Do provinces have power to close mining companies?

For the longest time, since 1977, I have been teaching Labor Law, Legal Ethics and Constitutional Law in various universities and schools in Metro Manila. This academic year, I have expanded my legal horizon by accepting a new subject on the Local Government Code. I am excited, as well as my students.

Teaching the Local Government Code, we are using the codal provisions of Republic Act 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991. The first cases that I discussed were the famous Mandanas cases on the sharing of revenues from taxes and national wealth. Another interesting Supreme Court decision is in the case of Province of Occidental Mindoro v. Agusan Petroleum and Mining Corp.

This was promulgated by the Supreme Court on January 14, 2025. The ruling was written by the Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, who opened the decision as follows: "While the Constitution recognizes the autonomy of local government units to enact ordinances and adopt resolutions for the general welfare of their constituents, this does not extend to vetoing the national law. The Province of Occidental Mindoro exceeded its powers and authority when it completely banned all large-scale exploration and mining operations within its territorial jurisdiction, in contravention of Republic Act No. 7942 or the Philippine Mining Act of 1995."

This is an important ruling that should guide our LGU officials in making decisions on industries operating in their territorial jurisdictions.

While the advocacy of the provincial officials of Mindoro Occidental is commendable, as they obviously wanted to protect their natural environment from the effects of mining operations, in this case, the Supreme Court insisted that national laws prevail on matters of mining and the determination on the use, exploration, and development of natural resources. In other words, it’s beyond the scope of the authority of the provincial government.

The Supreme Court held that territorial and political subdivisions are only allowed to take care of their own local affairs so that governance will be more responsive and effective to their unique needs. Congress still retains control over the extent of powers or authority granted to them. This ruling is consistent with Justice Leonen's concurring opinion in the case of League of Provinces v. DENR. Therefore, mining and other operations concerning the development of natural resources are within the realm of the national government.

Justice Leonen reminded one and all that local governments are only autonomous, they are not sovereign states, much less independent of the national government. It was also underscored that provinces and other local government units remain to be under the supervision of the president on behalf of the national government. This ruling is also consistent with the Supreme Court ruling in KMP v. Aurora Pacific Economic Zone Authority, decided in 2020 with Justice Leonen as ponente.

Governors and mayors and their respective local legislative bodies are reminded by the highest court of the land that LGUs should stay within the scope and limits of their respective territorial and functional charters. They cannot stray beyond the legal boundaries defined by the Constitution and by Congress. Justice Leonen reminded all that LGUs cannot exercise their power contrary to the Constitution. The source of their power is the Constitution. Like water, they cannot rise above the level of their source.

It was sternly emphasized since they merely derive their power from the State legislature, as such, they cannot regulate activities already allowed by statute. This was the holding of the High Court in the case of City of Batangas v. JG Summit Petrochemical Corp. on March 15, 2025. The rationale for the decision was explained in the earlier case of Magtajas v. Pryce Properties in 1994.

In that Magtajas case in Cagayan de Oro involving the mayor of that city, the court held that the rationale of the requirement that the ordinances should not contravene a statute is obvious. Municipal governments are only agents of the national government. Local councils exercise only delegated legislative powers conferred on them by Congress as the national lawmaking body.

Further, it was succinctly stressed: "The delegate cannot be superior to the principal or exercise powers higher than those of the latter. It is a heresy to suggest that the local government units can undo the acts of Congress, from which they have derived their power in the first place, and negate by mere ordinance the mandate of the statute." What more can we say? And so be it.