Gerona Vs Secretary of Education, GR # L-13954 DIGEST
Uploaded by
Nichole LusticaGerona Vs Secretary of Education, GR # L-13954 DIGEST
Uploaded by
Nichole LusticaRepublic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-13954 August 12, 1959
GENARO GERONA, ET AL., petitioners-appellants,
vs.
THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, ET AL., respondents-appellees.
MONTEMAYOR, J.:
TOPIC:
DOCTRINE:
FACTS:
This case was about the excluding or banning of petitioners-appellants, their
children and all other of Jehovah's Witnesses, from admission to public schools, solely
on account of their refusal to salute the flag.
When the Republic Act No. 1265 was approved and went into effect. The
Secretary of Education issued Department Order No. 8 pursuant to Section 2 of the said
act. Under the said Department Order No. 8, specifically, sub-paragraph B of its
paragraph 2 states, “while the flag is being raised, all person shall stand at attention and
execute salute.” And under sub-paragraph C “immediately following the singing of the
national anthem, shall recite in unison of following patriotic pledge”. This was held daily
in every school, public and private.
PETITIONER’S ARGUMENT:
Petitioners-appellants belong to what is called the JEHOVAH'S WITNESS, an
unincorporated body teaching that the obligation imposed by law of God is superior to
that of laws enacted by the State. Their religious beliefs include a literal version of
Exodus, Chapter 20, verses 4 and 5, which say: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any
graven image, . . . thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them." They
consider that the flag is an "image within this command. For this reason, they refuse to
salute it.
Petitioners' children attending the Buenavista Community School, Uson,
Masbate, refused to salute the flag, sing the national anthem and recite the patriotic
pledge contrary to the requirement of Department Order No. 8; as a result they were
expelled from school.
ISSUE:
WHETHER OR NOT DEPARTMENT ORDER NO. 8 VIOLATES THE
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS ABOUT FREEDOM RELIGION AND EXERCISE OF
RELIGION.
RULING:
NO,
The court held that if the existence of said religious beliefs clashes with the established
institution of society and with the law, then the former must yield and give way to the
latter.
The constitutional protection of religious freedom ... gave religious equality, not civil
immunity. Its essence is freedom from conformity to religious dogma, not freedom from
conformity to law because of religious dogma.
The flag is not an image but a symbol of the Republic of the Philippines, an emblem of
national sovereignty, of national unity and cohesion and of freedom and liberty which it
and the Constitution guarantee and protect.
Saluting the flag consequently does not involve any religious ceremony.
The flag salute, particularly the recital of the pledge of loyalty is no more a religious
ceremony than the taking of an oath of office by a public official or by a candidate for
admission to the bar.
And as to the singing of the National Anthem, it speaks only of love of country, of
patriotism, liberty and the glory of suffering and dying for it.
Therefore, Department Order No. 8, does not violate the Constitutional provision about
freedom of religion and exercise of religion.
And that for failure and refusal to participate in the flag ceremony, petitioners were
properly excluded and dismissed from the public school they were attending.
