EbraIinag, et aI vs. Div. Supt.

of SchooIs of Cebu
G.R. No. 95770, March 1, 1993

Facts:
n 1989, DECS Regional Office in Cebu received complaints about teachers and pupils belonging
to the Jehovah's Witness, and enrolled in various public and private schools, which refused to sing the
Phil. National Anthem, salute the flag and recite the patriotic pledge.
Division Superintendent of schools, Susana B. Cabahug of the Cebu Division of DECS and her
Assistant issued Division Memorandum No. 108, dated Nov. 17, 1989, directing District Supervisors, High
School Principals and Heads of Private Educational institutions to remove from service, after due
process, teachers and school employees, and to deprive the students and pupils from the benefit of
public education, if they do not participate in daily flag ceremony and doesn't obey flag salute rule.
Members of the Jehovah's Witness sect find such memorandum to be contrary to their religious
belief and choose not to obey. Despite a number of appropriate persuasions made by the Cebu officials
to let them obey the directives, still they opted to follow their conviction to their belief. As a result, an order
was issued by the district supervisor of Daan Bantayan District of Cebu, dated July 24, 1990, ordering the
'dropping from the list' in the school register of all Jehovah's Witness teachers and pupils from Grade 1 to
Grade 6 who opted to follow their belief which is against the Flag Salute Law, however, given a chance to
be re-accepted if they change their mind.
Some Jehovah's Witness members appealed to the Secretary of Education but the latter did not
answer to their letter.
On Oct. 31, 1990, students and their parents filed special civil actions for Mandamus, Certiorari
and prohibition, alleging that the respondents acted without or in excess of their jurisdiction and with
grave abuse of discretion in ordering their expulsion without prior notice and hearing, hence, in violation
of their right to due process, their right to free public education and their right to freedom of speech,
religion and worship. Petitioners prayed for the voiding of the order of expulsion or 'dropping from the
rolls' issued by the District Supervisor; prohibiting and enjoining respondent from barring them from
classes; and compelling the respondent and all persons acting for him to admit and order
their(Petitioners) re-admission their respective schools.
On November 27, 1990, Court issued a TRO and writ of preliminary mandatory injunction,
commanding the respondents to immediately re-admit the petitioners to their respective classes until
further orders.
On May 31, the Solicitor General filed a consolidated comment to the petitions defending the
expulsion orders issued by the respondents.
Petitioners stressed that while they do not take part in the compulsory flag ceremony, they do not
engage in 'external acts' or behavior that would offend their countrymen who believe in expressing their
love of country through observance of the flag ceremony. They quietly stand at attention during the flag
ceremony to show their respect for the right of those who choose to participate in the solemn
proceedings. Since they do not engage in disruptive behavior, there is no warrant for their expulsion.
ssue:
Whether or not the expulsion of the members of Jehovah's Witness from the schools violates
their right to; (a) right to religious profession and worship and (b) to receive free education.

eId:
The expulsion of the members of Jehovah's Witness from the schools where they were enrolled
will violate their right to religious profession and worship on the ground that the freedom to believe is
absolute as long as the belief is confined within the realm of thought. f they quietly stand at attention
during flag ceremony while their classmates and teachers salute the flag, sing the national anthem and
recite the patriotic pledge, we do not see how such conduct may possibly disturb the peace, or pose 'a
grave and present danger of a serious evil to public safety, public morals, public health or any legitimate
public interest that the state has a right and duty to prevent. Hence, the state only regulates the freedom
to act on one's belief.

Moreover, it will violate their right as Philippine citizens, under the 1987 Constitution, to receive
free education, for it is the duty of the state to 'protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality
education, and to make such education accessible to all (Sec. , Art XV). Nevertheless, their right not to
participate in the Flag Ceremony does not give them a right to disrupt such patriotic exercises.

t is appropriate to recall the Japanese occupation of our country in 1942-1944 when every
Filipino, regardless of religious persuasion, in fear of the invader, saluted the Japanese flag and bowed
before every Japanese soldier, perhaps if petitioners had lived through that dark period of our history,
they would not quibble now about saluting the Phil. Flag.

The petitions for certiorari and prohibition are granted and expulsion orders are hereby annulled
and set aside.