Aglipay v.

Ruiz
RECIT-READY: Gregorio Aglipay, the Supreme Head of the Philippine Independent
Church, filed for a writ of prohibition against Juan Ruiz, Director of Posts, to stop him
rd
from selling postage stamps which commemorated the 33 International Eucharistic
Congress organized by the Catholic Church in Manila. Petitioner alleges that this violates
the Constitutional provision prohibitting the use of public money for the benefit of any
religious denomination. The Court denied the petition. The Director of Posts acted by
virtue of Act No. 4052 which appropriated 60,000 pesos for the cost of printing of
stamps with new designs. The stamps themselves featured a map of the Philippines. The
government’s goal was to promote the Philippines. There was no religious goal. The
proceeds of the sale of the stamps also went to the government and no to any church.

Petitioner: Gregorio Aglipay, Supreme Head of the Philippine Independent Church

Respondent: Juan Ruiz, Director of Posts
Facts:

• In May 1936, the Director of Posts announced that he would issue

rd
postage stamps 
commemorating the celebration of the 33 International
Eucharistic Congress 
organized by the Roman Catholic Church in Manila. 


• Petitioner filed for a writ of prohibition to stop the issuance and sale of
the 
remaining postage stamps. 


• Petitioner alleges that this violates Sec. 23, subsection 3, Article VI of the
16
1935 
Constitution (now Section 29, par. 2, Article VI of the 1987
Constitution) which prohibited the appropriation of public funds for the benefit
or support of any religion. 


• Basically, petitioner is alleging that it is a violation of the principle of

separation of Church and State. 
16 The case says Section 13 but this is a
typographical error. Its really section 23. 


Issues:

• WON a writ of prohibition is the proper remedy 


• WON there was a violation of the Constitution 


Held:
1. YES

Generally, a writ of prohibition is only issued on the performance of judicial or quasi-

judicial functions. But it can be issued, in appropriate cases, to an officer or person
whose acts are without or in excess of his authority.

2. NO
• What is granted by the Constitution is not mere religious tolerance but

religious freedom. Even the Preamble of the Constitution manifests the

religious nature of Filipinos. 


• The Director of Posts issued the postage stamps pursuant to Act No.
4052 


o Act No. 4052 appropriated 60,000 pesos for the cost of printing of postage stamps
with new designs. The Director of Posts, with the approval of the Secretary of Public
Works and Communication, is authorized to dispose of the funds as long as it is deemed
advantageous to the government.

• There is no religious purpose for Act No. 4052. Even if the stamps
featured the International Eucharistic Congress, none of the funds raised would
be used for the benefit of the Catholic Church. 


• The final stamp design also showed a map of the Philippines and the
location of Manila (instead of the original design featuring a chalice). The main
purpose of the stamp was to advertise the Philippines and attract more tourists.
The resulting propaganda, if any, received by the Catholic Church was not the
purpose of the Government. 
Petition denied.