0% found this document useful (0 votes)
531 views

Zabal Vs Duterte

The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding President Duterte's plan to shut down Boracay island for six months. Petitioners filed a case challenging the constitutionality of the president's proclamation declaring a state of calamity in Boracay and ordering its closure. They argued their right to travel was impaired and it would result in economic loss. Respondents claimed the case was a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). The court ultimately held that while the case involved environmental issues in Boracay, the main issue was the constitutionality of the proclamation, so it was not a SLAPP case.

Uploaded by

Lorelie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
531 views

Zabal Vs Duterte

The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding President Duterte's plan to shut down Boracay island for six months. Petitioners filed a case challenging the constitutionality of the president's proclamation declaring a state of calamity in Boracay and ordering its closure. They argued their right to travel was impaired and it would result in economic loss. Respondents claimed the case was a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). The court ultimately held that while the case involved environmental issues in Boracay, the main issue was the constitutionality of the proclamation, so it was not a SLAPP case.

Uploaded by

Lorelie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Zabal v. Duterte, G.R. No.

238467, [February 12, 2019]


FACTS: President Duterte made public his plan on shutting dow the Boracay during a business forum
held in Davao sometime in Feb 2018. This was followed by several speeches and news stating that he
would place Boracay under a state of calamity. Petitioner Zabal and Jacosalem filed a petition despite
the government was yet to release a formal issuance on the matter, they prayed for the the grant of
TRO and/or writ of Preliminary Prohibition Injunction and that the banning of tourist and non-resident
to travel from Boracay be declared as unconstitutional. Following the day of filling their petition the
president issued Proclamation No. 475 declaring state calamity in Boracay ordering its closure for six
months. Petitioner implore the court to declare the proclamation unconstitutional, that the right to
travel is impaired resulting to economic loss. Respondent argued that the petition filed by the
petitioner is a SLAPP.

ISSUE: Whether or not the case is a SLAPP.


HELD: No, while the case touches on the environmental issue on Boracay, the ultimate issue is the
resolution of the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 475 which allegedly impairs the petitioners
right to travel. The procedure under Rule 6 of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases should
not be applied

You might also like