6. Garces v.

Estenzo
G.R. No. L-53487 | 25 May 1981 | Aquino, J.
Aggy | Topic: Establishment Clause

Doctrine:
Not all government activity/expenditure which has some religious tint violates the constitutional right to free
exercise of religion. Acquisition of a barangay council of a wooden image of a saint for purposes of
celebrating the barrio fiesta is a secular matter, though it may have some religious tint, and does not violate
the constitution.
Facts:
1. Barangay council of Valencia adopted Resolution No. 5 which revived the socio-religious celebration
of the feast day of Señor San Vicente Ferrer (patron saint of Valencia).
a. The resolution also provided for the construction of a waiting shed, and the acquisition of
the image of San Vicente Ferrer.
2. Under the council’s Resolution No. 6, councilman Tomas Cabatingan (chairman of the fiesta) was
assigned as custodian of the image.
a. It would remain in Cabatingan’s residence for one year until his successor is elected.
b. Resolution also provided that the image would be made available to the Catholic parish
church during the celebration of the feast day.
3. Funds were raised through solicitations and cash donations. The wooden image of San Vicente
Ferrer was acquired for P400.
a. It was temporarily placed in the altar of the Catholic church of Valencia during the mass for
the fiesta.
4. Father Osmeña, the parish priest, refused to return the image. He claims that it was church’s
property because it was acquired through church funds.
5. Council enacted Resolution No. 10 & 12 which authorized the hiring of a lawyer to file a replevin
case against Osmeña, and appointing Brgy. Captain Veloso as its representative in the case.
6. Osmeña and 3 other persons, Andres Garces (member of the Aglipayan church) and Jesus
Edullantes and Nicetas Dagar (Catholic laymen) filed a case against the barangay council seeking
the annulment of the resolutions.
a. They argue that the resolutions were violative of the constitution because it favored the
Catholic religion.
7. CFI dismissed the complaint and upheld the validity of the resolutions.

Issue/Holding:
W/N the resolutions must be annulled? – NO.

• SC noted that the image was bought with private funds and was a secular matter. There is
no relation whatsoever to the separation of church and state, and the free exercise of religion.
• The barangay had authority to assign anyone to be the image’s custodian because it was private
property. (cos the funds came from solicitations and donations)
• The image was purchased for the celebration of the barrio fiesta honoring the patron saint, and
not for the purpose of favoring any religion nor interfering with religious matters or religious
beliefs of the barrio residents.
o The fiesta is a socio-religious affair, celebration of which is an ingrained tradition
in rural communities.
• NOT all government activity/expenditure which has some religious tint violates the constitutional
right to free exercise of religion.

Ruling: Lower court decision is affirmed.