FREEDOM OF RELIGION

ARTICLE 18, UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

RELIGION

-          Any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc., often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy.

-          A profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator (Aglipay v. Ruiz)

-          Religion embraces matters of faith and dogma, as well as doubt, agnosticism and atheism

RELIGION IN THE CONSTITUTION

Basic provision of the Constitution on religion

ARTICLE II, SEC.6, 1987 CONSTITUTION The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.

ARTICLE III, SEC.5, 1987 CONSTITUTION No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

 

Other pertinent provisions

ART. VI, SEC. 28(3), 1987 CONSTITUTION Charitable institutions, churches, parsonage or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, and non-profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements actually, directly and exclusively used for religious, charitable or educational purposes shall be exempt from taxation.

ART. VI, SEC. 29(2), 1987 CONSTITUTION No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, paid or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary as such except when such priest, preacher, minister or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium.

ART. XIV, SEC. 3(3), 1987 CONSTITUTION At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians, religions shall be allowed to be taught to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools within the regular class hours by instructors designated or approved by the religious authorities of the religions to which the children or wards belong, without additional cost to the Government.

ART. XIV, SEC. 4(2), 1987 CONSTITUTION Educational institutions, other than those established by religious groups and mission boards, shall be owned solely by citizens of the Philippines or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citizens. The Congress may, however, require increased Filipino equity participation in all educational institutions. The control and administration of educational institutions shall be vested in citizens of the Philippines. No educational institution shall be established exclusively for aliens and no group of aliens shall comprise more than one-third of the enrollment in any school. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to school established for foreign diplomatic personnel and their dependents and, unless otherwise provided by law, for other foreign temporary residents.

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

·         “Strong fences make good neighbors”

·         The idea is to delineate the boundaries between the 2 institutions and thus avoid encroachments by one against the other because of a misunderstanding of the limits of their respective exclusive jurisdictions.

·         “render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s”

·         A union of Church and State tends to destroy government and to degrade religion

·         The wall of separation between Church and State is not a wall of hostility. The State in fact recognizes the beneficent influence of religion in the enrichment of the nation’s life.

·         The establishment clause simply means that the state cannot set up a church; nor pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religion, or prefer one religion over another nor force nor influence a person to go to or remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion; that the state cannot punish a person for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance; that no tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activity or institution whatever they may be called or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion; that the state cannot openly or secretly participate in the affairs of any religious organization or group and vice versa. (Everson v. Board of Education)

·         There will be no violation of the establishment clause if:

Ø  The statute has a secular legislative purpose

Ø  Its principal or primary effect is one that neither advances nor inhibits religion

Ø  It does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion

·         The government is neutral, and while protecting all, it prefers none, and it disparages none. Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion; the right to worship includes the right not to worship.

·         Does not inhibit the use of public property for religious purposes when the religious character of such use is merely incidental to a temporary use which is available indiscriminately to the public in general

·         GR: Payment of public funds is prohibited to ecclesiastics

XPN:

when such priest, preacher, minister or dignitary is assigned to:

Ø  The armed forces

Ø  Any penal institution

Ø  Government orphanages

Ø  Leprosarium

Ø  if they serve the government in a non-ecclesiastical capacity.

·         The Constitution itself also provides for the exemption from property taxes of religious institutions and all lands, buildings and improvements actually, directly and exclusively devoted to religious purposes

·         XPN to the GR: Public elementary and high schools may be used for optional religious instruction in accordance with Art. XIV, Sec. 3(3).

INTRAMURAL RELIGIOUS DISPUTES

GR: Intramural disputes regarding religious dogma and other matters of faith are outside the jurisdiction of the secular authorities.

XPN: Where the dispute involves the property rights of the religious group or the relations of the members where property rights are involved, the civil courts may assume jurisdiction.

