PEOPLE V. TENGSON, No.

07115-CR, August 30, 1969

TOPIC Title II – Crimes Against the Fundamental Laws of State; Art. 133 – Offending the Religious Feelings

PARTIES: 1. Plaintiff and Appellee: THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

2. Accused and Appellant: ALFONSO TENGSON

NATURE: Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court Batangas, Batangas, convicting the accused of violation of Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), and
sentencing him to serve six (6) months and one (1) day of prison correccional, with the accessories of the law and to pay one-half (1/2) of the cost.

ANTECEDENTS: 1. 1962 April 4 – Tengson, a minister of the sect “Christ is the Answer” went to Bauan, Batangas together with his assistant, Eduardo Olegario, after receiving
a telegram informing him of the death of the wife of Tiburcio Cepillo. There they perfomed a religious service consisting of the singing of the hymns and
reading of passages from the Bible. Cepillo informed Tengson that as per his deceased wife’s wishes, her remains would be buried in the Bauan Roman
Catholic Cemetery the next day.

2. The next day, before the funeral cortege for his deceased wife started, Cepillo requested Tengson to perform yet another religious service for his
deceased wife in the sect barrio chapel. After the service, the funeral cortege headed to the Poblacion while Tengson and his assistant waited for its
arrival at the Bauan Municipal Hall.

3. Tengson directed the funeral cortege to the cemetery, but in the process stopped in front of an unfinished Roman Catholic Chapel, where some religious
rites were conducted before the interment.

4. Upon the foregoing facts, Tengson was found guilty of violating Article 133 of the RPC, thus this appeal.

SC DECISION REVERSED the decision of the Batangas, Batangas Municipal Court, ACQUIT the ACCUSED, with costs de oficio.
(Bottomline)

ISSUE(S) SC DECISION RATIO/LEGAL BASIS/DOCTRINES

1. Did Tengson and his assistant performed acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings of a
Christian or a Roman Catholic faithful?
NO, Tengson and his assistant did not There are two essential elements of the offense characterized under Article
perform acts notoriously offensive to the 133 of the RPC, to wit:
feelings of a Christian or a Roman Catholic 1. That the acts complained of were performed in a place devoted to
faithful. religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony;
and
 ISSUE(S) SC DECISION
The second essential element of the offense
penalized by Article 133 of the RPC was not
met, because Tengson and his assistant
simply performed religious rites in
accordance with the practice of their
Christian sect. Such act may have offended
the Roman Catholic priest of Bauan and
some catholic adherents in the municipality,
but since there was permit for the burial of
of Cepillos’ wife in the Bauan Catholic
cemetery, the religious rites cannot be
considered offensive to the feelings of
everybody who professes the Christian
religion.
Please read the other opinions (concurring, dissenting and concurring, dissenting) in the decision if you have extra time.
Use at your own risk – Arnel A. Manalastas
RATIO/LEGAL BASIS/DOCTRINES
2. That the act or acts must be notoriously offensive to those who are
faithful in their religion.
For an act to be notoriously offensive to religious feelings, it must be directed
against a religious practice, or dogma, or ritual for the purpose of ridicule.
The offender mocks, scoffs at, or attempts to damage an object of religious
veneration, and the act must be abusive, insulting and obnoxious
The dissenting opinion of Justice Laurel in the case of People v. Baes seems
to express the correct philosophy behind the legal provision in question.
According to the dissenting opinion, an offense to religious feelings should
not be made to depend upon the more or less narrow conception of any given
particular religion, but should be gauged by the NATURE OF THE ACTS
COMMITTED, and after scrutiny of all the facts and circumstances viewed
through the mirror of unbiased judicial criterion, otherwise the gravity or
leniency of the offense will depend on the subjective characterization of the
act from the point of view of a given religious denomination or sect. In such
case, the application of the law would be partial and arbitrary and such a
view would be dangerous to a country where there different religious
Christian sects.