Did the Supreme Court act judiciously when it issued a Writ of Kalikasan, which could lead to the suspension of the vital 3.9-kilometer connector bridge between Davao City and the Island Garden City of Samal (IGACOS)?

The bridge is supposed to cut the waiting and travel time from two hours to just five minutes. It is believed to improve the living conditions of coconut farmers in the island city as this will drastically reduce the cost of transport. Tourism-oriented businesses, both large and medium-scale, will likewise generate thousands of job opportunities, especially for locals.

The problem is quite complicated. The owners of the beach resorts on the Samal side complained about the intransigence of the Department of Public Works and Highways in addressing their plight.

As stakeholders, they were obviously not consulted. The resort operators even go beyond their plea by offering a valuable piece of property not far from where the bridge will be anchored for FREE as an alternative area that would spare the coral reefs. The DPWH declined this offer, and it proceeded to purchase the present site where the bridge is now located. The refusal to accept the donation elicited suspicion.

The Writ of Kalikasan is a legal option to protect the right to a healthy environment. Several environmental foundations, represented by a phalanx of lawyers, sought the Supreme Court’s intervention to stop the bridge construction, as it would damage the coral reefs in the area and therefore threaten the lives, health, and properties of the communities that were supposed to be impacted by the project.

The bridge spans the narrowest divide between Davao City and Samal Island, known as the Pakiputan Strait.

The ecological conditions of the Pakiputan Strait are far from being a healthy ecosystem. The narrow channel is the passage way of cargo vessels that anchor in the Mindanao Container Port in Panabo City, Hijo Port in Tagum, Holcim Cement, Sumifru, and Sasa ports in Davao City.

Constant floods carry sediments for years and have harmed the ecosystem in the strait, rendering coral reefs vulnerable.

Thus, I raised the question: Did the Supreme Court act judiciously when it issued a Writ of Kalikasan? Do the High Court, the environment foundations and their battery of lawyers expect that the islanders will just wait in the bend in acquiescence?

Approximately 40 percent of the P23-billion bridge had been completed. It had already traversed the coral reefs and, if any, had already occurred. There are a few options left, among these are:

• Stop the construction and kiss the bridge goodbye;

• Transfer the bridge anchor in Samal side to the area being offered by the resorts operators;

• Transplant healthy corals in damaged areas; and

• Create artificial reefs and corral nurseries for future needs.

There are success stories involving these initiatives in countries like Indonesia, Japan, Australia and elsewhere.

It is a supreme irony that the construction of the 40-kilometer bridge that links Bataan and Cavite goes unhampered while the 3.9-kilometer Davao-Samal bridge deserves the Writ of Kalikasan.