·         Whatever dogma is adopted by a religious group cannot be binding upon the State if it contravenes its valid laws

·         Where a civil right depends upon some matter pertaining to ecclesiastical affairs, the civil tribunal tries the civil right and nothing more, taking the ecclesiastical decision out of which the civil right has arisen as it finds them, and accepting those decisions as matters adjudicated by another jurisdiction. (Gonzales v. Archbishop of Manila)

RELIGIOUS PROFESSION AND WORSHIP

Twofold Aspect:

1.       Freedom to believe

-          Absolute as long as the belief is confined within the realm of thought

-          An individual may indulge his own theories about life and death; worship any god he chooses, or none at all; embrace or reject any religion; acknowledge the divinity of God or of any being that appeals to his reverence; recognize or deny the immortality of his soul

-          Cherish any religious conviction as he and he alone sees fit

-          However absurd his beliefs may be to others, even if they be hostile and heretical to the majority, he has full freedom to believe as he pleases

-          He may not be required to prove his beliefs nor may he be punished for his inability to do so

2.       Freedom to act on one’s belief

-          Subject to regulation where the belief is translated into external acts that affect the public welfare

-          Can be enjoyed only with proper regard for the rights of others

-          The inherent police power can be exercised to prevent religious practices inimical to society

-          The constitutional provision on religious freedom terminated disabilities; it did not create new privileges. It gave religious liberty, not civil immunity. Its essence is freedom from conformity to religious dogma, not freedom from conformity to law because of religious dogma. (W. Va. Board of Education v. Barnette)

-          The authority of the State shall not at all times prevail over the right of the individual to religious profession and worship. As long as it can be shown that the exercise of the right does not impair the public welfare, the attempt of the State to regulate or prohibit such right would be an unconstitutional encroachment.

-          When we balance the Constitutional rights of owners of property against those of the people to enjoy freedom of the press and religion, as we must here, we remain mindful of the fact that the latter occupy a preferred position. (Marsh v. Alabama)

-          The constitutional guaranty of free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship carries with it the right to disseminate religious information. Any restraint of such right can be justified like other restraints of freedom of expression on the ground that there is a clear and present danger of any substantive evil which the State has the right to prevent. (American Bible Society v. City of Manila)

-          The test to determine which shall prevail as between religious freedom and the powers of the State is, as always, the test of reasonableness.

RELIGIOUS TEST

-          The constitutional prohibition against religious tests is aimed against clandestine attempts on the part of  the government to prevent a person from exercising his civil or political rights because of his religious belief

-          An attempt to avoid military duties on the ground among others of conscientious scruples was brushed aside by the SC in People v. Zosa. Basis of the decision was Art. II, Sec. 4 of the Constitution. As accommodation perhaps to his religious misgivings, the conscientious objector, provided his sincerity is first established, can be assigned non-military duties in defense of the State.

-          3 Tests to acknowledge a conscientious objector:

o   an applicant’s objection must be against participating in war in any form, not just a particular war

o   an applicant’s objection to service in the military must be based on religious  training and belief

o   an applicant’s objection must be sincere

-          Facial challenge may be mounted for purposes of questioning the validity of statutes concerning religious freedom.

-          In case of conflict between the free exercise clause and the State, the Court adheres to the doctrine of benevolent neutrality.

-          The benevolent neutrality theory believes that with respect to these governmental actions, accommodation of religion may be allowed, not to promote the government’s favored form of religion, but to allow individuals and groups to exercise their religion without hindrance. “The purpose of accommodation is to remove a burden on, or facilitate the exercise of, a person’s or institution’s religion.” “What is sought under the theory of accommodation in not a declaration of unconstitutionality of a facially neutral law, but an exemption from its application or its ‘burdensome effect,’ whether by the legislature or the courts.”” (Estrada v. Escritor)

-          In ascertaining the limits of the exercise of religious freedom, the compelling state interest test is proper. Underlying the compelling state interest test is the notion that free exercise is a fundamental right and that laws burdening it should be subject to strict scrutiny.