By F. Bontog, Jr.



Mike Defensor had to make the decision no one could make


During his stint as secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Mike Defensor got a lot of flak for approving Mineral Production Sharing Agreements (MPSAs) with several mining corporations that were said to have resulted in substantial environmental degradation to the areas in which they worked.

It is great that people cared enough to follow these stories and to take a stand. However, it really is very unfair and counterproductive to put all on the blame on Defensor. Some people have gone so far as to call the man “anti-environment”, but there is much evidence that shows otherwise. And there are reasons behind his decisions, many of which have sadly been overlooked in conventional media.



For one thing, students of governance and politics will know that for productive industry to flourish (and for private-led development to take place), government cannot play too big a hand in the operations of companies working in the country. Idle assets have to be put to productive use, and it is the job of government to find the best uses for these in the project of development. Once it has done that, the country is best served with government stepping back.

Defensor obviously had to make a tough decision, and there obviously were tradeoffs in allowing these mining companies to work in the country. It is tragic that some of these companies might have committed infractions of environmental laws and the guidelines set by the DENR (and the perpetrators will have to be dealt with severely—which Defensor has already done more than once), but if government makes it policy to at the outset block companies from working in the country on the basis of a speculative fear that they might not abide by the rules, then no development could ever take place.

It should be noted that all of the companies with approved mining contracts complied with the DENR’s application requirements and were subjected to a rigid qualification procedure. Since they met the requirements, they were awarded the contracts. And now, the companies will surely be held liable for any infractions they might have committed. But Defensor cannot be held to blame for approving the contracts at the time they were entered, because until then, everything was complied with.

Also, Defensor’s long record of going after violators of DENR guidelines and environmental laws has pointedly been overlooked in conventional media. Remember that it was during Defensor’s stint as DENR chief that the fight against illegal loggers was most successful. It was during his term that many of big-time illegal loggers, many of whom themselves held influential positions in government, were finally charged. Also, it was during Defensor’s term that the total log ban was finally enacted.

It was also during Defensor’s term as DENR secretary that the biggest ever fine for violation of an environmental law was imposed (a P10.7 million fine against the big-time Australian mining firm LaFayette, which was found to have violated the Clean Air Act). If this isn’t a huge statement against violators of environmental law, then I don’t know what is.

What is needed here is balance. Mistakes were certainly made, but it is not as black and white as many people make it out to be. Mining contracts such as those in question and the proper implementation of policy are complicated matters. A more mature view on the matter will be necessary if we are to get to the bottom of these infractions, and this cannot be had if people automatically heap blame on government as it did in the case of Defensor.


The writer is a soil conservationist who worked as Soil Analyst for Sustainable Agriculture Center. He is an environmentalist who lobbied for better mining laws in the country together with Green Initiative Baguio Benguet.