DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/July 8) – Councilor Danny Dayanghirang emphasized that “compromise, not confrontation, is the way forward” for the Samal Island-Davao City bridge project, noting that “technical realignment of the bridge route remains a possibility.” Speaking during the Sangguniang Panlungsod’s weekly session, Dayanghirang, who chairs the Finance, Ways and Means, and Appropriations Committee, warned that the project’s potential suspension following a Writ of Kalikasan issued by the Supreme Court could significantly setback Davao City and Samal Island, not only in infrastructure but also financially, with taxpayers continuing to pay interest and amortization despite delays. The P23-billion, 3.98-kilometer bridge aims to reduce travel time between Samal Island and Davao City from 20 minutes by barge to five minutes. However, concerns over environmental impact, including damage to coral reefs and fisherfolk livelihoods, have fueled opposition. Marine biologist John Michael Lacson criticized the lack of transparency regarding environmental impacts, particularly on coral reefs rich in biodiversity. The Supreme Court’s Writ of Kalikasan, issued on July 1, targets the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and other involved entities over alleged irreversible environmental damage. Petitioners, including Carmela Marie Santos and Mark Peñalver, argued that the bridge construction would harm ecologically sensitive marine areas. Councilor Diosdado Mahipus Jr. suggested inviting DPWH and petitioners for dialogue, while Dayanghirang stressed the City Council’s role in legislating for public interest. He advocated for compromise and the possibility of route realignment, noting expropriation with just compensation as a lawful tool for unresolved right-of-way issues. The petitioners clarified they are not against the project but seek realignment to protect coral reefs. Romeo Cabarde of the Save Davao Movement welcomed dialogue but emphasized vigilance to ensure transparency and accountability. The Supreme Court has given respondents 10 days to respond to the writ and referred a request for a temporary environmental protection order to the Court of Appeals in Cagayan de Oro. (Ian Carl Espinosa/MindaNews)
