8/19/2019 Arigo vs. Swift G.R. No. 206510

1/3

MOST REV. PEDRO D. ARIGO, Vicar Apostolic of PuertoPrincesa D.D., et. al vs. SCOTT H. SI!T in "is capacit# as

Co$$an%er of t"e &S. 't" !leet, et. al.G.R. (o. )*+-* Septe$er -+, )*-/

!ACTS0 In December 2012, the US Embassy in the PH requested diplomaticclearance for the USS uardian, an !"en#er$class mine countermeasuresship of the US %a"y, &to enter and e'it the territorial (aters of the PH and toarri"e at the port of Subic )ay for the purpose of routine ship replenishmentmaintenance, and cre( liberty*+ -n .anuary /, 201, the ship left Sasebo,

 .apan for Subic )ay, arri"in# on .anuary 1, 201 after a brief stop for fuel in-ina(a, .apan* -n .anuary 1, 201, the USS uardian departed Subic )ayfor its ne't port of call in 3aassar, Indonesia* -n .anuary 14, 201 at 2520a*m* (hile transitin# the Sulu Sea, the ship ran a#round on the north(estside of South Shoal of the 6ubbataha 7eefs, about 80 miles east$southeastof Pala(an* %o one (as in9ured in the incident, and there ha"e been no

reports of leain# fuel or oil*-n !pril 14, 201, the abo"e$named petitioners on their behalf and in

representation of their respecti"e sector:or#ani;ation and others, includin#minors or #enerations yet unborn, aliasan (ith prayer for the issuance of a 6emporary En"ironmentalProtection -rder*

Petitioners claim that the #roundin#, sal"a#in# and post$sal"a#in#operations of the USS uardian cause and continue to cause en"ironmentaldama#e of such ma#nitude as to a?ect the pro"inces of Pala(an, !ntique,

!lan, uimaras, Iloilo, %e#ros -ccidental, %e#ros -riental, @amboan#a del%orte, )asilan, Sulu, and 6a(i$6a(i, (hich e"ents "iolate their constitutionalri#hts to a balanced and healthful ecolo#y* 6hey also see a directi"e fromthis Aourt for the institution of ci"il, administrati"e and criminal suits foracts committed in "iolation of en"ironmental la(s and re#ulations inconnection (ith the #roundin# incident*

ISS&ES01* =hether or not the petitioners ha"e le#al standin#*2* =hether or not the pro"isions of the U%AB-S can be applied to US

respondents (hen the US is not a party to the U%AB-S** =hether or not the (ai"er of immunity from suit under the Cisitin# orces!#reement C!F applies in the instant case*

R&1I(G01* GES* 6here is no dispute on the le#al standin# of petitioners to

8/19/2019 Arigo vs. Swift G.R. No. 206510

2/3

result+ of the act bein# challen#ed, and +calls for more than 9ust a#enerali;ed #rie"ance*+ Ho(e"er, the rule on standin# is a proceduralmatter (hich this Aourt has rela'ed for non$traditional plainti?s lie ordinaryciti;ens, ta'payers and le#islators (hen the public interest so requires, suchas (hen the sub9ect matter of the contro"ersy is of transcendentalimportance, of o"erreachin# si#ni

8/19/2019 Arigo vs. Swift G.R. No. 206510

3/3