Court orders anti-mining protesters to explain defiance of injunction

Anti-mining protesters were ordered by a regional trial court to explain why they should not be cited for contempt following allegations that they defied a lawful order allowing mining equipment to enter a project site.

Presiding Judge Paul R. Attolba Jr. of the Bayombong Regional Trial Court Branch 30 issued the motu proprio order on 28 January 2026, after receiving a sheriff’s report detailing resistance during the implementation of a writ of preliminary injunction.

The seven individuals were directed by the court to show cause within 10 days why they should not be punished for indirect contempt under the Rules of Court.

The proceedings stemmed from a 23 January incident along Barangay Keon Road in Bitnong, where protesters allegedly formed human barricades to block the entry of the plaintiff’s equipment.

Based on the sheriff’s report, the group resisted repeated pleas to disperse and obstructed the implementation of the writ despite assistance from the Philippine National Police. The court noted that certain individuals allegedly instigated the resistance through public statements and social media posts prior to police action. While acknowledging that the judiciary is not immune from public scrutiny, the court said acts that obstruct court orders are not protected by constitutional guarantees of free speech.

“Contempt proceedings were initiated not for the benefit of any party, but to protect the authority of the judiciary, preserve the orderly administration of justice, and ensure compliance with lawful court orders,” the court said in its order.

Police officers reported exercising maximum tolerance during the encounter, but several individuals were arrested for refusing to vacate the barricades and physically obstructing law enforcement.

The sheriff confirmed that the writ was eventually fully implemented after the barricades were cleared and the equipment was unloaded.

The individuals named in the order are Florentino Daynos, Janette Macario, Sonette Nginsayan, Adelia Modi, Krislyn Pocday, Analiza Balliao, and Amelia Rabino.

The court set a hearing on the indirect contempt proceedings on 12 February at 10 a.m., allowing the respondents to present their defenses and evidence.

Judge Attolba warned that failure to submit a written explanation or to appear at the hearing would be deemed a waiver of the right to be heard. The court also reserved the right to act against other unidentified individuals mentioned in the report should evidence warrant further citations.