organization duly organized and existing under Philippine laws and
with principal place of business at 640 Morales Avenue, Brgy. Gen.
Paulino Santos, Koronadal City and with members in the Municipality
of Majayjay, Laguna, hereto represented by its Secretary General,
Atty. Paterno L. Esmaquel, also of legal age and with office address at
Unit 1706 17th Floor, Prestige Tower, F. Ortigas Jr. Rd., Ortigas
Center, Pasig City.
The oppositor Froilan T. Gruezo is a concerned citizen and
resident of Majayjay, Laguna (Majayjay for short), while PPP has
members in Majayjay who will be directly affected and prejudiced by
the instant application for water permits subject matter of this
opposition. It is part of the advocacies of PPP to promote good
governance, transparency and accountability in our Government as
well as in our public officers/employees. The PPP is duly represented
hereto by its Secretary General, Atty. Paterno L. Esmaquel, who is
likewise from Majayjay, Laguna. A copy each of the original and
amended Articles of Incorporation of PPP and the necessary
Secretary’s Certificate are hereto attached as Annexes “A”, “B” and
“C”, respectively.
2
II
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF THE MATTERS INVOLVED
Majayjay is situated at the foot of the mystical Mt. Banahaw. It
is blessed with abundant sources of fresh potable water coming from
various springs flowing to various rivers which naturally flow and
drain to Laguna Lake. The subject applications for water permits
shall and will affect the ecological balance of Laguna Lake as
waters coming from the various springs and rivers of Majayjay
will be diverted for Municipal and Commercial uses without
comprehensive ecological study on its long term impact and
effects to Laguna de Bay.
Majayjay has an existing water system which is now almost 100
years old. As provided in the 1933 case decided by the Supreme Court
entitled “The Municipality of Majayjay, plaintiff-appellee vs. Tomas
Dizon, et.al., defendants-appellants,” GR No. L-3538, February 9,
1933, the water system of Majayjay was constructed in or before
August 1920. The Majayjay Waterworks System (MWS for short)
was named “Guevarra Waterworks System” in honor of the late
stateman Hon. Pedro Guevarra, the then Senator for the Fourth
Senatorial District and the author of Act No. 2773, the law which
3
authorized the issuance of the bonds that were used for the
construction of MWS.
From 1920’s up to the present time, the main source of water of
MWS for distribution to the inhabitants/people of Majayjay is the
“Sinabak Spring” located at Brgy. Malinao, Majayjay, Laguna. In
other words, for almost 100 years now, Majayjay has been extracting
and drawing water from Sinabak Spring which is being distributed to
its inhabitants/people thru the MWS.
Through the years and due to old age, the MWS was already
repaired and rehabilitated for several times and the water coming from
Sinabak Spring was and is being augmented by water coming from
other water sources of Majayjay. But up to this time, Majayjay still
principally relies upon MWS for the distribution of potable water to
its inhabitants/ people.
For the households covered by the MWS, the present water rate
in Majayjay is P33.00 per house with supply of water for three (3)
hours a day, more or less, at the estimated volume of 1,000 liters or
one (1) cubic meter per day or thirty (30) cubic meters per month.
Stated differently, for a price of P33.00 per house, the
inhabitants/people of Majayjay covered by MWS are receiving/
4
drawing water from MWS at the rate of more than 10 cubic meters
and up to 30 cubic meters of water per month, more or less.
It was under the foregoing background that Majayjay entered
into and executed with the applicant the Contract for the Supply of
Bulk Water dated August 1, 2011 which provides for a mind boggling
term of 100 years, inclusive of the 50 years automatic extension, at the
revenue sharing of 90% in favor the applicant and 10% in favor of
Majayjay. Under the said Contract for the Supply of Bulk Water, the
applicant was granted the right of first refusal to extract water from
“all water sources of Majayjay” for the said period of 100 years and
the right to sell bulk water to Majayjay and its neighboring towns. A
copy of the said Contract for the Supply of Bulk Water is hereto
attached as Annex “D”.
Subsequently, Majayjay entered into a separate Water Supply
Contracts, both dated December 30, 2011, with the Municipalities of
Lumban, Laguna and Sta. Cruz, Laguna. Copies of the said two (2)
Water Supply Contracts are hereto attached as Annexes “E” and “F”,
respectively.
It is interesting to take note that Majayjay was the one made to
appear as the Water Supplier of bulk water to Lumban and Sta. Cruz
under the said Water Supply Contract (Annexes “E” and “F” hereof)
5
although the applicant was the one granted the right to supply bulk
water to Majayjay and its neighboring towns under the Contract for
the Supply of Bulk Water dated August 1, 2011 (Annex “D” hereof).
