In the context of a game-changing, uncharacteristic form of authority granted by the 1987 Constitution, the Philippine Supreme Court has shed its restraint-based, pro-precedent inclinations by adopting new rules of procedures for expeditious environmental litigation as well as for effectively managing environmental cases. The “green” rules provide for novel legal means to assert a right or relieve environmental injury, and allow the court to step into the institutional gap created by the persistent incoherence in executive policy-making, in order to prevent further miscarriage of environmental justice. Through illustrations of selected court cases, the paper argues that the groundbreaking post-modernist legal distillations have successfully translated into helpful public policies and good practices which redress unjust distributions of power that weaken environmental protection, and expanded access to justice and effective participation by the poor and other vulnerable sectors. In the process, the “unelected” high court has knocked over conventional counter-majoritarian thinking and made the grade as a sensible activist judiciary.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1049 | 119 | 20 |
Full Text Views | 28 | 6 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 80 | 20 | 2 |
In the context of a game-changing, uncharacteristic form of authority granted by the 1987 Constitution, the Philippine Supreme Court has shed its restraint-based, pro-precedent inclinations by adopting new rules of procedures for expeditious environmental litigation as well as for effectively managing environmental cases. The “green” rules provide for novel legal means to assert a right or relieve environmental injury, and allow the court to step into the institutional gap created by the persistent incoherence in executive policy-making, in order to prevent further miscarriage of environmental justice. Through illustrations of selected court cases, the paper argues that the groundbreaking post-modernist legal distillations have successfully translated into helpful public policies and good practices which redress unjust distributions of power that weaken environmental protection, and expanded access to justice and effective participation by the poor and other vulnerable sectors. In the process, the “unelected” high court has knocked over conventional counter-majoritarian thinking and made the grade as a sensible activist judiciary.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1049 | 119 | 20 |
Full Text Views | 28 | 6 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 80 | 20 | 2 |