spot_img
28 C
Philippines
Friday, March 29, 2024

SC throws out suit vs Philpost issuance of INC commemorative stamps in 2014

- Advertisement -

The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition challenging the legality of the decision of the Philippine Postal Corporation to print and sell more than 1.2 million postage stamps to commemorate the 100th founding anniversary of Iglesia ni Cristo in 2014.

In a 26-page en banc decision authored by Associate Justice Noel Tijam, the SC upheld the July 24, 2015 decision and the resolution dated March 8, 2016 of the Court of Appeals, which declared Philpost’s use of public funds to print the commemorative stamps did not violate Section 29 (2) Article VI of the Constitution which bars the use of public funds to support a religious sect.

“The printing of the INC commemorative stamp is no different. It is simply an acknowledgment of INC’s existence for a hundred years. It does not necessarily equate to the State sponsoring the INC,” the SC ruled.

The high court resolved the case by applying its policy of “benevolent neutrality” in resolving  disputes  between the  State and the Church.

- Advertisement -

Citing Estrada vs. Escritor case, the Court  ruled that “benevolent neutrality recognizes the religious nature of the Filipino people and the elevating influence of religion in society; at the same time, it acknowledges that government must pursue its secular goals.”

The policy gives room for accommodation of religious exercises as required under the Constitution, it said.

Because of this, the SC said it has adopted a stance of “benevolent neutrality” in determining the whether there has been a violation of the provision on separation of the Church and the State.

“Rightfully so, for this incorporates the Constitutional principle of separation of the Church and the State while recognizing the people’s right to express their belief or non-belief of a Supreme  Being,” the SC held.

The high court did not give weight to the argument of petitioner Renato Peralta that the printing and issuance of the INC commemorative stamp involved disbursement of public funds and tantamount to sponsorship of a religious activities, thus, violating the principle of separation of powers between the State and the Church and the non-establishment of religion clause.

Peralta, who filed the suit in his capacity as taxpayer, argued that printing and issuance of INC commemorative stamps  constitute free advertisement for the INC at the expense of taxpayers’ money.

He noted that PhilPost printed a total of 1.2 million stamps although  the memorandum of agreement between INC and PhilPost covered only 50,000 pieces. 

However, the SC held that the printing of the INC commemorative stamp did not amount to violation of the non-establishment or religion clause.

The tribunal pointed out that the costs for the printing and issuance of the 50,000 stamps were all paid for by INC.

“Any perceived use of government property, machines or otherwise, is de minimis (about minimal things) and certainly do not amount to a sponsorship of a specific religion,” the SC stressed.

The SC also said it sees no violation of the Constitutional prohibition on the establishment of religion with regard to the remaining 1,150 pieces of commemorative stamps printed and distributed by Philpost.

It noted that Philpost has also issued stamps for Catholic Church, such as those featuring heritage churches, International Eucharistic Congress and Pope Francis. It also printed in the past stamps celebrating 300 years of Islam.

“Based on the foregoing, this Court is not convinced that Philpost has actually used its resources to endorse, nor encourage Filipinos to join INC or observe the latter’s doctrines. On the contrary, this Court agrees with the respondents that the printing of the INC commemorative stamp was endeavored merely as part of PhilPost’s ordinary business,” the Court declared.

The Court also said there was no basis on Peralta’s claim that there was illegal disbursement of funds under Section 29 (2) of Article VI of the Constitution.

The tribunal stressed that the records do not show that the State has been using the resources and manpower of Philpost for INC’s advantage.

“On the contrary, the stamps printed and issued by PhilPost seen through its website, feature various entities and organizations, other than religious sects,” it noted.

Besides, the SC said it sees no religious overtones surrounding the commemorative stamps considering that the design was “merely an acknowledgment of the historical and cultural contribution of INC to the Philippine society."

- Advertisement -

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles