Re: Letter of Tony Q.

Valenciano Holding of Religious Rituals at the Hall of

Justice Building in Quezon City

A.M. No. 10-4-19-SC

March 7, 2017

Facts: This controversy originated from a series of letters written by Valenciano and
addressed to the Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno reporting that the basement of the Hall
of Justice of Quezon City had been converted into a Roman Catholic Chapel, complete
with Catholic religious icons and other instrument for religious activities. He believe
that such practice violated the constitutional provisions on the separation of Church and
State and the constitutional prohibition against the appropriation of public money and
property for the benefit of a sect, church, denomination, or any other system of religion.
He further averred that the holding of masses at the basement of Hall of Justice showed
that it tended to favor the Catholic litigants; that the rehearsals and other activities
caused great disturbance to the employees; and that court functions are affected due to
the masses that is being held from 12:00 to 1:15 in the afternoon.

Issue: Whether or not the holding of masses at the basement of the Quezon City Hall of
Justice violates the constitutional principle of separation of Church and State as well as
the constitutional prohibition against appropriation of public money or property for the
benefit of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution or system of religion.

Ruling: The holding of Religious Rituals in the Hall of Justice does not amount to the
union of Church and State. The 1987 constitution provides that the separation of Church
and the State shall be inviolable; if further provides that the free exercise and enjoyment
of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever
be allowed. Allowing religion to flourish is not contrary to the principle of separation of
Church and state. In fact, these two principles are in perfect harmony with each other.
The Roman Catholic express their worship through the holy mass and to stop these
would be tantamount to repressing the right to the free exercise of their religion.

It is also the view of the Supreme Court that the holding of Catholic masses at the
basement of the Quezon City Hall of Justice is not a case of establishment but merely
accommodation wherein the government recognize the reality that some measures may
not be imposed on a certain portion of the population for the reason that these measures
are contrary to their religious beliefs. 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.

No appropriation of Public money or property for the benefit of any Church. The
constitution provides that “No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied,
paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support any sect, church,
denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or 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 any penal institution,
or government orphanage or leprosarium.

The prohibition contemplates a scenario where the appropriation is primarily intended

for the furtherance of a particular church. The aforecited constitutional provision “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. Thus, the basement of the Quezon City Hall of Justice has
remained to be a public property devoted for public use because the holding of Catholic
masses therein is a mere incidental consequence of its primary purpose.