Case Digest - G.R No. 119673

You might also like

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1

Selynn Co

Block 1C
Iglesia ni Cristo (Inc.) v. Court of Appeals
G.R. no. 119673
July 26, 1996
I.

Facts:
Petitioner Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) was initially unable to broadcast
Series Nos. 116, 119, 121 and 128 of its TV Program Ang Iglesia ni Cristo, as
the Board of Review for Motion Pictures and Television concluded the said
series to be x-rated, mainly due to the programs attacks on other religions.
Petitioner pursued two courses of action: (1) appealed to the Office
of the president, which reversed the decision of the Board, and (2) filed against
the Board, alleging that the respondent Board acted without jurisdiction or with
grave abuse of discretion in asking them to submit tapes. The court rendered
judgment, granting INC permit to air the program, however refrain from
attacking other religions.
Petitioner moved for reconsideration praying: (a) for the deletion of
the second paragraph of the dispositive portion of the Decision, and (b) for the
Board to be perpetually enjoined from requiring petitioner to submit for review
the tapes of its program, which were both granted.
The Board appealed the decision, wherein the Court of Appeals
reversed the trial court. It ruled that: (1) the respondent board has jurisdiction
and power to review the TV program Ang Iglesia ni Cristo, and (2) the
respondent Board did not act with grave abuse of discretion.

II.

Issues:
(1) Whether the respondent Board has the power to review petitioners TV
program Ang Iglesia ni Cristo, and, (2) assuming it has the power, whether it
gravely abused its discretion when it prohibited the airing of petitioners
religious program, series Nos. 115, 119 and 121, for the reason that they
constitute an attack against other religions and that they are indecent, contrary
to law and good customs.

III.

Held:
1) Yes.
Under the P.D. 1986, the Board has the function of reviewing, approve or
delete all motion pictures and television shows.
2) No.
It impedes on the constitutional guarantee of free speech and expression
under Article III, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, and interferes with
rights to freedom of religion.

You might also like