On account of which, Majayjay will bear all the responsibilities
and obligations for the supply of bulk water to Lumban and Sta. Cruz,
including the posting of the required performance security, but the
sharing arrangement of the proceeds of the sale of bulk water will
remain the same at 90% in favor of the applicant and 10% in favor of
Majayjay.
Owing to the above-described three (3) water contracts which
are manifestly and grossly disadvantageous against Majayjay, the
oppositors filed a criminal complaint in the Ombudsman for three (3)
counts of violation of Sec. 3 (g) of Republic Act No. 3019, as
amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt-Practices,
against Mayor Teofilo Guera, Vice Mayor Ana Linda C. Rosas and
the seven (7) members of the Sangguniang Bayan of Majayjay and the
President (Arcadio Gapangada) of the applicant, together with the
corresponding administrative complaint against the respondent public
officials, which criminal complaint and administrative complaint are
docketed in the Ombudsman as OMB-L-C-12-0300-G and OMB-L-A-
6
12-0332-G, respectively. A copy of the body of the said complaint is
hereto attached as Annex “G”.
The subject applications for water permits were obviously filed
by the applicant to pursue and consummate the sale of bulk water
contemplated under the above-described three (3) water contracts. In
other words, it was under this circumstance that the applicant filed the
subject applications for water permits without any comprehensive
ecological study on the long term effects of the extraction of high
volume of waters from the water resources of Majayjay to the
ecological balance of Laguna Lake and the lives of the people of
Majayjay.
III
GROUNDS RELIED UPON TO THE OPPOSITION TO THE INSTANT THREE (3) APPLICATIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF WATER PERMITS.
The oppositors hereby oppose and object to the subject
applications for water permits on the grounds that:
A. THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER
PERMITS SHALL AND WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT
THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE OF LAGUNA LAKE.
7
B. THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER
PERMITS SHALL AND WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT
THE AGRICULTURAL LANDS OF MAJAYJAY.
C. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TITLE OR
OWNERSHIP OVER THE PARCEL OF LAND WHERE
THE SPRING SOURCE IS LOCATED. THERE IS NO
PROOF OF LAND OWNERSHIP OF, LEGAL TITLE
TO OR RIGHT OR INTEREST USE, THE PROPERTY
ON WHICH THE WATER SOURCE IS SITUATED.
D. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY RIGHT AT
ALL TO APPLY FOR THE WATER PERMITS.
E. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE AUTHORITY
TO APPLY FOR WATER PERMIT AS THE RIGHT TO
APPLY FOR WATER PERMITS PERTAINS TO THE
MUNICIPALITY OF MAJAYJAY IN THAT THE
SUBJECT WATER PERMIT APPLICATIONS ARE
CONTRARY TO THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT
FOR THE SUPPLY OF BULK WATER DATED
AUGUST 1, 2011 BY AND BETWEEN IBDC AND
THE MUNICIPALITY OF MAJAYJAY (MAJAYJAY
FOR SHORT).
8
F. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE WATER PERMITS
APPLICATION IS FOR OTHER PURPOSES OR
COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, AND NOT SOLELY FOR
DOMESTIC AND/OR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES.
G. THE APPLICATION FOR WATER PERMIT IS NOT
MAINLY FOR THE REHABILITATION OF
MAJAYJAY WATERWORKS SYSTEM BUT FOR
COMMERCIAL PURPOSES OR FOR THE SALE OF
BULK WATER TO NEIGHBORING TOWNS.
H. THE CERTIFICATION DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2009
OF MAYOR TEOFILO GUERA OF MAJAYJAY IS
FALSE BECAUSE THE PURPOSE OF THE SUBJECT
WATER PERMITS APPLICATIONS IS NOT MAINLY
FOR REHABILITATION BUT FOR COMMERCIAL
PURPOSES OR FOR THE SALE OF THE BULK
WATER TO NEIGHBORING TOWNS.
I. THE SUBJECT WATER PERMITS APPLICATIONS
ARE CONTRARY TO THE DESCENDING PURPOSES
AND USES OF WATER AS PROVIDED UNDER THE
IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS
9
IMPLEMENTING LLDA B.R. NO. 2007-338 (IRR-
LLDA FOR SHORT).
J. SINABAK SPRING, PATAK-PATAK SPRING AND
MANGULILA SPRING ARE EXISTING
GROUNDWATER SOURCES AND THERE IS NO
WATER PERMIT FROM NWRB ATTACHED TO THE
SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS
AS REQUIRED UNDER THE IRR-LLDA.
K. THERE IS NO PROPER NOTICE TO THE
BARANGAY CHAIRMAN WHERE PATAK-PATAK
SPRING IS LOCATED AS THE LATTER IS NOT
SITUATED IN BRGY. AMONOY BUT IN BRGY.
