Freedom of religion - MAD
FREEDOM OF RELIGION 2. Citizenship requirement of ownership of educational
Sec. 5. Art. III: 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.
Note: This is a self-executory provision.
What is Religion?
Religion as a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man
to his Creator is recognized. And, in so far as it instills into the minds the purest
principles of morality, its influence is deeply felt and highly appreciated.
(Aglipay v. Ruiz, G.R. No. 45459)
What are the two guarantees contained in Sec. 5 Article III of the 1987
Constitution?
1. Non‐establishment clause;
2. Free exercise clause, or the freedom of religious profession and
worship
Non‐establishment clause
The non‐establishment clause states that the State cannot: ( S A I F )
1. Set up a church
2. Pass laws which aid one or all religions or prefer one over another
3. Influence a person to go to or stay away from church against his will
4. Force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion
 Exceptions.
1. Tax exemption on property actually, directly and exclusively
used for religious purposes; (Sec. 28 (3), Art. VI )
institutions, except those established by religious groups and
mission boards (Sec. 4 (2), Art. XIV)
3. Optional religious instruction in public elementary and high
schools:
a. At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians,
b. Religious instruction taught within regular class hours by
instructors designated or approved by the religious authorities
of the religion to which the children or wards belong,
c. Without additional cost to the Government.
(Sec. 3 (3), Art. XIV)
4. Appropriation allowed where the minister or ecclesiastic is
employed in the armed forces, in a penal institution, or in a
government-owned orphanage or leprosarium. (Sec. 29 (2), Art. VI)
5. Government sponsorship of town fiestas, some purely religious
traditions have now been considered as having acquired secular
character; and
6. Postage stamps depicting Philippines as the venue of a significant
religious event – benefit to the religious sect involved was merely
incidental as the promotion of Philippines as a tourist destination
was the primary objective.
What is guaranteed by our Constitution is religious liberty, not
mere religious toleration. Religious freedom, however, as a
constitutional mandate is not inhibition of profound reverence for
religion and is not a denial of its influence in human affairs.
(Aglipay v. Ruiz)
Free Exercise Clause
 What are the aspects of freedom of religious profession and
worship?
These are the right to believe, which is absolute, and the right to act on
one’s belief, which is subject to regulation.
1
Freedom of religion - MAD
 Freedom to believe – absolute freedom which cannot be
regulated. People are free to believe whatever they want, even
if they cannot prove it.
 Freedom to act – when belief is translated into external acts,
they can be subjects of regulation and police power, especially
if they are injurious to public safety.
 In American bible society v. City of Manila, free exercise of religion
carries with it the right to disseminate religious information. Any
restraint of such right must pass the test of clear and present danger of
any substantive evil which the State may prevent.
 Solicitation for religious purposes may be regulted by the State in its
exercise of police power. The state may protect its citizens from
fraudulent solicitations. It may regulate the time and manner of
solicitations.
Freedom of religion is a valid reason for people to be exempted from the
operation of certain laws and policies:
 On union membership – despite having a closed shop provision in the
CBA, a member of the Iesia ni Cristo may opt not to join the labor union
since this is disallowed by his religion. Freedom of religion is superior
over contractual rights.
 On flag ceremony – In Ebranalig v. Division Superintendent,
Jehovah’s Witness may be excluded from the mandatory flag ceremonu
in public schools because it is against their religion to worship other
idols. While maintaining that the Philippine flag and the flag ceremony
are not religious idols and rituals, the SC upheld their right to not
participate. They may not disrupt it either.
 On mandatory education – the Amish community may refuse to enroll
their children from the public school system despite a compulsory
education policy by the State. They have their own system of education
which is more appropriate for their religious beliefs. (Wisconsin v.
Yoder)
 On Government office hours – Muslim court employees were exempted
from the 8am to 5pm work hours. Instead, they were allowed to work
from 7:30am to 3:30 pm without breaks in order to comply with their
Ramadan obligation of fasting. (In Re: Request of Muslim Employees)
Lemon Test ( S P I )
It is a test to determine whether an act of the government violates the non‐
establishment clause. To pass the Lemon test, a government act or policy
must:
1. Have a secular purpose;
2. Not promote or favor any set of religious beliefs or religion generally;
and
3. Not get the government too closely involved (“entangled”) with
religion.
Benevolent Neutrality
The approach that gives room for accommodation of religious exercises,
provided that it does not offend compelling state interest.
What is the Compelling State Interest test?
It is the test used to determine if the interests of the State are compelling
enough to justify infringement of religious freedom. It involves a three‐step
process:
1. Has the statute or government action created a burden on the free
exercise of religion? – Courts often look into the sincerity of the
religious belief, but without inquiring into the truth of the belief since
the free exercise clause prohibits inquiring about its truth.
2. Is there a sufficiently compelling state interest to justify this
infringement of religious liberty? – In this step, the government has to
establish that its purposes are legitimate for the State and that
they are compelling.
3. Has the State in achieving its legitimate purposes used the least
intrusive means possible so that the free exercise is not infringed any
more than necessary to achieve the legitimate goal of the State? – The
analysis requires the State to show that the means in which it is
achieving its legitimate State objective is the least intrusive means,
2
Freedom of religion - MAD

or it has chosen a way to achieve its legitimate State end that imposes
as little as possible intrusion on religious beliefs.

 In Estrada v. Escritor, it was held that if the burden is great and the
sincerity of the religious belief is not in question, adherence to
benevolent neutrality accommodation approach requires that the Court
make an individual determination and not dismiss the claim outright.
Accordingly, the Court found that in this particular case and under the
distinct circumstances prevailing, respondent Escritor’s arrangement
cannot be penalized as she made out a case for exemption from the law
based on her fundamental right to freedom of religion. Concluding, the
high tribunal said that the Court recognizes that the state interests
must be upheld in order that freedoms, including religious freedom,
may be enjpyed. But in the area of religious exercise as a preferred
freedom, man stands accountable to an authority higher than the
state, and so the state interest sought to be upheld must be so
compelling that the violation will erode the very fabric of the state that
will also protect the freedom. In the absence of a showing that such
state interest exists, man must be allowed to subscribe to the
infinite.
Criticism of other religion prohibition
In INC v CA, criticisms of other religions by any other religion is not a valid
ground to prohibit that religion’s show on TV since it does not pass the “clear
and present danger test” for prohibiting free speech and free exercise of
religion.
Under our constitutional scheme, it is not the task of the State to favor any
religion by protecting it against an attack by another religion. In a State where
there ought to be no difference between the appearance and the reality of
freedom of religion, the remedy against bad theology is better theology
Religious Test
The Government may not use religion as a basis of classification for the
imposition of duties, penalties, privileges or benefits.

What is ecclesiastical affair?

It is one that concerns doctrine, creed or form of worship of the church, or the
adoption and enforcement within a religious association of needful laws and
regulations for the government of the membership, and the power of excluding
from such associations those deemed unworthy of membership”

State Jurisdiction over Religious/ ecclesiastical affairs

The government does not have the power to interfere and substitute its
judgment on matters of religious doctrine and other purely religious
affairs. (Taruc v. Dela Cruz)

Government Neutrality is not compromised even if some acts cause some

incidental benefit to any religion. The determining factor is that it is not
primarily aimed at providing such benefit.
3