Topic: Benevolent Neutrality Approach

Benevolent neutrality recognizes that government must pursue its secular goals and interests but at the
same time strives to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent possible within flexible constitutional
limits. Thus, although the morality contemplated by laws is secular, benevolent neutrality could allow
for accommodation of morality based on religion, provided it does not offend compelling state interests.

En Banc
[A.M. No. P-02-1651. August 4, 2003]
Alejandro Estrada, Complainant, Vs. Soledad S. Escritor, Respondent.

Facts:
In a sworn letter-complaint dated July 27, 2000, complainant Alejandro Estrada wrote to Judge Jose F.
Caoibes, Jr., presiding judge of Branch 253, Regional Trial Court of Las Pias City, requesting for an
investigation of rumors that respondent Soledad Escritor, court interpreter in said court, is living with a
man not her husband. They allegedly have a child of eighteen to twenty years old, an immoral act that
tarnishes the image of the court, thus she should not be allowed to remain employed therein as it might
appear that the court condones her act.[5]
Respondent Escritor contended that, as a member of the religious sect known as the Jehovahs
Witnesses and the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society, their conjugal arrangement is in conformity
with their religious beliefs. In fact, after ten years of living together, she executed on July 28, 1991 a
Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness

At the time Escritor executed her pledge, her husband was still alive but living with another
woman. Quilapio was likewise married at that time, but had been separated in fact from his wife. During
her testimony, Escritor volunteered to present members of her congregation to confirm the truthfulness
of their Declarations of Pledging Faithfulness.

Issue:

Whether or not respondent should be found guilty of the administrative charge of gross and immoral
conduct. To resolve this issue, it is necessary to determine the sub-issue of whether or not respondents
right to religious freedom should carve out an exception from the prevailing jurisprudence on illicit
relations for which government employees are held administratively liable.

Held:
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the case is REMANDED to the Office of the Court Administrator. The Solicitor
General is ordered to intervene in the case where it will be given the opportunity (a) to examine the
sincerity and centrality of respondents claimed religious belief and practice; (b) to present evidence on
the states compelling interest to override respondents religious belief and practice; and (c) to show that
the means the state adopts in pursuing its interest is the least restrictive to respondents religious
freedom. The rehearing should be concluded thirty (30) days from the Office of the Court Administrators
receipt of this Decision.

Later, in June 22, 2006:

 The Supreme Court declared that, invoking the benevolent neutrality approach, the conjugal
arrangement of Escritor, in accordance with her religion and free exercise thereof, cannot be penalized
as she has made out a case for exemption from the law based on her fundamental right to freedom of
religion.