Ebranilag v. The Division of Supt. of Schools Digest

Ebranilag, et. al. v. The Division Supt. of Schools

March 1, 1993

FACTS: 

1. In G.R. No. 95770 "Roel Ebralinag, et al. vs. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu and Manuel F. Biongcog, Cebu District Supervisor," the petitioners are 43 high school and elementary school students in several towns of in Cebu province. All minors, they are assisted by their parents who belong to the religious group known as Jehovah's Witness. This is a consolidated petition.

2. All the petitioners in these two cases were expelled from their classes by the public school authorities in Cebu for refusing to salute the flag, sing the national anthem and recite the patriotic pledge as required by RA 1265 of July 11, 1955, and by DO No. 8 of the DECS making the flag ceremony compulsory in all educational institutions

3. In G.R. No. 95887, "May Amolo, et al. vs. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu and Antonio A. Sangutan," the petitioners are 25 high school and grade school students enrolled in public schools in Asturias, Cebu, whose parents are Jehovah's Witnesses. Both petitions were prepared by the same counsel, Attorney Felino M. Ganal.

4. The Jehovah's Witnesses admittedly teach their children not to salute the flag, sing the national anthem, and recite the patriotic pledge for they believe that those are "acts of worship" or "religious devotion’ only given to God.They consider the flag as an image or idol representing the State . They think the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and pledge transcends constitutional limitations on the State's power and invades the sphere of the intellect and spirit which the Constitution protect against official control 

5. In 1989, the DECS Regional Office in Cebu received complaints about teachers and pupils belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses, and enrolled in various public and private schools, who refused to sing the Philippine national anthem, salute the Philippine flag and recite the patriotic pledge.

6.  The students and their parents filed these special civil actions for Mandamus,Certiorari and Prohibition alleging that the public respondents acted without or in excess of their jurisdiction and with grave abuse of discretion — (1) in ordering their expulsion without prior notice and hearing, hence, in violation of their right to due process, their right to free public education, and their right to freedom of speech, religion and worship 

7. The Court issued a TRO and a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction and ordered to immediately re-admit the petitioners to their respective classes until further orders. 

ISSUE: Whether or not the expulsion is valid

NO. The court upheld the petitioners' right under the Constitution to refuse to salute the Philippine flag on account of their religious beliefs. Religious freedom as a fundamental right deserving the "highest priority and amplest protection among human rights. It reversed the expulsion orders made by the public respondents therein as violative of both the free exercise of religion clause and the right of citizens to education under the 1987 Constitution. 

Although the Court upholds in this decision   nevertheless, that another foreign invasion of our country will not be necessary in order for our countrymen to appreciate and cherish the Philippine flag.