MIRIAM URGES SUPREME COURT TO APPOINT 'CALAMITY' COURTS

Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago, a former RTC judge, urged the Supreme Court today to designate courts with low caseloads in Luzon to function as calamity courts. These courts will have jurisdiction to hear cases for damages against LGUs, government officials, and other entities.

Earlier, media reported that LGU officials, residents, farmers, and the Filipino-Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Pangasinan are contemplating a lawsuit against the San Roque Dam operators and other entities allegedly responsible for the massive flooding in the province.

On the other hand, residents and NGOs in Metro Manila want Public Works Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane, Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno, MMDA Chair Bayani Fernando, city mayors, municipal and city engineers, and other government officials in-charge of flood control and drainage systems to account for the massive flooding in the metropolis in the wake of Storm Ondoy.

"The Supreme Court has the power to designate courts to try special cases, as it already did with special courts on extrajudicial killings of political activists and members of the media," Santiago explained. "This time I respectfully submit that they should also designate calamity courts to try all the cases that will be brought in the wake of the massive flooding and destruction in Metro Manila and North Luzon."

Liability of LGUs, local officials, etc.

Santiago said that under the Local Government Code, local government units and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to persons or damage to property.

"Our Civil Code provides that the LGU is liable in damages for death or injuries suffered by reason of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works," she said. "Under this provision, LGUs could be held civilly liable for injuries or deaths caused by their defective public structures, including flood control systems."

Santiago cited Supreme Court decisions where the LGU was held liable for damages for injuries suffered by a person due to the defective condition of its public works.

"In City of Manila v. Teotico (22 SCRA 267), the city of Manila was held liable for damages when a person fell into an open manhole," she said. "In Jimenez v. City of Manila (150 SCRA 510), the LGU was held liable for injuries sustained by an individual who stepped on a rusted nail in the public market while it was flooded."

She further said that under the Civil Code, the LGU is subsidiarily liable for damages suffered by a person by reason of the failure or refusal of a member of the police force to render aid and protection in case of danger to life and property.

Asked what charges can be brought against San Roque Dam managers who failed to notify local officials and residents that the dam's gates would be opened, resulting in deaths and multimillion-peso damage to property and agricultural crops, Santiago said that a civil suit for damages can be brought against them under a "catch-all" provision in the Civil Code.

"This catch-all provision in the Civil Code provides that whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a 'quasi-delict,'" Santiago explained.

Class suit improper

Santiago said that a class suit is improper and will not prosper if the plaintiffs want compensation for damages individually sustained by them.

Earlier, LGU officials and even some senators said that they are planning to file a class suit against the dam operators for the damages sustained by their constituents.

"If the victims want to sue jointly for the damages they sustained, they should join as parties in the suit and not file a class suit," she said. "The joinder of parties and a class suit are different devices provided for in our Rules of Court."

Santiago said that in a Supreme Court case[1] involving the close relatives and legal heirs of the deceased passengers of the ill-fated Doña Paz which sunk at sea, the Court ruled that the heirs could not bring a class suit against the shipowners, but should instead all join as parties in the suit.

"What makes a situation a proper case for a class suit is the circumstance that there is only one right or cause of action pertaining or belonging in common to many persons, not separately or severally to distinct individuals," Santiago said.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Administrative Matter No. 88-1-646: Re request of the Heirs of the Passengers of Doña Paz to set aside the Order of Judge B.V. Chingcuangco, 31 March 1988.