BALAYONG, MAJAYJAY, LAGUNA.
L. THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER
PERMITS WILL CAUSE ADVERSE EFFECT TO
PUBLIC AND/OR PRIVATE INTEREST.
M. THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER
PERMITS WILL AFFECT THE PRESENT BRGY.
WATER SYSTEM.
10
N. THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE SAMPLE
SUBMITTED IS THE SAME SAMPLE THAT WAS
SUBJECTED TO LABORATORY EXAMINATION.
O. IT DOES NOT APPEAR FROM THE RECORDS OF
THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER
PERMITS THAT NOTICES OF APPLICATIONS
WERE POSTED TO THE FOLLOWING OFFICES FOR
POSTING IN CONSPICUOUS PLACES WITHIN
THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE
APPLICATION AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 9
OF THE IRR-LLDA, TO WIT:
(a) BRGY. CHAIRMAN OF THE PLACE WHERE
THE POINT OF DIVERSION IS LOCATED;
(b) PROVINCIAL SECRETARY OF THE
SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN OF THE
PROVINCE WHERE THE POINT OF
DIVERSION IS LOCATED;
(c) DPWH DISTRICT ENGINEER OR NIA
IRRIGATION OFFICER AS THE CASE MAY
BE.
11
P. THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE INVESTIGATION
AND STUDIES REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 10 OF
THE IRR-LLDA WERE CONDUCTED BY THE
OFFICE CONCERNED AS THERE EXISTS NO
RECORDS OF THE INVESTIGATION AND STUDIES
OF:
1. THE APPROXIMATE SEASONAL
DISCHARGE OF THE WATER SOURCES;
2. THE AMOUNT OF WATER ALREADY
APPROPRIATED FOR BENEFICIAL USE;
3. THE WATER REQUIREMENT OF THE
APPLICANT AS DETERMINED FROM
STANDARDS OF BENEFICIAL USE
PRESCRIBED BY THE LLDA/NWRB;
4. POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS ON EXISTING
GRANTEES/PERMITTEES OR PUBLIC/
PRIVATE INTEREST INCLUDING
MITIGATING MEASURES;
5. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS;
6. LAND-USE ECONOMICS;
12
7. WHETHER THE AREA TO BE IRRIGATED
WITH THAT OF AN EXISTING OR
PROPOSED IRRIGATION ASSOCIATION FOR
COMMON IRRIGATION FACILITIES, IF THE
PURPOSE IS FOR IRRIGATION ONLY;
8. CLIMATE CONDITIONS AND CHANGES;
9. OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS.
Q. THE APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS SHALL
AND WILL PUT IN DANGER THE LIVES AND
HEALTH OF THE PEOPLE OF MAJAYJAY AS THEY
WERE MADE IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 13 OF
THE IRR-LLDA WHICH PROVIDES THAT “NO
CONSTRUCTION WORK OR PRIVATE SECTOR
PROJECT SHALL COMMENCE UNTIL THE PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS AND IMPLEMENTING
SCHEDULES ARE DULY APPROVED.”
13
IV
DISCUSSION
A
THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS SHALL AND WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE OF LAGUNA LAKE.
The subject applications for water permits shall and will
endanger the balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the
rhythm and harmony of nature, especially in Laguna de Bay Region.
The water right granted by Majayjay to applicant to extract
water from all sources of Majayjay for a period of 100 years will
certainly create ecological imbalance and put in danger the life of
Laguna Lake as it appears that there is no comprehensive study ever
conducted on the possible long term effect to Laguna Lake of the
extraction by a private company of water from all water sources of
Majayjay for the period of 100 years.
For instance, in the water application to extract water from
Mangulila Springs in Brgy. Piit, Majayjay alone, the applicant will
extract water from Mangulila Springs for diversion/distribution to
Magdalena, Sta. Cruz and Lumban at the rate of 900 LITERS PER
14
SECOND (LPS) or 54,000 LITERS PER MINUTE or 3,240,000
LITERS PER HOUR or 77,760,000 LITERS PER DAY or
2,332,800,000 LITERS PER MONTH or 27,993,600,000 LITERS
PER YEAR. Mangulila Springs naturally flows and drains to
Dalitawan River of Majayjay. On the other hand, Dalitawan River
naturally flows and drains to water tributaries leading to Laguna Lake.
There is no available comprehensive study conducted regarding
the long term effect of diverting from Laguna Lake 7,760,000
LITERS PER DAY of water coming from Mangulila Spring.
Neither is there a comprehensive study conducted on the long term
effect to Laguna Lake of getting water directly from Dalitiwan River.
