Garces v.
Estenzo (PAO) In the case at bar, the Petitioner contends the following:
May 25, 1981 | Aquino | Freedom of Religion
PETITIONER: Andres Garces et al
RESPONDENTS: Hon. Numeriano Estenzo (CFI of Leyte, Ormoc City)
et al
Summary:
On March 23 and 26 of 1976, the barangay council of Ormoc City
adopted Resolution 5 and 6 (to revive the socio-religious celebration of
the feast of the patron saint of Valencia, San Vicente Ferrer). The former
resolution provided for the acquisition of the patron saint and the
construction of a waiting shed, while the latter resolution designated
Councilman Cabatingan as the hermano mayor of the fiesta and the
caretaker of the image of the patron saint. Both resolutions were ratified
by the barangay general assembly.
Funds for the image and the waiting shed were solicited (and donated) by
the barangay and its residents. It was temporarily placed at the altar of the
Catholic Church of Barangay Valencia where people could worship it.
However, the controversy arose when Father Osmena refused to return
the image with the reason that it was church property because church
funds were used to acquire it. During a mass, Father Osmena uttered
defamatory remarks towards the barangay captain (Veloso), the latter
filed a case of oral defamation against the former. The barangay council
then adopted two resolutions, 10 and 12. The former authorized a replavin
case against Father Osmena, the latter appointed Veloso as the
represented of the case.
Father Osmena turned over the image to the council; however, he (and the
other petitioners in this case) filed a complaint in the CFI assailing the
constitutionality and calling for the annulment of Resolutions 10 and 12.
The lower court dismissed the complaint.
1) The Chairman of the council did not participate in the sessions of
ratification
2) That no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion
and no public money shall be appropriated for the benefit of a
specific religion
The Court dismissed the petition.
1) Despite the absence of the Chairman, there was a quorum;
also, he was duly notified of the sessions. He was just
working with a construction company at Ipil.
2) The image was purchased with public funds and the waiting
shed was is entirely a secular matter. It was purchased in
commemoration of the patron saint to celebrate the barrio
fiesta, not with the purpose of favoring the catholic church.
One of the highlights of the fiesta was a mass; consequently,
the image had to be placed in the church.
FACTS: *Check Summary*
ISSUES:
- WON Resolutions 10 and 12 of the barangay council are violative
of the freedom of religion and use of public money in favor of a
specific religion. NO
HELD: Petition is dismissed.
RATIO:
*Check Summary*