Freedom of Religion

Free Exercise Clause

Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano, Holding of Religious Ritual at the Hall of Justice of
Quezon City
A.M. No. 10-4-19-SC

Facts:
Valenciano reported that the basement of the Hall of Justice of Quezon City had been converted
into a Roman Catholic Chapel, complete with offertory table, images of Catholic religious icons,
a canopy, an electric organ, and a projector. He believed that such practice violated the
constitutional provision on the separation of Church and State and the constitutional prohibition
against the appropriation of public money or property for the benefit of a sect, church,
denomination, or any other system of religion.
Judge Maceren clarified that the basement of the QC Hall of Justice was known as the prayer
corner. He opined that the use of the said area for holding masses did not violate the
constitutional prohibition against the use of public property for religious purposes because the
religious character of such use was merely incidental to a temporary use.
Judge Lutero opined that it is not the conduct of masses in public places which the Constitution
prohibited, but the passage of laws or the use of public funds for the purpose of establishing a
religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. She conveyed the fact that no law or rule had
been passed and that no public funds had been appropriated or used to support the celebration
of masses. She added that the holding of Catholic masses did not mean that Catholics had
better chances of obtaining favorable resolutions from the court.
The Office of the Court Administrator believed that the practical inconveniences cited by
Valenciano were unfounded. The case must be dismissed for lack of merit and that the RTC
and MeTC Executive Judges of QC be directed to closely regulate and monitor the holding of
masses and other religious practices within the premises of the QC Hall of Justice.

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 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.
In this case, the basement of the QC Hall of Justice is not appropriated, applied or employed for
the sole purpose of supporting the Roman Catholics. The basement of the Quezon City Hall of
Justice has remained to be a public property devoted for public use and the holding of Catholic
masses therein is a mere incidental consequence of its primary purpose.
Therefore, the holding of masses at the basement of the Quezon City Hall of Justice does not
violate the constitutional principle of separation of Church and State.