Nor is there a comprehensive study conducted on the long term effect
to Laguna Lake of getting water for domestic use from other major
sources of water of Majayjay such as Olla River, Balanak River and
Maimpis River. All these rivers naturally flow and drain to Laguna
Lake.
In fact, the so-called water project of the applicant did not pass
and was not reviewed by the Provincial Planning and Development
Coordinator’s Office to ensure that there is or there will be no adverse
effect to Laguna Lake, as evidenced by a Certification hereto marked
and attached as Annex “H”.
15
Mangulila, Sinabak and Patak-Patak Springs naturally flow and
drain to various rivers of Majayjay. Rivers with highly altered and
regulated flows lose their ability to support natural processes and will
gradually lose its existence.
Clearly then, since there is no comprehensive study ever
conducted to determine the long term effect to Laguna Lake of the
diversion for domestic use or municipal use of water coming from
water sources of Majayjay, there is great probability that this
Honorable Office’s programs to promote and accelerate sustainable
development in the Laguna de Bay Region and to preserve the
ecological integrity therein would be rendered useless and
meaningless by the subject applications for water permit.
B
THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS SHALL AND WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE AGRICULTURAL LANDS OF MAJAYJAY.
The subject applications for water permits shall and will
adversely affect the agricultural lands of Majayjay.
The springs of Majayjay not only give life to its rivers but the
springs also support its irrigation system and/or the agricultural lands
of Majayjay. In other words, the agricultural lands in Majayjay
16
principally depend on the various Springs for irrigation. Without the
water coming from the Springs, the agricultural lands in Majayjay will
not be productive which will cause untold prejudice and damages to
the people of Majayjay as Majayjay is principally an agricultural
town.
The subject applications for water permits, if granted, will
authorize the applicant to extract water at the total rate of 82,944,000
LITERS PER DAY or 2,488,320,000 LITERS PER MONTH or
29,859,840,000 LITERS PER YEAR. The applicant will extract
82,944,000 LITERS PER DAY of water from various springs of
Majayjay for domestic use and/or municipal use and/or commercial
use and with no regard to the other beneficiaries who have relied from
the springs of Majayjay since time immemorial.
Due to abundant water, the lands in Majayjay are rich. Forestry
is also abundant in Majayjay and the springs give life to it. The
springs flow to its irrigation system. However, agricultural life in
Majayjay might be in danger as there is no comprehensive study
conducted to determine the long term effect of diverting 82,944,000
LITERS PER DAY of water coming from Mangulila, Sinabak and
Patak-Patak Springs solely for domestic, municipal and commercial
uses.
17
Most importantly, the oppositors received information that there
is an irrigation water permit or water permit for agricultural use
granted for extracting water from Sinabak Spring to assure and protect
the supply of water to the agricultural lands along the path of the
water flowing from Sinabak Spring. Thus, the said irrigation permit or
water permit for agricultural use would be rendered nugatory upon the
allowance of the applicant’s water permit application for Sinabak
Spring considering there is no available study on record regarding the
effect to the agricultural lands in Majayjay of the extraction of
2,592,000 LITERS PER DAY from Sinabak and its diversion for
domestic use and/or municipal use.
C
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TITLE OR OWNERSHIP OVER THE PARCEL OF LAND WHERE THE SPRING SOURCE IS LOCATED. THERE IS NO PROOF OF LAND OWNERSHIP OF, LEGAL TITLE TO OR RIGHT OR INTEREST USE, THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE WATER SOURCE IS SITUATED.
D
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY RIGHT AT ALL TO APPLY FOR THE WATER PERMITS.
18
E
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE AUTHORITY TO APPLY FOR WATER PERMIT AS THE RIGHT TO APPLY FOR WATER PERMITS PERTAINS TO THE MUNICIPALITY OF MAJAYJAY IN THAT THE SUBJECT WATER PERMIT APPLICATIONS ARE CONTRARY TO THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY OF BULK WATER DATED AUGUST 1, 2011 BY AND BETWEEN IBDC AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF MAJAYJAY (MAJAYJAY FOR SHORT).
Being closely related, we will jointly discuss the grounds for
opposition raised herein.
It cannot be denied that the applicant did not present or attach to
the petition any title or proof of ownership over the parcel of land
where the springs (Sinabak Spring, Patak-Patak Spring and Mangulila
Spring) subject matter of the applications are located. As provided
under Sec. 5 of IRR-LLDA, one of the requirements for application for
water permit for municipal use or any other use such as for commercial
use is the title or proof of ownership over the parcel of land where the
springs is located. The rule used the word “shall” which means that the
requirement is mandatory. It is a settled rule that “the term ‘mandatory
statutes’ is a generic term describing which require and not merely
permit a course of action. They are characterized by such directives as
19
‘shall’ and not ‘may’.1 “A ‘mandatory’ provision in a statute is one,
the omission to follow which, renders the proceedings to which it
relates void.”2 Thus, on this score alone, the subject applications for
water permits should be denied for utter lack or merit.
