Workers from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) clear mud from a tunnel along riverside drive in Las Piñas on September 9, 2021. Tropical Storm Jolina brought in heavy rains that caused waist-deep flooding in the area yesterday. George Calvelo, ABS-CBN News/File

MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) has clarified that the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) was not given the power of eminent domain for implementing flood control measures within Metro Manila.

In the decision of the court promulgated on October 11, 2023, it denied the petition of the MMDA to implement a flood control project, which will result in the expropriation of a private property along the bank of the San Juan River in Quezon City.

The SC also affirmed the decision of Court of Appeals that favored Diamond Motor Corporation.

The case started in 2007 when the MMDA informed Diamond Motor, which maintains an automobile store outlet and showroom along Quezon Avenue, that its flood wall will be demolished, along with all other structures within 10 meters from the strip of the bank of the river.

Diamond Motor protested that the project would result to an intrusion into its property line and destroy a substantial portion of its showroom.

The Makati City Regional Trial Court Branch 66 found the proposed 10-meter easement unreasonable but it authorized MMDA to enforce a maximum three-meter easement pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 1067 or the Water Code.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the RTC but declared that the lower court erred in stating that maintenance roads need only be established on one side of the river bank.

In its decision, SC noted that the MMDA is a development authority with functions such as formulating and implementing programs for the delivery of metro-wide services, setting policies concerning traffic, ticketing system for traffic violations.

“A plain reading of the foregoing provisions reveals no mention at all of the power to expropriate,” the court said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Dimaampao.

“Should the adjustment of legal easements be deemed necessary, it is the proper agencies granted the delegated power of eminent domain which must act," the court added.

Flood control plan finished by 2035: MMDA

The MMDA, however, insisted that in case MMDA vs Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, it was empowered to cause the removal of structures and other encroachments along Manila Bay in violation of the Water Code.

But the Supreme Court said that the MMDA misunderstood the court’s pronouncements in the case.

“Nowhere in the Manila Bay case did the court sanction the burdening or taking of private properties,” the court said.

The court also noted that there is no updated study that would support the MMDA in its conclusion on the 10-meter easement of the Diamond Motor property.

Rhe documentary and testimonial evidence presented by the MMDA to the RTC included the 1979 study conducted by the Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Communication.

The Supreme Court however said that it is not downplaying the magnitude of the worsening flood problem within Metro Manila, including the loss of lives and damage to properties.

“Certainly, petitioner’s objectives are laudable. But the court cannot uphold its actions sans legal imprimatur,” the Supreme Court said.

COA to MMDA: Expedite delayed P825.38-M flood control projects