PRA downplays harms of Manila Bay reclamation projects

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

The assertions of environmental harms are 'not supported by competent, science-based evidence,' the PRA said in a comment submitted to the Supreme Court

MANILA, Philippines – The Philippine Reclamation Authority dismissed fisherfolk and environmental groups’ concerns on harms caused by reclamation in Manila Bay, saying the claims are unscientific and speculative.

“Their assertions of environmental harm were not supported by competent, science-based evidence showing actual or imminent damage of the requisite magnitude,” the PRA said in a 46-page comment submitted to the Supreme Court.

The harms petitioners claimed in their petition are “speculative, hypothetical, and circumstantial (if not imaginary),” said the PRA.

Further, they argued that since approved reclamation projects are currently suspended (save for two ongoing projects in Pasay City), “there is no actual or imminent threat to the environment to warrant a writ of kalikasan.”

The PRA is responding to a petition that Pamalakaya and other groups filed before the High Court in December last year, asking for a writ of kalikasan and continuing mandamus against Manila Bay seabed quarry projects and reclamations.

They had fulfilled their mandates by following the procedures in review and approval of reclamation projects, the PRA said. They claimed that petitioners “bypassed the proper administrative channels” within PRA and the lower courts, and instead went straight to the SC.

The writ of kalikasan is a legal remedy that protects Filipinos’ constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology.

Pamalakaya retorted in a statement Monday, June 2, that PRA’s comment is “pure defensive outburst that utterly rejects the science and the lived experiences of fisherfolk and coastal people.”

According to Fernando Hicap, Pamalakaya’s national chairperson, PRA “only showed it has no concern over the environment and rights of fisherfolk and coastal communities.”

The PRA has asked the SC to dismiss the petitions. This is the same prayer made by several private firms and local governments impleaded in the case.

What the science says

A month ago, the PRA stated support toward the Department of Environment and Natural Resources’ undertaking of a cumulative impact assessment of Manila Bay reclamation projects.

They said the study is testament to “science-based policymaking” under the Marcos administration.

The study had confirmed what many environmental and fishers group had been saying: that reclamation in the Bay will harm livelihood, marine habitats and resources.

Experts summarized the findings this way: “Flooding, public health risk, biodiversity loss, and fisheries decline will worsen with the urbanization that reclamation is expected to bring.”

Since the release of these findings, the environment department said it is reaching out to concerned local governments to cooperate with them for the review of the projects.

Under Executive Order 74, the PRA governing board has the power to approve applications for reclamation projects. The President still retains authority to modify, amend, or nullify decisions made by the board. – Rappler.com