I went bloghopping early tonight and I read a very substantial piece from Ang Sa Wari Ko. Well, it is one kind of post that will actually awaken some sense in you. At least that is what it has done to me. Well, maybe if you read thoroughly then you will be able to think of ways on how to resolve the conflicting interest that springs such post. It’s immediate concern are the people, the economy as well as the environment that the South Cotabato local government is duty bound to uphold, take care and protect, as well as make certain that progress is at hand for the economic growth and prosperity of Tampakan.


But what happens when this billion dollar investment of the Sagittarius Mines Inc. (SMI) which is what is perceived to be a very good source of income for the people, progress for the district and the entire region, or even the Philippines, may be harmful to the very place where they all exist? Surely, THE SOUTH COTABATO ENVIRONMENT CODE has specified certain provisions and may stipulate some specific laws that may fall incongruent to the nature and scope of the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 just to give way for the entire project.

I also read about that from the Asian Correspondent as well as the Philippine Star, and the Manila Bulletin, on two separate articles, HERE,  and HERE..  So really, how would you resolve such conflict? Do you know?

Below are some of the provisions of  The South Cotabato Environment Code:

SECTION 22. REGULATORY PROVISIONS. Quarrying and extraction of quarry materials and mineral deposits shall be governed by the following provisions:

a.Mining and quarrying activities within the Province of South Cotabato shall be subject to prior Environment Impact Assessment, as provided under the Philippine Environmental Impact Assessment System;

b.Open-pit mining method shall not be allowed in the Province of South Cotabato;

c.The extraction or removal of mineral resources and other materials other than by open pit method shall be allowed beyond a distance of one (1) kilometer from the boundaries of reservoirs established for public water supply, archaeological, historical sites and any public or private works or structures; and

d.The extraction or removal of quarry resources shall be allowed except those within one kilometer from the bridges and dams upstream and downstream. The desiltation shall be allowed provided that a written consent is secured from government agencies or private entities concerned.

I guess there is still a way that these two shall be able to play around each other’s boundaries. Should the above provisions be followed, it will indeed be better for our environment, but may not be as good as how mining was perceived to create a lasting economic solution to the longstanding problem of low incomes that lead to hardened life for the people. If I were the mayor, surely, I would find it difficult NOT to push for an economic agenda when it will surely benefit everybody. But if I were an environmentalist, my focus would be to strengthen the natural wonders by NOT allowing anything to hurt it even if it means providing a good source of income for the people.. Both are right in their arguments. But needless to say, a solution is needed to resolve this dilemma.. And such solution must be a WIN-WIN solution wherein, both can benefit. After all, both are necessary for Juan Dela Cruz.. And Juan Dela Cruz has more than seven children, unlike Father Abraham..