SC: Manufactured charcoal not a forest product under forestry law

The Supreme Court has upheld the dismissal of a criminal case against a man arrested for transporting 475 sacks of manufactured wood charcoal without a permit in Oriental Mindoro, ruling that charcoal is not considered a forest product under the Revised Forestry Code.

The case involved Rudy Villagen, who was charged before the Regional Trial Court in Pinamalayan after authorities intercepted the charcoal, valued at about P71,250, in Bongabong, Oriental Mindoro, on 8 October 2020.

Villagen was accused of violating Section 77 of Presidential Decree 705, or the Revised Forestry Code, for allegedly possessing and transporting forest products without the required authority.

In affirming the dismissal of the case, the Supreme Court said manufactured wood charcoal is not among the forest products covered by the penal provision of the law.

The Court explained that once wood has undergone processing and has been converted into charcoal, it can no longer be treated in the same manner as the natural wood products specifically covered by the statute.

It also ruled that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources cannot expand criminal liability through an administrative order by including charcoal in its regulatory definition of forest products when the law itself does not expressly provide for such criminal liability.

The high court stressed that administrative regulations may implement a law but cannot amend or enlarge the scope of a penal statute.

It added that penal laws must be strictly interpreted in favor of the accused and that any expansion of acts subject to criminal prosecution must be expressly provided by Congress.

The ruling, however, does not prevent the DENR from carrying out apprehension, seizure or confiscation measures authorized under its existing administrative regulations.

Authorities may also pursue appropriate cases when the wood used in making charcoal was itself illegally cut, gathered or removed from forest areas, subject to applicable laws.

The case is docketed as People of the Philippines v. Rudy Villagen y Suelos, G.R. No. E-02082.