Moreover, the applicant does not have any right at all to apply for
the questioned water permits. The subject applications for water
permits of the applicant were apparently filed by the applicant on the
basis of its supposed right under the Contract for the Supply of Bulk
Water dated August 1, 2011 by and between IBDC and the
Municipality of Majayjay. Sad to say, however, it is expressly provided
under Sec. 7 of the said Contract for the Supply of Bulk Water that the
right to apply for water permit belongs to Majayjay and not to IBDC.
The role of the applicant is merely to assist Majayjay in the application
for water permits.3 Thus, it is quite clear that the applicant does not
have the right at all to apply for the questioned water permits.
F
THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE WATER PERMITS APPLICATION IS FOR OTHER PURPOSES OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, AND NOT SOLELY FOR DOMESTIC AND/OR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES.
G
1 Pineda, Ernesto L. Persons, 2000 ed., p. 20.2 Pineda, Ernesto L., Persons, 2000 ed., p. 19.3 Section 6 of the Contract for the Supply of Bulk Water dated August 1, 2011.
20
THE APPLICATION FOR WATER PERMIT IS NOT MAINLY FOR THE REHABILITATION OF MAJAYJAY WATERWORKS SYSTEM BUT FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES OR FOR THE SALE OF BULK WATER TO NEIGHBORING TOWNS.
H
THE CERTIFICATION DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2009 OF MAYOR TEOFILO GUERA OF MAJAYJAY IS FALSE BECAUSE THE PURPOSE OF THE SUBJECT WATER PERMITS APPLICATIONS IS NOT MAINLY FOR REHABILITATION BUT FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES OR FOR THE SALE OF THE BULK A WATER TO NEIGHBORING TOWNS.
I
THE SUBJECT WATER PERMITS APPLICATIONS ARE CONTRARY TO THE DESCENDING PURPOSES AND USES OF WATER AS PROVIDED UNDER THE IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING LLDA B.R. NO. 2007-338 (IRR-LLDA FOR SHORT).
We will also jointly discuss the grounds raised herein for the
opposition as they are also closely related with each other.
The applicant wants to make it appear that the subject
applications for water permits are intended for municipal purposes
and/or for the rehabilitation of the Majayjay Water Work System. For
21
this purpose, the applicant even attached to its application the
Certification dated February 9, 2009 of Mayor Teofilo Guera of
Majayjay attesting that the waters to be extracted from the above
stated springs will be used in the rehabilitation of Majayjay Water
Work System.
The subject applications for water permits provide that the
purpose of the extraction of water from the said spring sources is for
domestic purposes. However, the body of the subject applications for
water permits will show that the bulk of the water to be extracted from
Sinabak Spring, Patak-patak Spring and Mangulila Spring will not be
used for domestic purposes but for municipal purposes and other
purposes such as commercial purposes. Use of surface water for
domestic purposes has been defined as the utilization of the subject
surface water directly drawn from a source by a household for
drinking, washing, bathing, cooking, watering of gardens or animals
and other domestic uses.4 On the other hand, the use of water for
municipal purposes has been defined as the utilization of surface water
for supplying the water requirements of a community, whether by
piped or bulk distribution for domestic use, direct consumption, the
drawer or abstractor of which being the national government, its
4 Sec. 1 of Rule 1 IRR-LLDA
22
subsidiary agencies, local government units, private persons,
cooperatives or corporations.5
The applicant provides in the subject applications for water
permits that Sinabak Spring source and Patak-Patak Spring source
shall be diverted to Majayjay while the Mangulila Spring source shall
be diverted to the Municipalities of Magdalena, Sta. Cruz and
Lumban. These statements of the applicant under oath in the subject
water applications are undeniable proof that the true and real purpose
of subject applications for water permits is not to extract water for
domestic purposes but to extract water for commercial purposes. This
is so because, as would be shown in the subsequent discussion, the
bulk of the water to be extracted will be diverted for commercial
purposes in that the same will be diverted for sale as bulk water to the
Municipalities of Magdalena, Sta. Cruz and Lumban.
