The Flag Salute

Cases Revisited
(Valid Secular Policy
us. Freedom of
Religion)

By
JORGE R. COQUIA
The article of JORGE R. COQUIA discussed the basis of
reversal in the decision regarding Flag Salute Cases which
was patterned to the decision of Circuit Court of Appeal in
United States.
In Gerona vs. Secretary of Education, the court sustained
the validity of the statute that requiring the school pupils to
participate in the flag salute. It was stated that the statute
was a non-discriminatory school policy applicable to all.
Freedom of religion guaranteed by the Constitution does not
and cannot mean exemption from or noncompliance with
reasonable and non-discriminatory laws, rules and
regulations promulgated by competent authority.
The previous decision was reversed in the case of Roel
Ebralinag et. al. vs. The Division Superintendent of Schools
of Cebu and May Amolo, et al. vs. The Division
Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, following the trend in
the court ruling in United States, it held that school pupils
may not be compelled to salute the flag, sing the national
anthem, and recite the patriotic pledge if they invoke their
religious belief that the flag is an "image" or "idol" which the
Bible expressly prohibits.
Is flag Salute a “valid secular policy”?

Yes, it is entirely secular. The Filipino flag is a symbol of the

Republic of the Philippines utterly devoid of any religious
significance. It does not represent idolatry or god. In fact, it
represents the Filipino people.
Citing the US cases, in Minnersville School District vs.
Gobitis the court reiterate that “the mere possession of
religious convictions which contravene the relevant concerns
of a political society does not relieve the citizen from the
discharge of political responsibilities”.
Reversing the decision in Gobitis case, Barnette vs. West
Virginia Board of Education was ruled that making it
compulsory for public student to salute the flag violates the
Fourteenth Amendment of Constitution. In this case it was
not based on religious freedom but by general right of
freedom as protected by the First Amendment. In Barnette
case it rejected the “valid secular policy” which was the basis
in Gobitis case.
Flag Salute Cases in the Philippines:

 Secretary Jose Abad Santos (1941), sustaining the Bureau

of Education Circular No. 61, series of 1940, and
Commonwealth Act No. 589 (1940) by stating that
entrance to a public school is a political privilege given to
those who can comply with the requirements imposed by
the competent school authorities. In line with the
constitutional mandate that "all schools shall aim to
develop-civic conscience and to teach the duties of
citizenship" the regulation requiring all public schools’
pupils to salute the flag and providing that pupils who
refuse thereof may be barred from admission to, expelled
from, the public schools, is legal and valid.
Flag Salute Cases in the Philippines:

 Secretary of Justice of 1948 ruled that “school authorities

cannot force a student to salute the flag if that is against
his religious scruples, nor can they lawfully expel a pupil
for refusing to comply with such requirement”. According
to the Secretary, “persuasion, not compulsion is the
teacher's means to attain the end of inspiring pupils love
of country and reverence for its institutions”.
Flag Salute Cases in the Philippines:

 Secretary of Justice of 1952, reversed the 1948 opinion

and restored the 1940 opinion of Secretary Jose Abad
Santos holding that public school pupils are bound, under
pain of expulsion, to participate in flag ceremonies in
schools notwithstanding their religious convictions.
Flag Salute Cases in the Philippines:

 In 1957, Jehovah’s Witness was expelled from

Buenaventura Community School at Uson, Masbate, for
refusing to abide with Department Order No. 8 of the
Department of Education. Justice Montemayor held that
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 freedom and liberty
which it and the Constitution guarantee and protect. In
this case there was no absolute compulsion involved, they
just merely lost the benefits of public education being
maintained at the expense of their fellow citizens.
Flag Salute Cases in the Philippines:

 In 1960, new grounds were used by the Jehovah’s witness,

this time it was constitutionality of Department Order No.
8 that they challenge. They stated that it was not
published in the Official Gazette. Supreme Court held that
there was no penalty for violation in the case at bar and
publication applies only to the circulars that provide
penalties for violation, thus, publication is not necessary
Coquiao discussed the consequences of the decision in
Ebralinag and Amolo opens the liberal interpretation of
religious freedom on constitutional provision. He reiterates
that our country needs discipline more than freedom
especially if freedom amounts to license. Hence, inculcating
patriotism and nationalism will be ineffective. The
Philippines cannot tolerate liberties to the extremes as
compared to United States.
THANK YOU !!!