RELATED TITLES

Documents  Personal Growth  Religion & Spirituality

131 views 4 0

Re Letter of Tony Q Valenciano
(digest)
Uploaded by Quake G. The Subtle Art of Not The Alchemist The Song of
Giving a F*ck: A Achilles: A Novel
Case digest/brief of the Philippine Supreme Court
resolution Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano Topic:
religious freedom Full description

  
Save Embed Share

CONSTI 2
Section 5: Freedom of Religion

Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano, Holding of Religious Rituals at the Hall of Jus
Building in Quezon City
March 7, 2017 | J. Mendoza

Petitioner: Tony Q. Valenciano (complainant)

Respondent: Chief Justice Puno (addressee of Valenciano’s letter)

Doctrine:  In order to give life to the constitutional right of freedom of religion, the State adopts a po
accommodation. As long as it can be shown that the exercise of the right does not impair the public w
the attempt of the State to regulate or prohibit such right would be an unconstitutional encroachment

FACTS
 Valenciano reported that the basement of the QC Hall of Justice had been converted into a R
Catholic Chapel, complete with Catholic religious icons and other instruments for religious acti
He also complained that (1) the holding of masses showed it tended to favor Catholic litigan
choir rehearsals caused disturbance to other employees; (3) public could no longer us
basement as a resting place; (4) employees and litigants of the PAO, RTC, Legal library
Mediation Center, records section of the office of the Clerk of Court could not attend to per
necessities from 12 nn to 1:15pm; (5) court employees were hostile to each other as they vi
the right to read epistles; (6) water supply of entire building was cut off during mass becaus
generator was turned off to ensure silence
 He had argued that such practice violated the constitutional principle of separation of Churc
State, as well as the prohibition against the appropriation of public money or property for t he b
of any system of religion.
 Valenciano’s letters were referred to the Executive Judges of the RTC and MeTC, MeTC , as well a
the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA). RTC Executive Judge Teodoro Bay had recomme
that the daily masses would still be permitted to continue, provided that: (1) masses would be l
to thirty minutes; (2) no loud singing would be allowed; and (3) the inconveniences caused b
mass be addressed.
 Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) report on the matter: the practical inconvenience
Valenciano were unfounded. Recommended dismissal of the letter-complaints. The princi
separation of Church and State, especially with reference to the establishment clause, ought
be interpreted according to the rigid standards of separation. Neutrality of the State in re
should be benevolent; standard of Benevolent Neutrality/Accommodation was espoused bec
structure of Consti is such that the Establishment Clause was immediately followed by decla
of the Free Exercise Clause. In effect, Benevolent Neutrality/Accommodation = balanced
interest vs individual freedom to exercise religion
 RELATED TITLES
Documents  Personal Growth  Religion & Spirituality

131 views 4 0

Re Letter of Tony Q Valenciano
(digest)
Uploaded by Quake G. The Subtle Art of Not The Alchemist The Song of
Giving a F*ck: A Achilles: A Novel
Case digest/brief of the Philippine Supreme Court
resolution Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano Topic:
religious freedom Full description

  
Save Embed Share

CONSTI 2
Section 5: Freedom of Religion

 Clearly, allowing citizens to practice their religion is not equivalent to a fusion of Church and
 Freedom of religion has preferred status, but it is not absolute. It cannot have its way if the
compelling state interest 2.
 Religious Accommodation  in order to give life to the constitutional right of freedom of re
the State adopts a policy of accommodation 3. As long as it can be shown that the exercise
right does not impair the public welfare, the attempt of the State to regulate or prohibit such
would be an unconstitutional encroachment
o Several jurisprudence show cases of benevolent accommodation (Estrada v. Es
Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union; Ebralinag v. Division Superintende
Schools of Cebu)
o Several laws have been enacted to accommodate religion: Revised Admin Code
RA 9177, RA 9849, PD, 1083 (Code of Muslim Personal laws), etc.
 In this case, mass only conducted during noon breaks, not disruptive of public services, no
Service rules violated. As there has been no detrimental effect on the public servi
prejudice to the State, there is simply no state interest compelling enough to prohib
exercise of religious freedom in the halls of justice