The descending purposes and uses of water as provided under
Section 1 of Rule 1 of IRR-LLDA are as follows:
a. Domestic
b. Municipal
c. Irrigation
d. Power Generation
5 Sec. 1 Rule 1 of IRR-LLDA
23
e. Fisheries
f. Poultry and Livestock Raising
g. Industrial
h. Recreational; and
i. Other purposes
By diverting the bulk of the water to be extracted for
commercial purposes, then the subject applications for water permits
have flagrantly violated the above enumerated descending purposes
and uses of water. The use of water for commercial purposes is the
last in the descending purposes and uses of water. Before the water
can be diverted and use for commercial purposes, the water must be
first devoted for domestic, municipal and irrigation purposes which are
obviously violated by the subject water applications. The bulk of the
water to be extracted from the said three (3) Springs will not be
diverted for domestic, municipal or irrigation uses or purposes in
Majayjay but the same will be diverted for commercial purposes or for
sale as bulk water to the Municipalities of Magdalena, Sta. Cruz and
Lumban. Thus, the subject applications for water permits are clearly
devoid of merit.
J
24
SINABAK SPRING, PATAK-PATAK SPRING AND MANGULILA SPRING ARE EXISTING GROUNDWATER SOURCES AND THERE IS NO WATER PERMIT FROM NWRB ATTACHED TO THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS AS REQUIRED UNDER THE IRR-LLDA.
Sinabak Spring, Patak-Patak Spring and Mangulila Spring are
existing ground water sources in Majayjay. In fact, Majayjay has been
extracting and drawing water from Sinabak Spring for almost 100
years now. Patak-Patak Spring and Mangulila Spring are also existing
groundwater sources in Majayjay. As provided under Republic Act
No. 9275, otherwise known as the Philippine Clean Water Act of
2004, groundwater means a subsurface water that occurs beneath
a water table in soils and rocks, or in a geological formations.
Section 5 of Rule 1 of IRR-LLDA explicitly provides that one
of the strict requirements for water applications either for domestic
use, municipal use or other use such as commercial use is the
presentation and submission of Water Permit from NWRB. It is
beyond dispute that the applicant failed to present and attach to
its subject applications for water permits the required water
permits from NWRB.
Again, this requirement on the submission of the water permits
from the NWRB regarding the existing groundwater source is a
25
mandatory requirement under the IRR-LLDA. As such, omission to
follow which, renders the proceedings to which it relates void6. Thus,
the subject applications for water permits must fail.
K
THERE IS NO PROPER NOTICE TO THE BARANGAY CHAIRMAN WHERE PATAK-PATAK SPRING IS LOCATED AS THE LATTER IS NOT SITUATED IN BRGY. AMONOY BUT IN BRGY. BALAYONG, MAJAYJAY, LAGUNA.
In its applications for water permits under SWPA-12-01003, the
applicant states that Patak-Patak Spring source is located at Brgy.
Amonoy, Majayjay, Laguna. This is a big lie because Patak-Patak
Spring is not located at Brgy. Amonoy but in Brgy. Balayong,
Majayjay, Laguna, as shown in the attached Certification issued by
Brgy. Chairman of Brgy. Balayong, Majayjay, Laguna hereto attached
as Annex “I”.
This clearly shows that the applicant makes false statement and
representation under oath in its applications for water permit over
Patak-Patak Spring source. Stated differently, due to the manifest
failure to indicate the true and correct location of Patak-Patak Spring
source, the applicant failed to comply with the requirements for the
filing of application for water permits as the same resulted to the
6 Pineda, Ernesto L. Persons, 2000 ed., p.19.
26
failure to give the required notice to the Barangay Chairman and the
failure to post the notice in the Office of the Barangay Chairman.
L
THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS WILL CAUSE ADVERSE EFFECT TO PUBLIC AND/OR PRIVATE INTEREST.
M
THE SUBJECT APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS WILL AFFECT THE PRESENT BRGY. WATER SYSTEM.
We will jointly discuss the grounds raised herein for the
opposition as they are also closely related with one another.
In filing the subject applications for water permits, it does not
appear that the applicant had made a comprehensive study on the long
term effect to the people of Majayjay of extracting water from water
sources in Majayjay for diversion to the Municipalities of Magdalena,
Sta. Cruz and Lumban. It is significant to take note of the fact that the
bulk of the waters to be extracted from the said three (3) Springs will
not go to Majayjay but to the Municipalities of Magdalena, Sta. Cruz
and Lumban. This is quite ridiculous and unjust.
From the three (3) applications of water permits, 900 LITERS
PER SECOND or 77,760,000 LITERS PER DAY will be diverted to
27
the Municipalities of Magdalena, Sta. Cruz and Lumban, while 30
Liters coming from Sinabak Spring and another 30 Liters coming from
Patak-Patak Spring or the total of 60 LITERS PER SECOND or
5,184,000 LITERS PER DAY will be diverted for municipal use in
Majayjay. There is a recurrent water shortage in Majayjay and thus it
is unfair and unjust to the people of Majayjay for applicant to bring the
water resources of Majayjay to the neighboring towns without first
satisfying or filling the needs of the people of Majayjay. Before selling
and diverting waters to the neighboring town, the applicant must fist
satisfy the water requirements of the people of Majayjay pursuant to
the descending purposes and uses of water as provided under Sec. 1 of
Rule 1 of the IRR-LLDA. There is no available study in the record of
subject applications on how the applicant will satisfy the recurrent
water shortage in Majayjay and/or the needs for water of the people of
Majayjay.
