Ikaw ug ang Balaod

September 6, 2015
DYSS IBP Program
4:00 5:00pm
Topic :
1. Conduct of Preliminary Investigation
2. Separation of Church and State
3. Exercise of Freedom of Religion

I.

Introduction :
a. Laying the foundation for the topic :
i. Iglesia ni Cristo rally :
- MANILA, Philippines The Manila city government
has allowed the politically influential Iglesia ni Cristo
to hold vigil in front of the Department of Justice (DOJ)
from August 27 to August 31, 2015 Five Day Rally
ended
-

Executive Minister Eduardo Manalo, now heads the

religious organization.

- At the same time that INC members continued to hold

vigil in Manila, other church members flocked to the
Philippines iconic highway called EDSA near the
Catholic shrine where the 1986 People Power revolt
happened. The churchs members along EDSA carried
banners calling for the separation of church and state.
- The INC is staging these rallies as it slams the DOJ,
especially Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, for alleged
religious persecution. This makes the ongoing INC vigil
its longest gathering in recent history. It is also the
politically influential groups first explicitly antigovernment event in recent years.
- The INCs events even those as innocent as a medical
mission have been known to cause heavy traffic,
prompt the cancellation of classes, and paralyze the
metropolis.
- Founded by a former member of the Catholic Church,
the INC is a 101-year-old religious group in
predominantly Catholic Philippines. It draws political

influence from its practice of bloc voting, and is known

for lobbying for key positions in government
- This comes after expelled INC minister Isaias Samson
Jr filed an illegal detention case against INC leaders
before the DOJ.
A. Late August, Isaias Samson, a member of the
INC Sanggunian and head of the INC foreign
mission, as well as editor of the official INC
publication, also filed a complaint, but this time
with the Department of Justice (DOJ). Samson
also charged the Sanggunian of illegal detention
or kidnapping, when he and his family were also
put under armed guard and restricted to their
house for several days, while the Sanggunian
interrogated Samson about what he knows about
the person of the blogger, "Antonio Ebangelista,"
a pseudonym. the complaint is for serious illegal
detention against the entire membership of the
Sanggunian, headed by Ka Glicerio Santos Jr.
B. Samson and his family were allegedly treated as
prisoners in their own house for nine days.
C. During that period, the complainant claimed
they were not allowed to go out of their own
house, their lines of telephones and Internet were
cut off, and the health of his wife was
endangered because she has just undergone a
heart operation when they were placed under
"house arrest" in their townhouse in Tierre Bella,
Quezon City.
I.

INCs Claims :
- According to the INC, De Limas act constitutes
selective justice because of the special attention given
by the Justice Secretary to the Samson complaint,
allegedly even receiving the complaint itself.
- INC claimed or claims still that the latter Secretary De
Lima was or is showing special interest and, thus,
discrimination and/or bias against it (the INC) in the
investigation to be conducted by DOJ on the complaint

for alleged serious illegal detention (punishable by

reclusion perpetua under Article 267 of the Revised
Penal Code) filed by former INC Minister Isaias
Samson, Jr. against Sanggunian (Council) members of
INC which was developing into a fire.
II.

De Limas Response :
- According to De Lima, there is no truth to this
allegation, since it is ministerial upon the DOJ to
accept criminal complaints for purposes of conducting
preliminary investigation that, in the first place, is the
very mandate of the DOJ.
- In this instance, De Lima has even no discretion on
whether or not to receive the Samson complaint.
Receiving a criminal complaint is ministerial upon the
DOJ. If the INC demand were to be logically granted,
De Lima would have dictated against all procedure
and laws the state prosecutor to either not accept the
complaint or to throw it out. In so doing, she would
have committed an act of graft and corrupt practices by
unduly favoring a party to the injury of the
complainant. Violation under Sec 3 of RA 3019 or the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. What the INC is
demanding is for De Lima to commit a crime.

