San Beda College College of Law Mendiola

July 24 2012

OBJECTIVE WRITING

SBC 1R Wilander Beltran Kevin Groyon Bomie Mark Goloyugo

Dean Ulan Sarmiento Professor Legal Research

Kevin Groyon Jr., a minor, represented by his father Kevin Groyon v. Wilander Beltran Catholic High School

MEMORANDUM FOR PLAINTIFF Plaintiff, by counsel, respectfully submits this memorandum, to wit: PREFATORY STATEMENT The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines declares: The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable. (Article II, Section 6)

No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights. (Article III, Section 5). STATEMENT OF FACTS Kevin Groyon, Plaintiff, filed a case against Wilander Beltran Catholic High School, Defendant, before this Honorable Court for expelling his son, Kevin Jr., from the said school due to non compliance of its religious activities.

ISSUES Whether a non-catholic can exercise his religious freedom by non-conformity to religious activities connected with the catholic school.

Whether the catholic school violates the religious freedom of a non-catholic student enrolled in the said institution by requiring him to comply with its religious activities.

ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSION 1. A non-catholic student like Kevin Jr. can exercise his religious freedom by nonconformity to religious activities connected with Wilander Beltran Catholic High School.

Article II, Section 6 implies that the church is not to interfere in temporal aspects of mans life. With regard to the question presented, the church running a catholic school has clearly no right to impose set of rules to students with regard to faith; much more to make mandatory all religious activity, for it is simply unconstitutional. This does not only apply to catholic schools, but also to those schools run by other religious groups or organization.

Under Article III, Section 5 invokes religious freedom; any person shall have the freedom to act in accordance with his belief provided they are consistent with the public safety, health, morals, general welfare of society, or should not violate the criminal law. Thus, any person could actively protest and not conform to the set of rules imposed by a school that makes religious activities mandatory with regards to religion.

In the decided case by the Superior court of Canada entitled S.L. v. Commission scolaire des Chnes, 2012 SCC 7, it states that in 2008, the Ethics and Religious Culture program became mandatory in Quebec schools replacing Catholic and Protestant programs of religious and moral instruction. The appellants argued that their children be exempted from the said program. According to the appellants, the existence of the ERC program could inflict serious harm to their children within the meaning of s. 222 of the Education Act. The director educational resources for young students and school boards council of commissioner both decided to deny the exemption. The appellants then contested the decision to the superior court seeking a declaration that the ERC Program infringed their and their childrens right to freedom of conscience and religion, and judicial review of the decision of the director and that of the council of commissioners, denying their requests for exemption from the ERC course. The decision of the superior court was:
Dubois J. of the Superior Court found that the appellants had not proved that the ERC Program infringed their freedom of conscience and religion (2009 QCCS 3875, [2009] R.J.Q. 2398). He concluded that the objective presentation of various religions to children did not put them [TRANSLATION] in an obligatory and coercive situation (paras. 64 and 66). He dismissed the motion for a declaratory judgment. Having found that the ERC Program did not infringe the right to freedom of conscience and religion, he held that the school boards decision to deny the exemptions was valid (para. 123). In light of the evidence, he also held that the school boards decision had not been made

under the Ministres influence (para. 119) and consequently dismissed the motion for judicial review.
1

If the State cannot punish a person for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, so much more are the schools, they cannot pass judgment to those students who would like to be exempted from doing or participating on religious activity that they find against their faith. The law simply provides that there should be free exercise of his religious beliefs.

2. A catholic school violates the religious freedom of a non-catholic student enrolled in the said institution by requiring him to comply with its religious activities.

Catholic schools are very distinctive from their public school counterparts in that they aim to focus on the development of individuals as practitioners of the Catholic faith. The leaders, teachers and students are required to focus on four fundamental rules initiated by the Church and school. This includes the Catholic identity of the school, education in regards to life and faith, celebration of life and faith, and action and social justice. 2

Catholic schools and institutions have been around in the Philippines since the Spanish colonization. They have been viewed as one of the pioneers in terms of quality education. Thus, such organizations enjoy a high regard from all individuals in the pursuit of knowledge.

While that identification with the Catholic Church officially defines the institution as well as the community that constitutes it, it also affirms without hesitation that women and men of all religious traditions are welcomed and embraced in that community. A person's religious preference or lack thereof is not in any way considered a factor in the admission process of some catholic schools. Everyone is expected to respect women and men of other faiths and those who have no religious preference. 3

1 2

scc.lexum.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_school 3 http://www.stpaulparish.org

The Catholic Church recognizes the good in other religious traditions and believes that the Catholic Church has been entrusted with the fullness of faith and represents in the closest manner the authentic teaching of Jesus Christ as handed down from the Apostles. Rooted in genuine respect for other faith traditions there is no institutional effort to penalize anyone who does not share the Catholic faith. 4

To support, the case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) states that the First Amendment prohibits government officials from compelling individuals to speak or espouse orthodox beliefs that are at odds with their conscience and values. The purpose of the First Amendment is to ensure that individuals have an individual sphere of freedom of thought and belief that the government cannot invade. Authority here is to be controlled by public opinion, not public opinion by authority.

PRAYER Wherefore, plaintiff prays that this Honourable Court renders judgment: 1. Ordering defendant WBCHS to set aside and reverse its expulsion of Kevin Groyon Jr., reinstating him as a student. 2. Ordering defendant to compensate plaintiff in the amount of P10,000 as moral damages, and to pay attorneys fees and costs of suit. Such other relief which are just and equitable under the circumstances are likewise prayed for.

(Sgd.) Atty. Bomie Mark Goloyugo Counsel for the Plaintiff Address Roll No. IBP No. PTR No. MCLE No.

(copy furnished)

http://policies.cua.edu/studentlife/faith.cfm