Further, there are some informal/unregistered Barangay Water
Systems in Majayjay which are extracting waters from either Sinabak
Spring or Patak-Patak Spring for free distribution to the people of the
Barangay. If the applicant would be granted water permits over
Sinabak Spring and Patak-Patak Spring, the same will deprive the
people of some Barangays of free water coming from Sinabak Spring
28
and Patak-Patak Spring. The informal/unregistered Barangay Water
System drawing water from Sinabak Spring and Patak-Patak Spring
have been extracting waters therefrom for several years now and thus
they have already acquired vested right to extract water from Sinabak
Spring and Patak-patak Spring.
Accordingly, the grant of water permits to the applicant will
result to the eventual closure of the said Barangay Water System
which provides free water to the people of the Barangay, thereby
resulting to untold prejudice and damages to the people of the
concerned Barangays. Simply put, the grant of the questioned water
permits will cause grave adverse effect and irreparable damages to the
public.
N
THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE SAMPLE SUBMITTED IS THE SAME SAMPLE THAT WAS SUBJECTED TO LABORATORY EXAMINATION.
While it is true that the applicant has supposedly submitted a
result of physical/chemical analysis of the sample of water from the
said three (3) Springs, this does not prove that the sample submitted is
the same sample that was subjected to laboratory examination. In fact
the record shows that the water sample from Sinabak Spring was
29
collected on November 10, 2010, the receipt of the sample was on
November 11, 2010, and the examination was done on November 11
to 18, 2010. The chain of custody from the time of collection on
November 10, 2010 up to the time of examination on November 11 to
18, 2010 was not recorded. It also appears from the document
submitted by the applicant that the water sample was collected not by
the testing laboratory itself. Thus, it has not been proven that the
sample collected and examined are in fact one and the same.
It is also worthy to note that Majayjay Waterworks is the name
of the customer of San Pablo City Water District Laboratory as
indicated on the submitted water sample test and analysis result. To
emphasize, the applicant for the water permits is IBDC and not
Majayjay Waterworks.
Moreover, San Pablo City Water District Laboratory does not
show that it is a Department of Health (DOH) accredited water testing
laboratory and thus the result of the laboratory test is suspect and
without legal force and effect.
O
IT DOES NOT APPEAR FROM THE RECORDS OF THE SUBJECT
30
APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS THAT NOTICES OF APPLICATIONS WERE POSTED TO THE FOLLOWING OFFICES FOR POSTING IN CONSPICUOUS PLACES WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE IRR-LLDA, TO WIT:
a. BRGY. CHAIRMAN OF THE PLACE WHERE THE POINT OF DIVERSION IS LOCATED;
b. PROVINCIAL SECRETARY OF THE SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN OF THE PROVINCE WHERE THE POINT OF DIVERSION IS LOCATED;
c. DPWH DISTRICT ENGINEER OR NIA IRRIGATION OFFICER AS THE CASE MAY BE.
P
THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE INVESTIGATION AND STUDIES REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 10 OF THE IRR-LLDA WERE CONDUCTED BY THE OFFICE CONCERNED AS THERE EXISTS NO RECORDS OF THE INVESTIGATION AND STUDIES OF:
1. THE APPROXIMATE SEASONAL DISCHARGE OF THE WATER SOURCES;
2. THE AMOUNT OF WATER ALREADY APPROPRIATED FOR BENEFICIAL USE;
31
3. THE WATER REQUIREMENT OF THE APPLICANT AS DETERMINED FROM STANDARDS OF BENEFICIAL USE PRESCRIBED BY THE LLDA/NWRB;
4. POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS ON EXISTING GRANTEES/PERMITTEES OR PUBLIC/PRIVATE INTEREST INCLUDING MITIGATING MEASURES;
5. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS;
6. LAND-USE ECONOMICS;
7. WHETHER THE AREA TO BE IRRIGATED WITH THAT OF AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED IRRIGATION ASSOCIATION FOR COMMON IRRIGATION FACILITIES, IF THE PURPOSE IS FOR IRRIGATION ONLY;
8. CLIMATE CONDITIONS AND CHANGES;
9. OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS.
We will also jointly discuss the grounds for the opposition
raised herein as they are also closely related with one another.
