ARTICLE III SECTION 5 CASE 10 OF tanunginsijica
Office of the Court Administrator, through Deputy Court
ESTRADA vs. ESCRITOR
DOCTRINE:
Compelling State Interest test:
1. Inquire whether respondent’s right to religious freedom has been burdened
2. Ascertain respondent’s sincerity in religious belief
FACTS:
1. Escritor was a court interpreter since 1999 in the RTC of Las Pinas City.
Estrada is not personally related to her or her partner, nor a resident
of Las Pinas.
2. Estrada wrote to the presiding judge of the RTC of Las Pinas for an
investigation of rumors that Escritor is living with a man who is not
her husband
a. Immoral act that tarnishes the image of the court
b. Grounds for expelling a person from the judiciary
3. Escritor has been living with Luciano Quilapio Jr without the benefit
of marriage for 20 years and that they have a son.
4. Escritor claims that their conjugal arrangement is permitted by their
religion  Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Watch Tower, and the Bible Trace
Society
a. After 10 years of living toether, she executed a “Declaration of
Pledging Faithfulness,” acknowledging that such “union” is
in accordance with hteir beliefs as members of the Jehovah,
and she promised to legalize such union
b. At the time she executed her pledge, Escritor’s husband was
still alive but living with another woman, and Quilapio was
also married but separated in fact from his wife
c. Insofar as the congregation is concerned, the arrangement
between them is not immoral
5. The investigating judge acknowledged that religious freedom is a
fundamental right which is entitled to the highest priority and the
amplest protection among human rights, for it involves the
relationship of man to his Creator, and thereby recommended the
dismissal the complaint.
6.
Administrator Lock, claim that she is stil subject to disciplinary action
because of her relationship with a married man.
a. Recommended that she be found guilty of immorality and
that she be penalized
ISSUES:
1. W/N Escritor should be held administratively liable for gross and
immoral conduct
RULING:
1. CASE IS REMANDED TO THE OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Sol Gen is ordered to intervene
a. In both PH and US jurisdiction, it is recognized that there is a
tension between the Free Exercise Clause and the
Establishment Clause in their application. There is a natural
antagonism between a command not to establish religion and
a command not to inhibiti its practice; this tension between
the religion clauses often leaves the courts with a choice
between competing values in religion cases.
b. Escritor does not claim that there is error in the settled
jurisprudence that an illicit relation constitutes disgraceful
and immoral conduct for which a government employee is
held liable
c. Court finds that there is no such reason to deviate from such
rulings that illicit relationships constitute disgraceful and
immoral conduct punishable under the Civil Service Law
i. Thus she could be held administratively liable
ii. HOWEVER, as a defense, respondent invokes
religious freedom since her religion, the Jehovah’s
Witnesses, has, allowed her conjugal arrangement
with Quilapio based on the church’s religious beliefs
and practices
d. Two approaches for the separation of church and state:
i. Separationist – absolute barrier to formal
interdependence of religion and state. Religious
institutions could not receive aid, whether direct or
indirect, from the state. Nor could the state adjust its
secular programs to alleviate burdens the programs
placed on believers
 ii. Accommodationist – Benevolent neutrality
recognizes religion’s important role in the public life
C. it is good public policy, and sometimes
constitutionally required, for the state to
make conscious and deliberate efforts to
avoid interference with religious freedom
D. Accommodationist = benevolent neutrality
e. From a benevolent neutrality stance, the SC must determine
the compelling state interest significant to religious freedom.
i. Compelling state interest test
C. Proper where conduct is involved that would
have different effects on the state’s interests
D. Effects may be immediate and short-term or
delayed and far-reaching
E. Test to protect the interests of the state in
preventing a substantial evil
F. Application of test:
a. Inquiry on whether respondent’s
right to religious freedom has been
burdened.
b. Ascertain respondent’s sincerity in
her religious belief
f. Choosing between keeping her employment and abandon
religious beliefs and family puts a burden on her free exercise
of religion
g. She appears to be sincere in her religious belief and practice.
She did not secure the Declaration of Pledging Fauthfulness
only after entering the judiciary
h. Burden of evidence should be discharged by the proper
agency of the government, the OSG.
i. Gov’t should be given the opportunity to
demonstrate the compelling state interest it seeks to
uphold in opposing the respondent’s stance that her
conjugal arrangement is not immoral.