Alejandro Estrada VS. Soledad S.

Escritor
A.M. No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006
Puno, J.

FACTS:
Soledad Escritor, a court interpreter and member of the Jehovah's Witnesses
religious sect, began living with Luciano Quilapio, Jr. even while her legal
husband was still alive but living with another woman.

After ten years of living together, Escritor executed a "Declaration of Pledging

Faithfulness" on July 28, 1991. This declaration allows congregation members
their spouses have abandoned to enter marital relations. It makes the resulting
union moral and binding within the congregation worldwide, except in countries
where divorce is allowed.

Escritor's husband died in 1998, and she joined the judiciary in 1999.

On July 27, 2000, Alejandro Estrada submitted a sworn letter of complaint to

Judge Caoibes, requesting an investigation of Escritor because she was
committing "disgraceful and immoral conduct" under Book V, Title I, Chapter VI,
Sec. 46(b)(5) of the Revised Administrative Code since she is still living with
Quilapio and had borne his child.

ISSUES:
1. Whether or not the respondent's religious freedom rights outweigh the
government's interest in enforcing laws against adultery and concubinage.
2. Whether or not the respondent should be found guilty of the administrative
charge of "disgraceful and immoral conduct."
RULING:
1. Yes, the respondent's religious freedom outweighs the government's interest
in enforcing laws against adultery and concubinage. Religious freedom is a
fundamental right protected by the Philippine Constitution. Article III,
Section 5(1) of the Constitution states that "no person shall be deprived of
life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be
denied the equal protection of the laws." This provision has been
interpreted to include the right to freedom of religion.

In this case, the Court held that the respondent's religious beliefs were
sincere and that she had a strong case for an exemption from the law. The
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) failed to demonstrate "the gravest
abuses, endangering paramount interests," which could limit or override the
respondent's fundamental right to religious freedom. Consequently, the
Court also held that the government could not show that the means it sought
to achieve a legitimate state objective was the least intrusive.

2. Escritor should not be found guilty of the administrative charge of

"disgraceful and immoral conduct." While it is legally true that she
cohabited with Luciano Quilapio, Jr., a married man, even while her
husband was still alive. Using the compelling state interest test, the Court
found that the government failed to show that Escritor's cohabitation with
Quilapio harmed anyone or threatened the public good. Additionally, the
Court found that Escritor's religious beliefs were sincere and that she had a
strong case for an exemption from the law. Furthermore, the Court also
recognized that the government is interested in protecting marriage and the
family, but it found that this interest was insufficient to override Escritor's
religious freedom, especially because she now has a family with Quilapio.