Parang mahirap nang makinig ng awiting, "Could we start again please?" Kahit ano pa ang sabihin ng NGO Forum on ADB, a civil society organization, sasabayan ko ng "It's more than a miracle..."
Anang nasabing org, ADB must be held liable for the environmental destruction caused by projects funded under its portfolio, in particular, the Marcopper Mining project which the ADB funded until 1994. In 1996, the drainage tunnels of Marcopper Mining Corp. open pit broke, causing the mine waste leakage to drain into and pollute the Boac River.
 |
| Google Earth image of cloud reflected on abandoned Marcopper dams. |
The Philippines hosted the 51st Annual Meeting
of the Board of Governors of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) attended by about 3,000
delegates—including finance ministers, central bank governors, bankers and
officials.
Such annual meetings have become a premier forum for
discussions on economic and social development issues in Asia and the Pacific.
Some of the country’s top public officials and investors will be delivering
talks about the prospects of the Philippine economy, and testimonials on doing
business in the country.
But not everything is rosy for the Manila-based multilateral
lender. A few months after its last annual meeting in Yokohama, Japan, there
were calls for the ADB to be stripped of its immunity from suit. The NGO Forum
on ADB, a civil society organization, claimed that the ADB must be held liable
for the environmental destruction caused by projects funded under its
portfolio, in particular, the Marcopper Mining project which the ADB funded
until 1994. In 1996, the drainage tunnels of Marcopper Mining Corp. open pit
broke, causing the mine waste leakage to drain into and pollute the Boac River.
The ADB’s immunity from suit was again challenged in January
2018 after a petition was filed by former ADB employee Matthew
Westfall in the Court of Appeals, seeking to hold the bank
and its officers accountable for “abuse of right” and defamation for supposedly
bypassing him for promotion unceremoniously and allegedly fabricating
“allegations of ineptitude, lack of professionalism and incompetence against
him to justify their (action)” despite having full knowledge of his
credentials.
Westfall had also previously filed criminal charges for
libel and grave slander against said officers, after which ADB terminated him.
This is reminiscent of the case of Liang versus People where the Supreme Court
ruled that the immunity granted to officers and staff of the ADB was not
absolute and was limited to acts performed in an official capacity.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court held that the immunity could not cover the
commission of a crime such as slander or oral defamation in the name of
official duty.
Will this case find its way into the annals of jurisprudence
as the case of Liang did? Only time will tell.
