Pamil v. Teleron G.R. No.

L-34854 November 20, 1978

under the New Election Code. The rule is that all persons possessing the necessary qualifications, except those expressly disqualified by the election code, are eligible to run for public office. http://www.uberdigests.info FORTUNATO R. PAMIL vs. HONORABLE VICTORINO C. TELERON and REV. FR. MARGARITO R. GONZAGA G.R. No. L-34854 November 20, 1978 FORTUNATO R. PAMIL vs. HONORABLE VICTORINO C. TELERON and REV. FR. MARGARITO R. GONZAGA G.R. No. L-34854 November 20, 1978 FACTS: Private respondent, Father Margarito R. Gonzaga, was, in 1971, elected to the position of municipal mayor of Alburquerque, Bohol. Therefore, he was duly proclaimed. A suit for quo warranto was then filed by petitioner, himself an aspirant for the office, for his disqualification based on this Administrative Code provision: "In no case shall there be elected or appointed to a municipal office ecclesiastics, soldiers in active service, persons receiving salaries or compensation from provincial or national funds, or contractors for public works of the municipality." The suit did not prosper, respondent Judge sustaining the right of Father Gonzaga to the office of municipal mayor. He ruled that such statutory ineligibility was impliedly repealed by the Election Code of 1971. The matter was then elevated to this Tribunal by petitioner. It is his contention that there was no such implied repeal, that it is still in full force and effect. Thus was the specific question raised. ISSUE WON the disqualification of the respondent based on Administrative Code provision Constitutional HELD: The challenged Administrative Code provision, certainly insofar as it declares ineligible ecclesiastics to any elective or appointive office, is, on its face, inconsistent with the religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution. To so exclude them is to impose a religious test. Here being an ecclesiastic and therefore professing a religious faith suffices to disqualify for a public office. There is thus an incompatibility between the Administrative Code provision relied upon by petitioner and an express constitutional mandate. http://tobicasedigest.blogspot.com Aglipay v. Ruiz Digest G.R. No. L-45459 March 13, 1937 Laurel, J.: Facts: 1. In May 1936, the Director of Posts announced in the dailies of Manila that he would order the issuance of postage stamps commemorating the celebration in the City of Manila of the 33rd International Eucharistic Congress, organized by the Roman Catholic Church. 2. The petitioner, Mons. Gregorio Aglipay, Supreme Head of the Philippine Independent Church, in the fulfilment of what he considers to be a civic duty, requested Vicente Sotto, a member of the Philippine Bar, to denounce the matter to the President. In spite of the protest of the petitioners attorney, the Director of Posts publicly announced having sent to the United States the designs of the postage for printing. The said stamps were actually issued and sold though the greater part remained unsold. 3. The further sale was sought to be prevented by the petitioner. He alleged that the provisions of Section 23, Subsection 3, Article VI, of the Constitution were violated in the issuance and selling of the commemorative postage stamps. It was provided therein that, No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian, institution, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary as such, except when such priest,

