THE Supreme Court (SC) upheld a 2017 executive order (EO) on Tuesday that fast-tracks approvals for energy projects deemed nationally significant, dismissing a legal challenge filed by environmental advocates.
The SC, sitting en banc, rejected a petition seeking to block EO No. 30, which streamlines the permit process for Energy Projects of National Significance (EPNS) by establishing the Energy Investment Coordinating Council (EICC).
The ruling, written by Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, said the EO falls within the president’s power to reorganize the bureaucracy and expedite government processes.
The petitioners, Quezon for Environment, claimed that EO 30 exceeds the President’s authority, violated their right to a healthy environment, bypassed key environmental requirements like the Environmental Compliance Certificate, and set unrealistic deadlines for complex energy projects.
The tribunal dismissed these claims, ruling the EO is aligned with the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 and the Department of Energy (DoE) Act of 1992.
It said an Environmental Protection Order was not applicable as the petition raised legal, not factual, questions of environment law violations.
“The SC upheld the guidelines under EO 30, which only sets minimum standards to help guide agencies — these can be adjusted to follow specific laws or protect the public,” it said in a separate statement.
“It clarified that the presumption of prior approval means permits can be processed at the same time, not skipped altogether,” it added.
The 30-day timeframe, on the other hand, is even more flexible than the deadline under other laws like the DoE Act and the Ease of Doing Business Act.
Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F Leonen dissented, calling the EO illegal.
He called the 30-day rule arbitrary and noted that some permits require more time due to complexity or the need to assess environmental impact.
He also said rapid electrification should be consistent with environmental protection.
In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa said the EO cuts red tape without compromising legal protections.
The respondents in the case were former Executive Secretary Salvador C. Medialdea, the DoE, and other implementing agencies involved in the processing of energy project permits. — Chloe Mari A. Hufana
