Five university students on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to immediately stop the cutting of hundreds of roadside trees along Quirino Avenue and Roxas Boulevard in Manila and declare unconstitutional a provision of the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Code that bars lower courts from issuing Temporary Environmental Protection Orders (TEPOs) against PPP projects.

In a petition for certiorari, the students, who said they were acting on behalf of the Filipino youth and future generations, asked the high court to issue a TEPO against the San Miguel Corp. Southern Access Link Expressway (SALEX) project while the case is pending.

They also sought to have Section 23 of Republic Act No. 11966, or the PPP Code, declared unconstitutional, arguing that it improperly limits the judiciary's authority to protect the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology.

Named as respondents were Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 41 Presiding Judge Rosalyn D. Mislos-Loja, SMC Southern Access Link Expressway Corp., and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

The petition stemmed from the Manila RTC's June 29 order denying the students' application for a TEPO after ruling that Section 23 of the PPP Code expressly prohibits lower courts from issuing provisional injunctive relief against PPP infrastructure projects.

The petitioners argued that the provision itself is unconstitutional because it encroaches on judicial authority and weakens the courts' ability to enforce environmental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

The students first filed an environmental case before the Manila RTC in May after SMC began cutting and earth-balling trees covered by a DENR permit for the SALEX project.

According to the petition, more than 200 mature trees have already been removed, while around 400 more remain at risk.

They argued that the continued loss of decades-old roadside trees would cause irreversible environmental damage, including the loss of shade, carbon absorption, temperature regulation, and other ecological benefits for residents, commuters, and pedestrians.

The petition also maintained that replacing mature trees with newly planted saplings elsewhere would not immediately restore the environmental services provided by the existing tree canopy.

The students asked the Supreme Court to issue a TEPO stopping further tree cutting, declare Section 23 of the PPP Code unconstitutional, and nullify the Manila RTC's order denying their request for environmental protection.