Former Chief Justice Reynato Puno. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines—The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines (COMP) through retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno and retired Associate Justice Vicente Mendoza to participate in the debate on the petition that challenges anew the constitutionality of the Mining Act of 1995.
High Court’s information chief Theodore Te in a text message confirmed that the intervention filed by COMP has been allowed by the Supreme Court.
Among the members of COMP include the TVI Resources and Development Philippines Inc. (TVIRD), OceanaGold (Philippines) and Asiaticus Mining Corp. (AMCOR), and all are named respondents in the petition filed by anti-mining advocates led by former Akbayan Representative Risa Hontiveros.
In their motion, COMP pointed out that the high court has already ruled on the constitutionality of the Mining Act in the case of La Bugal-B’laan v. Ramos in 2004.
They said the La Bugal case took six years for the high court to deliberate on—still there is no material change in the circumstances of the Philippine mining industry.
“There is no compelling reason for the high tribunal to abandon its previous ruling,” COMP said as they insist that the petition be dismissed pointing that an adverse ruling “not only undermines mining investments but also leads to a significant loss of investors’ confidence, not only in the mining industry but broadly across all industries, severely impacting the investment climate and harming the country’s credibility.”
Intervenors said the issue is for the Executive and Legislative branches to resolve, not with the Supreme Court.
“To have the Supreme Court revisit its ruling so soon after the (La Bugal) decision became final in 2005 will definitely shake investor confidence and destabilize a critically needed industry,” they said.
COMP added that about P173 billion in mining investments have been poured into the country since 2004 following the La Bugal ruling, making the mining industry a significant contributor to the country’s coffers.
They said an adverse ruling would not only undermine mining investments but also would lead to significant loss of investors’ confidence.