Facts: 1. In 1971, Private respondent, Father Margarito R. Gonzaga, was elected and duly proclaimed as mayor of Alburquerque, Bohol. Petitioner filed a suit for quo warranto, to disqualify respondent based on Section 2175 of the Administrative Code provision: "In no case shall there be elected or appointed to a municipal office ecclesiastics, soldiers in active service, persons receiving salaries or compensation from provincial or national funds, or contractors for public works of the municipality." 2. The suit did not prosper, with the lower court held that the ineligibility was impliedly repealed by the Election Code of 1971. The matter was then elevated to this Tribunal by petitioner. It is his contention that there was no such implied repeal, that it is still in full force and effect. Thus was the specific question raised. ISSUE: Whether or not an ecclesiastic was eligible to an elective municipal position NO. The attack on the continuing effectivity of Section 2175 having failed, it must be, as noted at the outset, given full force and application. Section 2175 of the Revised Administrative Code, as far as ecclesiastics are concerned, must be accorded respect. The presumption of validity calls for its application. Under the circumstances, certiorari lies. http://lawsandfound.blogspot.com Political Law Inviolability of the Separation of Church and State In 1971, Fr. Margarito Gonzaga, a priest, won the election for mayoralty in Albuquerque, Bohol. He was also proclaimed as a mayor therein. Pamil, a rival candidate file a quo warranto case against Gonzaga questioning the eligibility of Gonzaga. He argued that as provided for in the Revised Administrative Code; in no case shall there be elected or appointed to a municipal office ecclesiastics, soldiers in active service, persons receiving salaries or compensation from provincial or national funds, or contractors for public works of the municipality. In this case, the elected mayor is a priest. However, Judge Teleron ruled that the Administrative Code is repealed by the Election Code of 1971 which allowed the prohibitions of the revised administrative code. ISSUE: Whether or not the Revised Administrative Code is no longer operative? HELD: Decision is indecisive, the said law, in the deliberations of the court, failed to obtain the majority vote of eight (8) which is needed in order for this law to be binding upon the parties in this case. For this, the petition must be granted and the decision of the lower court reversed and set aside. Fr. Gonzaga is hereby ordered to vacate the mayoralty position. It is also pointed out that how can one who swore to serve the Churchs interest above all be in duty to enforce state policies which at times may conflict with church tenets. This is in violation of the separation of the church and state. The Revised Administrative Code still stands because there is no implied repeal. Dissenting Opinion J. Teehankee The Comelec ruled that soldiers in active service and persons receiving salaries or compensation from provincial or national funds are obviously now allowed to run for a public elective office because under Sec. 23 of the Election Code of 1971 every person holding a public appointive office or position, including active members of the Armed Forces shall ipso facto cease in their office or position on the date they file their certificates of candidacy. This implies that they are no longer disqualified from running for an elective office. The Comelec further ruled that as to the two remaining categories formerly banned under the Revised Administrative Code, ecclesiastics and contractors for public works of the municipality are allowed to run for municipal elective offices under the maxim, Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius, they being not included in the enumeration of persons ineligible

preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces or to any penal institution, orphanage, or leprosarium. Issue: Whether or not the issuance of stamps was in violation of the principle of separation of church and state NO. 1. Religious freedom, as a constitutional mandate, is not inhibition of profound reverence for religion and is not denial of its influence in human affairs. Religion as a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator is recognized. In so far as it instils into the minds the purest principles of morality, its influence is deeply felt and highly appreciated. 2. When the Filipino people, in the preamble of the Constitution, implored "the aid of Divine Providence, in order to establish a government that shall embody their ideals, conserve and develop the patrimony of the nation, promote the general welfare, and secure to themselves and their posterity the blessings of independence under a regime of justice, liberty and democracy," they thereby manifested reliance upon Him who guides the destinies of men and nations. The elevating influence of religion in human society is recognized here as elsewhere. In fact, certain general concessions are indiscriminately accorded to religious sects and denominations. 3. There has been no constitutional infraction in this case. Act No. 4052 granted the Director of Posts, with the approval of the Sec. of Public Works and Communications, discretion to issue postage stamps with new designs. Even if we were to assume that these officials made use of a poor judgment in issuing and selling the postage stamps in question, still, the case of the petitioner would fail to take in weight. Between the exercise of a poor judgment and the unconstitutionality of the step taken, a gap exists which is yet to be filled to justify the court in setting aside the official act assailed as coming within a constitutional inhibition. The court resolved to deny the petition for a writ of prohibition. http://lawsandfound.blogspot.com Facts: Petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of prohibition against respondent Director of Posts from issuing and selling postage stamps commemorative of the 33rd International Eucharistic Congress. Petitioner contends that such act is a violation of the Constitutional provision stating that no public funds shall be appropriated or used in the benefit of any church, system of religion, etc. This provision is a result of the principle of the separation of church and state, for the purpose of avoiding the occasion wherein the state will use the church, or vice versa, as a weapon to further their ends and aims. Respondent contends that such issuance is in accordance to Act No. 4052, providing for the appropriation funds to respondent for the production and issuance of postage stamps as would be advantageous to the government. Issue: Whether or Not there was a violation of the freedom to religion. Held: What is guaranteed by our Constitution is religious freedom and not mere religious toleration. It is however not an inhibition of profound reverence for religion and is not a denial of its influence in human affairs. Religion as a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator is recognized. And in so far as it instills into the minds the purest principles of morality, its influence is deeply felt and highly appreciated. The phrase in Act No. 4052 advantageous to the government does not authorize violation of the Constitution. The issuance of the stamps was not inspired by any feeling to favor a particular church or religious denomination. They were not sold for the benefit of the Roman Catholic Church. The postage stamps, instead of showing a Catholic chalice as originally planned, contains a map of the Philippines and the location of Manila, with the wor ds Seat XXXIII International Eucharistic Congress. The focus of the stamps was not the Eucharistic Congress but the city of Manila, being the seat of that congress. This was to to advertise the Philippines and attract more tourists, the officials merely took advantage of an event considered of international importance. Although such