W/N the holding of masses at the basement of the QC Hall of Justice violated the Constitut
prohibition against appropriation of public money or property for the benefit of any sect, ch
denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion?  – NO
 Non-establishment Clause On the opposite side of the spectrum (vs. accommodation
minimal sense is that the state cannot establish or sponsor an official religion. It reinforces th
of separation between Church and State.
 In the same breath that the establishment clause restricts what the government can do with
it also limits what religious sects can or cannot do. The y can neither cause the government to
their particular doctrines as policy for ever yone, nor can they cause the government to restrict
groups.
  Court: holding of Catholic masses at the basement of the QC Hall of Justice is not a


es tablis hment, but merely accommodation .

o First, there is no law, ordinance or circular issued by any duly constitutive autho
expressly mandating that judiciary employees attend the Catholic masses a
basement.
o Second, when judiciary employees attend the masses to profess their faith, it is a
own initiative as they are there on their own free will and volition, with out any coercio
the judges or administrative officers.
o Third, no government funds are being spent because the lightings and airconditi
continue to be operational even if there are no religious rituals there.
o Fourth, the basement has neither been converted into a Roman Catholic chapel nor 
been permanently appropriated for the exclusive use of its faithful.
o Fifth, the allowance of the masses has not prejudiced other religions.
 RELATED TITLES
Documents  Personal Growth  Religion & Spirituality

131 views 4 0

Re Letter of Tony Q Valenciano
(digest)
Uploaded by Quake G. The Subtle Art of Not The Alchemist The Song of
Giving a F*ck: A Achilles: A Novel
Case digest/brief of the Philippine Supreme Court
resolution Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano Topic:
religious freedom Full description

  
Save Embed Share

CONSTI 2
Section 5: Freedom of Religion

 Also, no appropriation of public money or property has been done

 Section 29 (2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution provides, "No public money or property sh
appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or supp
any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of any p
 preacher, minister, or other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such
 preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal instituti
government orphanage or leprosarium." 
o Using the principle of noscitur a sociis, the words "pay" and "employ" should be under
to mean that what is prohibited is the use of public money or property for the sole pu
of benefiting or supporting any church
o Also, this provision does not inhibit the use of public property for religious purposes
the religious character of such use is merely incidental to a temporary use
o The phrase "directly or indirectly" refers to the manner of appropriation of public mo
property, not as to whether a particular act involves a direct or a mere incidental ben
any church.
o Ut magis valeat quam pereat (the Constitution is to be interpreted as a whole) 
proscribed is the passage of any law which tends to establish a religion, not mer
accommodate the free exercise thereof
 In this case, the basement of the QC Hall of Justice is not appropriated, applied or employ
the sole purpose of supporting the Roman Catholics. Further, it has not been converted
Roman Catholic chapel for the exclusive use of its faithful contrary to the claim of Valenciana
 That the holding of masses at the basement of the QC Hall of Justice may offend non-Catho
no reason to proscribe it. Our Constitution ensures and mandates an unconditional toler
without regard to whether those who seek to profess their faith belong to the majority or
minority.

RULING: Letter-complaints dismissed; holding of religious rituals of any of the world’s religions in any
of justice all over the country is allowed; Executive judges of QC directed to regulate and closely m
holding of masses and other religious practices within QC Hall of Justice

SUPERDIGEST ENTRY
Trigger Words: QC Hall of Justice, mass at noon
Facts: Valenciano complained of Catholic mass held at noon in the basement of QC Hall of Justice,
was a violation of the Constitutional provision on non-establishment (i.e. non-establishment clause)
Doctrine: In order to give life to the constitutional right of freedom of religion, the State adopts a po
accommodation. As long as it can be shown that t he exercise of the right does not i mpair the public we
the attempt of the State to regulate or prohibit such right would be an unconstitutional encroachment
Ruling: Letter-complaints dismissed; Executive judges of QC directed to regulate and closely m
holding of masses and other religious practices within QC Hall of Justice
Relevant Provisions: 1987 Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 5, Art. III, Sec. 5, Art. VI, Sec. 29