Outcome:

The Supreme Court denied the petition of Dela Cruz, et al. for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan, finding that the petitioners failed to prove any unlawful act on the part of respondent Manila Electric Company (MERALCO) and they failed to demonstrate the magnitude of the actual or threatened environmental damage as to prejudice the life, health, or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.

Facts:

Ninoy Aquino International Airport Terminal III (NAIA III) had an electric service agreement with MERALCO, as it required the construction of a nearby power substation and the installation of transmission lines to fully operate.

MERALCO was able to construct the power substation in 2002 and began excavating for the poles and transmission lines in September 2009.

The excavation works were later suspended upon the issuance of a cease-and-desist order of the City Engineering of Pasay because of the complaint of some residents.

The residents filed a Petition for Issuance of a Writ of Prohibitory Injunction before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), claiming that the installation of transmission lines near their residences "impinged" on their right to health.

The case was later deemed moot and academic upon the lifting of the cease-and-desist order of the City Engineering Office because of a petition filed by Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA), the new operator of NAIA III.

MERALCO resumed and was able to finish the installation works in November 2010.

Gemma Dela Cruz (Dela Cruz), together with other residents filed a Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan with prayer for issuance of a temporary environmental protection order before the Court of Appeals (CA). They claim that the installation of the transmission lines near their homes endangered their health and safety.

The CA dismissed the petition, holding that a writ of kalikasan only covers the right to a balanced and healthful ecology, an entirely different right from the right to health. It further found that Dela Cruz, et al. failed to discharge their burden of proving that the installation of high-tension wires endangered their life and health and MERALCO was able to comply with the relevant environmental laws.

Dela Cruz, et al. filed a Motion for Reconsideration but the same was denied by the CA.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of MERALCO.

Decision:

The Court held that a petition for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan may be brought if actual or threatened violation to the right to health may be proved as the rights to health and to a balanced and healthful ecology are inextricably linked.

The Court held that the petitioners failed to satisfy all the requisites in the issuance of a writ of kalikasan.

The Court found that petitioners satisfied the first requisite of "actual or threatened violation of the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology" in arguing that the electromagnetic fields emitted by high-tension wires allegedly cause leukemia in children.

However, the petitioners failed to satisfy the second and third requisites: they failed to prove any unlawful act on the part of respondents and they failed to demonstrate the magnitude of the actual or threatened environmental damage as to prejudice the life, health, or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.

The Court found that MERALCO complied with the implementing rules. MERALCO's transmission lines have a horizontal clearance which exceed the minimum required by the Philippine Electrical Code. It sufficiently proved that it conducted prior consultations with the residents on various dates before commencing installation works.

The Court held that the environmental damage alleged by the petitioners was neither shown to be potentially exponential in nature; nor was it shown to be large-scale. The installation of transmission lines would only affect residents of this narrow strip, and the damage, if any, can hardly be considered exponential.

The Court further held that the precautionary principle does not apply because regulatory precautions have already been taken. It is not uncertain that exposure to high-frequency electromagnetic fields has health effects, with some studies even claiming that electromagnetic fields cause leukemia in children. Other possible explanations for this association have not yet been ruled out.