Filipinos are known all over the world to be religious people. This is best displayed and demonstrated during Christmas season, Nazareno Day, Ramadan and the recently concluded, Semana Santa. During our celebration of Lent, social media was filled with posts of people repenting, pictures of processions, of different “santas” as well as the live action portrayal of the station of the cross. At the same time, socmed was also flooded with Semana Santa related memes – from Pontius Pilate delivering a stone cold stunner to a man dressed as Jesus buying kwekkwek and kikiam. As I observed, these memes may be funny to some, but to hardcore Catholics and faithfuls, these could be offensive.
Thus, as my entry for this week, we will try to answer the question – Whether or not a person is committing a crime if he/she disrespected a religion or interrupted a religious ceremony/event.
Under the Revised Penal of Code (RPC), there are two crimes which are categorized as Crimes against Religious Worship (Book II, Chapter 1, Section 4): (1) Interruption of Religious Worship (Article 132) and (2) Offending the Religious Feelings (Article 133).
Article 132 of the RPC states that the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period (or imprisonment of 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months) shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion. The penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and maximum period (imprisonment of 2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 6 years) if the same is committed with violence or threats. It bears emphasis that Article 132 may only be committed by a public officer or employee.
Article 133 of the RPC or Offending the Religious Feelings, on the other hand, may be committed by anyone who, in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony, shall perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful. The RPC imposes a penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period (imprisonment of 4 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months.)
The most famous case of violation of Article 133 of the RPC or Offending the Religious Feelings is that of the activist who brought out a placard with the word “DAMASO” while a catholic celebration was ongoing. The facts of the case are as follows: In celebration of the second anniversary of the May They Be One Campaign (MTBC) and the launching of the Hand Written Bible, Catholic Church dignitaries, media, students and representatives of various religious organizations gathered around the Manila Cathedral in the afternoon of September 30, 2010. During the reading of a passage from the bible at around 3:00 pm, the activist entered the Manila Cathedral clad in a black suit and hat, went to the center of the aisle, in front of the altar, brought out a placard with the word “Damaso” and shouted “Bishops, stop involving yourself in politics”. This disrupted and showed disrespect to a solemn celebration. (G.R. No. 220127, March 21, 2018)
The MeTC convicted the activist for the said crime. Such conviction was affirmed by the RTC, Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, citing the case of People vs Baes ruled that “whether or not the act complained of is offensive to the religious feelings of the Catholics, is a question of fact which must be judged only according to the feelings of the Catholics and not those of other faithful ones, for it is possible that certain acts may offend the feelings of those who profess a certain religion, while not otherwise offensive to the feelings of those professing another faith. (Idem)
Another controversial incident that drew flaks from the netizens was that of the drag artist Pura Luka Vega who was famous for his “Ama Namin remix” performance. Various religious groups filed numerous complaints against Pura for alleged violation of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code or Immoral Doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions, and indecent shows. Article 201 of the RPC states that the penalty of prision mayor or imprisonment of 6 years and 1 days to 12 shall be imposed upon those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs or any other place, exhibit, indecent or immoral plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in film, which are prescribed by virtue hereof, shall include those which: 3) offend any race or religion.
Supporters of the drag artist opposed his arrest and claimed that the same amounts to curtailment of freedom of expression and is a form of discrimination and prejudice against members of the LGBT community. There are even those who moved that Article 201 as well as Article 133 of the RPC be declared as unconstitutional as it violates the fundamental law of the land.
Some law professors state that such laws violate Section 5, Article III of the 1987 Constitution – no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof – for having referenced or giving privilege to religion. Moreover, they even declared that such laws are already outdated and is no longer applicable to current social norms as the RPC is based on Spanish Codigo Penal which was codified hundred of years ago.
To end this article, then again, as long as there is no law passed repealing said laws (Repeal – to pass another law voiding, annulling or revoking an existing one), nor a pronouncement by the Supreme Court declaring such laws unconstitutional, the law shall stand. Dura lex sed lex.