Issues :
Since there is a formal complaint by Mr. Samson Jr. that he was illegally
detained by members of the INC Sangunian, the DOJ is duty-bound to act on
it to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a wellfounded belief that a crime has been committed and that the respondent is
probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial
Secretary de Lima is right that DOJ has the power and the obligation,
even to conduct an investigation of all and any criminal complaint
properly lodged before the department.
But, this issue presents itself: which office in the DOJ should conduct
the preliminary investigation?
Shall it be the National Prosecution Service Central Office or shall
it be the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City where the alleged
offense was allegedly committed?

(Section 1, Rule 112, Rules of Court).

RULE 112
Preliminary Investigation
Section 1. Preliminary investigation defined; when required.
Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether
there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has
been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be
held for trial.
Except as provided in section 7 of this Rule, a preliminary investigation is
required to be conducted before the filing of a complaint or information for
an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two
(2) months and one (1) day without regard to the fine. (1a)
Section 2.

Officers authorized to conduct preliminary investigations.

The following may conduct preliminary investigations:

(a)

Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;

(b) Judges of the Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts;
(c)

National and Regional State Prosecutors; and

(d)

Other officers as may be authorized by law.

Their authority to conduct preliminary investigations shall include all crimes

cognizable by the proper court in their respective territorial jurisdictions.
(2a)
III.

Comment on Preliminary Investigation :

a. The usual procedure and practice is that the Office of the
Prosecutor in which territorial jurisdiction the alleged offense
was committed in this case Quezon City shall have the
original jurisdiction to conduct the preliminary investigation
pursuant to Republic Act 5180 (An Act Providing A Uniform
System of Preliminary Investigation by Provincial and City
Fiscals And Their Assistants, and the State Attorneys and
Their Assistants) and by Section 14 (a) of the DOJ Manual
For Prosecutors. And, the Office of the Secretary of Justice
only exercises appellate jurisdiction, that is, it reviews the
resolution of the City Prosecutors Office when one has been

made after due process and a petition for review would have
been appropriately filed by the aggrieved party, who can be
either the complainant or the respondent. This is provided by
DOJ Circular No. 70-2000 or the National Prosecution Service
Rules On Appeals.
b. But, the National Prosecution Service Central Office on the
authority of the Secretary usually, on cases involving
national interest or multi-faceted cases and/or involving
many different complainants from different places may
directly conduct the preliminary investigation. Thus, for
example, the PDAF and DAP investigations were conducted by
the Central Office.
c. Considering, however, that the complaint of Mr. Samson Jr. is
an ordinary illegal detention case involving only one
complainant and six members of the INC Sanggunian, and
there appears no special circumstance which would warrant
the preliminary investigation to be conducted by the Central
Office, it ought to be conducted by the QC Prosecutors
Office.
d. Probably, it is in this light that the INC has complained or is
still complaining that Secretary De Lima is cutting corners and
giving undue interest to the case involving INCs former and
present members.
e. In order, therefore, to dispel the suspicions of the INC,
Secretary de Lima should order that the preliminary
investigation of Samson Jr.s complaint be remanded to the QC
Prosecutors Office.
f. Then let the case take its due course from there. Hopefully, this
will end the interesting but unnecessary squabble that,
regrettably, wasted the time and effort of the DOJ Central
Office which can otherwise be spent for the other equally, if not
more important and urgent, cases pending before it.
IV.

Separation of Church and State :

- In the meantime, on the birthday of Secretary of Justice
Leila De Lima last August 27, the INC gathered outside
the gates of the DOJ demanding that the Secretary
refrain from meddling in INC matters and respect the
separation of church and State. We could only take this
to mean that the INC is demanding the DOJ to throw

V.

out Samsons complaint and let matters rest where they

are, i.e., within the confines of the INC temples.
Comment :
- What is the meaning of Separation of Church and
State?

VI.

