By Rachel Magday

 

NUEVA VIZCAYA, Philippines — The Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 30 issued a new show-cause order on Friday after defendants in a mining-related dispute allegedly reinstalled barricades and again obstructed access along Keon Road in Barangay Bitnong, Dupax del Norte, despite an existing writ of preliminary injunction.

In a seven-page order dated Feb. 6, 2026, Presiding Judge Paul R. Atolba, Jr. said Woggle Corporation, the plaintiff in SCA Case No. 139-25J, filed a manifestation on Jan. 28 reporting that a group led by anti-mining leader Florentino Daynos reinstalled a barricade on Jan. 27 about 70 meters from the junction of the National Highway and Keon Road.

The barricade allegedly blocked the company’s employees and contractors from entering Keon Road.

The court identified Daynos and several others as allegedly involved in reinstalling and manning the barricade and in excavating portions of Keon Road. The order also noted that Daynos was included in both show-cause orders previously issued by the court.

The order noted that the court had earlier issued a preliminary injunction ordering the defendants and their supporters to remove the barricades and stop blocking the barangay road.

The court said an initial attempt to enforce the order was only partly successful because the group allegedly formed a human barricade, so sheriffs paused to prevent violence. A later enforcement operation was completed and led to arrests.

While criminal complaints arising from that enforcement were reportedly dismissed by the provincial prosecutor, the court said the dismissal did not justify noncompliance with court directives.

In its warning, the court stressed the binding nature of judicial orders and stated: “Court Orders are not mere Suggestions or ‘frameworks’ or ‘guidelines’ but are mandatory and must be obeyed.” Judge Atolba added that deliberate defiance undermines the rule of law.

The court directed the named individuals to explain within 10 days why they should not be cited for contempt for willful disobedience of a lawful writ and other court orders.

They were ordered to submit sworn written explanations and were cautioned that unsatisfactory responses or continued defiance could lead to coercive or punitive sanctions, including fines, imprisonment until compliance, and immediate arrest and detention.

Judge Attolba also criticized the conduct of defense lawyers who were present during the enforcement operations, saying their actions interfered with the work of the sheriffs and police and raised doubts about their willingness to support an orderly implementation of the court’s orders.

The order warned that lawyers who obstruct lawful court proceedings may face disciplinary action or contempt charges.

The order concluded that the court’s authority “must be obeyed promptly, fully, and without obstruction.”