SAGÑAY, Camarines Sur - Facing two administrative and one criminal charges at the Ombudsman and a mandamus case at a regional trial court, the municipal health officer here rues at the lack of support system for doctors like him who were entangled in legal battle with business interest because of the disposition of their mandates.

        Dr. Ricardo Rodrigo Patacsil II, municipal health officer of this town, had stood to oppose the operation of the waste processing firm Safeco Environmental Services Inc. by not issuing a sanitary permit since residents of Mabca, the village where the plant is located, rejected through a petition its continued operation.

        Following an incident of fumes inhalation from burning materials suspected to have caused residents there to feel ill in late November last year, Mayor Roberto Briones of this town issued on February 14, 2007 a closure order to the owner of the Safeco.

        The temporary closure of Safeco was “effective immediately pending the issuance of permit, clearance and other pertinent documents and compliance on the payment of business tax.”

        Patacsil, who provided remedy to Mabca residents who fell ill after inhalation of fumes, said that he remained convinced not to issue a sanitary permit to Safeco in the absence of toxicology analysis from the DOH.

        He said he did not have trust on the findings of the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) which found that “the fire was the result of the burning plastic wastes”. It added that “the fire had extended to the tarpaulin/fiber glass wastes in the non-hazardous wastes containment facility.”

        Patacsil had requested the DOH for legal assistance but he was told by regional director Dr. Nestor F. Santiago Jr. that being a devolved unit the department cannot provide any other assistance but technical one.

        He said a team of toxicologists from the DOH was created and sent to Safeco plant to conduct actual investigation and toxicology analysis of materials that burned but said the team was not allowed to enter the compound.

        “A technical conference was called by the EMB during which Safeco’s position was that ‘no one was injured and no property was damaged.’ I questioned this since the determination of injury is a matter of medical opinion and not legal one,” Patacsil said.

        In a letter dated March 6, 2007, the municipal health officer informed Santiago that he had treated 26 patients suffering from symptoms mainly caused by fumes from fire that lasted for several hours.

        The letter he sent to Santiago requested for a “health impact assessment (both environmental and biological) to determine once and for all Safeco’s acute and chronic threat to the health of the” constituents and environment.