It does not appear from the records of the subject applications
for water permits that the concerned Brgy. Chairman of the place
where the aforestated Springs are located have issued a certification
that the applications were posted at the Office of the concerned Brgy.
Chairman. Neither is there a certification issued and attached to the
32
applications that the Provincial Secretary of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan of the Province of Laguna has posted in its office the
subject applications for water permits nor is there a certification
issued by the DPWH, District Engineer or NIA Irrigation Officer
regarding the posting in his Office of the subject applications.
The IRR-LLDA clearly provides that the notice of the
application must be posted in the offices concerned and the apparent
purpose of the posting of the notice is to inform the public about the
application. This purpose of the IRR-LLDA was obviously not
achieved in the absence of the required certification of the posting of
the notice from the concerned Brgy. Chairman, Provincial Secretary
of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan and the DPWH District Engineer,
or NIA Irrigation Officer.
Similarly, there is no proof attached to or available in the
records of the subject applications for water permits that the
investigations and studies required under Sec. 10 of IRR-LLDA were
conducted by the office concerned. In other words, the requirements
for filing of application for water permits as provided under Sections
9 and 10 of IRR-LLDA were not complied with by the applicant.
Those requirements provided under Sections 9 and 10 of IRR-LLDA
are strict and mandatory requirements in the filing of the application
33
for water permit and thus the violation of which renders the
application null and void and without legal effect. Acts executed
against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void,
except when the law itself authorizes their validity.7
A mandatory statute is one that contains words of command or
of prohibition, the omission to follow which renders the proceeding to
which it relates illegal and void, or the violation which makes the
decision therein rendered invalid. Acts executed against the
provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void, except
when the law itself authorizes their validity.8
Q
THE APPLICATIONS FOR WATER PERMITS SHALL AND WILL PUT IN DANGER THE LIVES AND HEALTH OF THE PEOPLE OF MAJAYJAY AS THEY WERE MADE IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 13 OF THE IRR-LLDA WHICH PROVIDES THAT “NO CONSTRUCTION WORK OR PRIVATE SECTOR PROJECT SHALL COMMENCE UNTIL THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND IMPLEMENTING SCHEDULES ARE DULY APPROVED.”
The applications for water permits shall and will put in danger
the lives and health of the people of Majayjay as they were made in
violation of Section 13 of the IRR-LLDA which provides that “no
7 Article 5, The Civil Code of the Philippines.8 Agpalo, Philippine Administrative Law, p. 47.
34
construction work or private sector project shall commence until the
plans, specifications and implementing schedules are duly approved.”
Section 13 of the IRR-LLDA was included in LLDA’s
Implementing Rules and Regulation on water permitting, registration
and monitoring system for the extraction of the lake waters of Laguna
de Bay for a reason. Section 13 is not mere formality but it serves as a
precautionary measure to protect and safeguard the health and safety
of the people who will be given service by the applicant for water
permit. In other words, the lives of the consumers of a water system
depend on the strict implementation of the approved plans,
specifications and implementing schedules. If the above-quoted
section is not followed, the government cannot ensure that the water
system installed and/or the materials used are in accordance with the
accepted standards for the applicant to safely provide water to the
public.
The subject applications for water permit filed by the applicant
are still pending. In fact, the applicant has not yet complied with all
the requirements of this Honorable Office. Thus, there are no
approved plans, specifications and implementing schedules to speak
of. Despite all these, the applicant started its construction all over
Majayjay by installing reported sub-standard pipes beneath the
35
surface, as shown by photographs herein marked and attached as
Annexes “J”, “J-1” to “J-7”, respectively.
Clearly, the subject applications for water permits should be
denied as they were made in gross violation Section 13 of the IRR-
LLDA. The plans, specifications and implementing schedules must
first be duly approved by the LLDA to ensure that the water system to
be installed is in accordance with the accepted standards since the
consumers of the water system will treat the water that will come out
from the pipes as potable water. It bears to remind that Section 67 of
IRR-LLDA provides that “In case where the offender is not a
permittee or grantee or has no right to use the water whatsoever, the
LLDA through its deputies or authorized representatives shall, in
addition to the imposition of appropriate fines and penalties, cause the
stoppage of the use of water either through demolition of the dam or
hydraulic structures, without prejudice to the institution of a
criminal/civil action as the facts and circumstances may warrant”.
Thus, the oppositors hereby reserve the right to cause the stoppage of
the construction and/or installation of water pipes by demolition
thereof without prejudice to the institution of the appropriate criminal
action.
36
WHEREFORE, the oppositors most respectfully pray to this
Honorable Office that the above described applications for water
permits of the applicant be denied for lack of merit.
Other reliefs just and equitable in the premises are likewise
prayed for.
37
38