issuance and sale may be inseparably linked with the Roman Catholic Church, any benefit and propaganda incidentally resulting from it w http://www.pinoycasedigest.info In the matter of the TESTATE ESTATE of PETRONILA TAMPOY vs. DIOSDADA ALBERASTINE G.R. No. L-14322. February 25, 1960 Facts: This concerns the probate of a document which purports to be the last will and testament of Petronila Tampoy. After the petition was published in accordance with law and petitioner had presented oral and documentary evidence, the trial court denied the petition on the ground that the left hand margin of the first page of the will does not bear the thumbmark of the testatrix. Petitioners contend that the will expresses the true intention of the testatrix to give the property to her whose claims remain undisputed. She wishes to emphasize that no one has filed any opposition to the probate of the will and that while the first page does not bear the thumbmark of the testatrix, the second however bears her thumbmark and both pages were signed by the three testimonial witnesses. Moreover, despite the fact that the petition for probate is unopposed, the three testimonial witnesses testified and manifested to the court that the document expresses the true and voluntary will of the deceased. Petitioner appealed from this ruling but the Court of Appeals certified the case to the Supreme Court as it involves purely a question of law. Issue: Petition to probate a will on the ground that the left hand margin of the first page of the document does not bear the thumb mark of the testatrix. Ruling: Section 618 of Act 190, as amended, requires that the testator sign the will and each and every page thereof in the presence of the witnesses, and that the latter sign the will and each and every page thereof in the presence of the testator and of each other, which requirement should be expressed in the attestation clause. This requirement is mandatory, for failure to comply with it is fatal to the validity of the will (Rodriguez vs. Alcala, 55 Phil., 150). Thus, it has been held that "Statutes prescribing the formalities to be observed in the execution of wills are very strictly construed. As stated in 40 Cyc., at page 1097, 'A will must be executed in accordance with the statutory requirements; otherwise it is entirely void.' All these requirements stand as of equal importance and must be observed, and courts cannot supply the defective execution of a will. No power or discretion is vested in them, either to superadd other conditions or dispense with those enumerated in the statutes" (Uy Coque vs. Navas L. Sioca, 43 Phil., 405, 407; See also Sao vs. Quintana, 48 Phil., 506; Gumban vs. Gorecho 50 Phil., 30; Quinto vs. Morata, 54 Phil., 481). Since the will in question suffers from the fatal defect that it does not bear the thumbmark of the testatrix on its first page even if it bears the signature of the three instrumental witnesses, the same still fails to comply with the law and therefore, cannot be admitted to probate. The order appealed from is affirmed.