Discussion:
- Although a predominantly Catholic country, the
principle of separation of church and state has particular
significance in the Philippines because the Filipino
people struggled against Spanish colonization, which
used the power of both the sword and the cross in
subjugating the nation.
- The provision of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
regarding the separation of church and state was
patterned after the abovementioned provision in the US
Constitution.
- Article II Declaration of Principles and State Policies :,
Section 6 of the Philippine Constitution declares that:
The separation of Church and State shall be
inviolable.
A. The principle of the separation of church and the
state is based on these two fundamental premises.
B. First, the government derives its mandate from
the people and not from the church, which,
during feudal times, bestowed upon the king the
divine right to rule the people (This was why it
was the bishop who used to crown the king or
queen.). Based on this principle of divine right,
the state and the church propagated the belief that
going against the king meant going against God,
the consequence of which was eternal damnation.
C. Second, the people have the fundamental right to
practice ones beliefs. This was a reaction to the
official religion being imposed upon the people
by the monarchy.
- Reinforced by Constitutional Provisions :
a. Art 3, Bill of Rights

i. Sec. 5. 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.
ii. Sec 2 (5) of Art. 9-C Religious Sector cannot be
registered as political party
iii. Sec 5 (2) Art. VI No Partylist representatives from the
religious sector.
iv. Sec 3( 3) Art 14 Optional religious instruction for
public elementary and high school
v. Sec 4 (2) Art 14 Filipino Ownership requirement for
educational institutions except those established by
religious groups and mission.
vi. Sec 29 (2) Art. 6 Prohibition against appropriation for
sectarian benefit
1. Exceptions :
a. Sec 28 (3) Art VI - Sec. 28.
Charitable institutions, churches and personages or
convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit
cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements,
actually, directly, and exclusively used for religious,
charitable,or educational purposes shall be exempt from
taxation.
b. Sec 29 (2) Art. 6
No public money or property shall be appropriated,
applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the
use, benefit, or support of any sect, church,
denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion,
or of any priest, preacher, minister, other religious
teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such priest,
preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed
forces, or to any penal institution, or government
orphanage or leprosarium.

VII. Discussion on Freedom of Religion

a. Art 3, Bill of Rights
i. Sec. 5. 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.
- Two Guarantees contained :
A. Non Establishment Clause
The state cannot set up church, nor pass
laws which aid one religion, aid all
religion,or prefer one religion over
another, nor force, nor influence to go to or
remain away from church against his will
or force him to profess a belief or disbelief
in any religion.( Everson v. Board of
Education US. Supreme Court
B. Freedom of religious profession and worship
Aspects :
Right to Believe, which is absolute
Right to act according to ones
belief, which is subject to
regulation
o Religious freedom may be
regulated only upon the
application of Compelling
State Interest- Concluding the
high tribunal said that the
Court recognizes that the state
interest must be upheld in
order that freedoms, including
religious exercise as a
preferred freedom may be
enjoyed. 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.( Estrada v.
Escritor)
VIII. Comment on INC Rally:

a. So does the INC violate the principle of the separation of

church and the state whenever it criticizes or acts against a
government policy or wrongdoing? No, it is not a violation of
this principle.
b. Did the Aquino government violate the principle of the
separation of church and state in its handling of the illegal
detention and harassment cases filed by Isaias Samson against
eight leaders of INC?
c. If the allegations of the INC that De Lima unduly interfered in
the investigation of the complaints were true, the Aquino
government did violate the principle of separation of church
and state. The INC was, therefore, correct in raising this as an
issue in its protest action. On the other hand, if De Lima abided
by the proper guidelines and processes in the administration of
justice, then the government has the duty to investigate a
complaint and could not be faulted of violating the principle of
separation of church and state.
d. However, more alarming is the allegation that De Lima
interfered in the investigation to force the INC to negotiate with
the Aquino government and get the INCs commitment to vote
for Mar Roxas and the entire Liberal Party slate in the 2016
elections. If this were true, then the Aquino government
violated more than the principle of the separation of church and
state; it is already rigging the elections