meaning, but is, one way or another, dependent on
the personal preference of the members who sit in the council as to which
particular sector among its constituents it wishes to favor.”
Mindful that the safety of the Manileños were still at risk, the
SC continued -
“Now
that the City of Manila, through the mayor and the city councilors, has changed
its view on the matter, favoring the city’s economic-related benefits, through
the continued stay of the oil terminals, over the protection of the very lives
and safety of its constituents, it is imperative for this Court to make a final
determination on the basis of the facts on the table as to which specific right
of the inhabitants of Manila should prevail…”
Thus, the SC struck down Ordinance No 8187 as invalid and unconstitutional
for the same reasons it upheld the constitutionality of Ordinance No. 8027, further
saying that -
“The issue of
whether or not the Pandacan Terminal is not a likely target of terrorist
attacks has already been passed upon in G. R. No. 156052. Based on the assessment of the Committee on
Housing, Resettlement and Urban Development of the City of Manila and the then
position of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, the Court was convinced that the
threat of terrorism is imminent. It remains so convinced.
… the very nature
of the depots where millions of liters of highly flammable and highly volatile
products, regardless of whether or not the composition may cause explosions,
has no place in a densely populated area. Surely, any untoward incident in the
oil depots, be it related to terrorism of whatever origin or otherwise, would
definitely cause not only destruction to properties within and among the
neighboring communities but certainly mass deaths and injuries.
xxx
It is the removal
of the danger to life not the mere subdual of risk of catastrophe, that we saw
in and made us favor Ordinance No. 8027. That reason, unaffected by Ordinance
No. 8187, compels the affirmance of our Decision in G.R. No. 156052.”
And so, the SC finally set a definite period for
the relocation of the oil depot -
“The oil companies
shall be given a fresh non-extendible period of forty-five (45) days from
notice within which to submit to the Regional Trial Court, Branch 39, Manila an updated
comprehensive plan and relocation schedule. The relocation, in turn, shall be
completed not later than six months from the date of their submission.”
We expect this to be the
last we hear of the continued stay of the depots even though there is a new
mayor in Manila, different from the mayor who signed Ordinance No. 8027 and
different from that who signed Ordinance No. 8187.It was the Supreme Court that had to remind
local legislators that they are supposed to have the welfare of the people
foremost in mind.
The Pandacan Oil Depot (Police Power vs Capital Power) [First of 2 parts: Ordinance No. 8027 and G.R. 156052]
The Pandacan Oil Depot (Police Power vs Capital Power) [First of 2 parts: Ordinance No. 8027 and G.R. 156052]
No comments:
Post a Comment