The current Constitution of the Philippines, enacted in 1987, guarantees the free exercise of religion and provides for the separation of Church and state. Section 5 of Article III (“Bill of Rights”) states, “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.” The preamble specifies that the constitution is promulgated by the “sovereign Filipino people,” who thereby are “imploring the aid of Almighty God.”
After Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States in 1898, many American ideas and cultural practices were adopted as well, including American-style separation of Church and state. According to Section 6 of Article II (“Declaration of Principles and State Policies Principles”), “The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.”
Under the Philippine constitution, religious groups are required to register in order to secure tax-exempt status. Institutions engaged in “religious, charitable, or educational” activities under Article VI (Section 28) are given this status. More specifically, these may be “charitable institutions, churches and parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and all lands” used exclusively by them.
Christianity has exercised a significant influence on the culture of the Philippines ever since the 1500s, when the Spanish began their colonisation of the archipelago. Despite the constitutional separation of Church and state, the Catholic Church retains an influential position in national politics. For example, the Catholic Church has long shaped the country’s education system. One reflection of the Church’s influence is that the government permits religious instruction with the written consent of a student’s parents or guardian in a public-school setting. Section 3 of Article XIV states, “At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools within the regular class hours.”
While a predominantly Christian country, the Philippines has a small but significant Muslim minority, particularly concentrated on the large southern island of Mindanao. Most Muslims in Mindanao are Sunni, whereas a smaller minority of Shi‘a Muslims lives in the provinces of Lanao Del Sur, in central Mindanao, and Zamboanga Del Sur, on the island’s extreme west. The integration of the Muslim minority remains a major and unresolved issue in national politics. In Mindanao, the followers of Islam, who were referred to as Moros or Moors by the Spanish, make up the majority. Despite the promise of Article X (1) of the constitution to establish “Muslim Mindanao” as an “autonomous region,” violent conflict between the Philippine government and Moro Muslim insurgents has been ongoing since 1969.
Following peace agreements signed between the Government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in 2018, President Duterte signed the proposed Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL). Ratified in 2019, the BOL formally abolished the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. The new law provided the area’s Muslim majority population with greater autonomy and a somewhat larger area. According to President Duterte, “the successful ratification of this Organic Law will enable us to create an environment that will be conducive to the peaceful coexistence between the Muslims, Christians… and all tribes…who will consider Mindanao as their home.” However, despite these peace efforts, violence has continued across Mindanao as terrorist groups excluded from government negotiations engage in widespread attacks subjecting minority religious communities to horrific violence and displacement.
The government recognises and authorises Shari‘a courts to operate in Mindanao. Pursuant to Presidential Decree 1083, the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines, a member of the Philippine Shari‘a Bar may be appointed as a Shari‘a circuit court judge from a shortlist of nominees submitted to the President by the Judicial Bar Council. In order for Muslims residing in other areas of the country to pursue action in a Shari‘a court, they must travel to the districts in Mindanao with recognised Shari‘a courts. Shari‘a courts have authority only in matters of Muslim customary and personal law. Their jurisdiction is restricted to Muslims and have no authority over criminal matters. Moreover, they operate under the administrative supervision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines. With the ratification of the Bangsamoro Organic Law, a Shari‘a High Court with jurisdiction over the region’s Muslim population was established.
The revised penal code, which has been in place since the 1930s, criminalises certain acts committed in the context of religious worship. Article 133 prohibits anyone from performing “acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful” in a place of religious worship or “during the celebration of any religious ceremony.” Article 132 criminalises the prevention or disturbance of a religious service by an officer of the state.
In 2019 Carlos Celdran died, the first and only Filipino to be convicted under Article 133, and with this his case came to a close. In 2010, Celdran, an artist and tour guide, walked into a religious function in Manila’s Catholic Cathedral and held up a sign with the word “Damaso”, a reference to a villainous character in the famous Filipino novel, Noli Me Tangere. Padre Damaso was a priest who personified the hypocrisies of the Church during Spanish colonial rule. Celdran’s intention at the time was to condemn the opposition of the Catholic Church’s hierarchy to a reproductive health bill designed to expand access to artificial contraception. Celdran was tried and convicted but eventually apologised to the Archdiocese of Manila (who said he was “forgiven”), but had to wait eight years for a final ruling in his case. In August 2018, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal and upheld a minimum sentence of three months and a maximum sentence of one year. He left the Philippines before a warrant for his arrest could be served, went into self-exile in Spain, and died there of a heart attack in October 2019.
After Carlos Celdran’s death, Bill No. 5170 was introduced in the Philippine House of Representatives in order to repeal Article 133. Should it be passed, all pending criminal cases and related civil cases that deal with Article 133 violations would be dismissed. However, the measure appears to face considerable opposition, and it is unlikely that it will be enacted in the foreseeable future.
Members of the Islamic extremist rebel group Abu Sayyaf, which claims allegiance to the Islamic State group, played a role in a suicide bombing that struck a religious service at Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Cathedral in Jolo, Sulu province, in January 2019. At least 22 people were killed, and more than 100 were wounded. The Chairman of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and local Christian leaders condemned the Jolo cathedral bombing.
In August 2019, a Protestant pastor with the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) known for his work in promoting human rights, was gunned down. Although the motives underlying the pastor’s murder were not established, the Ecumenical Bishops Forum noted that violent attacks against Christian human rights defenders have “alarmingly increased in the three years of President Duterte’s government.”
Several Catholic and Protestant leaders have strongly criticised the Duterte administration, especially with regard to the president’s war on drugs and his reinstatement of the death penalty. Indeed, the Catholic Church in particular has openly challenged the “direction” of Duterte’s drug war, which openly targets “mostly poor people [. . .] brutally murdered on the mere suspicion of being a small-time drug user and peddler while the big-time smugglers and drug lords go scot-free.” Many of the drug-related deaths that have occurred under the President’s administration involve the poorest Filipinos.
Despite the assistance Christian Churches have provided to help former drug users and victims of the killings lead new lives, Church leaders lament that they face sometimes virulent abuse by the current Philippine government and by President Duterte himself.
President Duterte was antagonistic to the Catholic Church even before his election on 9th May 2016. In early May 2016, he said the Catholic Church was “the most hypocritical institution.” That same year, when the anti-drug campaign was gaining momentum and hundreds of people had already died, the President called the members of the Roman Catholic clergy “sons of bitches” for criticising his actions in this area.
President Duterte has also denounced several bishops by name, using graphic and abusive language. The president has previously called God “stupid” and described the doctrines of the Catholic Church as “silly.” He has also said that the Church lacks the moral authority to criticise him and in February 2019 predicted that “Catholicism will disappear in 25 years because of the clergy’s alleged abuses.” Still, Duterte remains very popular, with a reported 91 percent approval rating among Filipinos in October 2020.
In January 2020, police arrested two Abu Sayyaf militants tasked with carrying out a bomb attack at a Catholic cathedral in Basilan province.
In the same month, in Davao City, Mindanao, a Church-run shelter for displaced tribal people was surrounded by knife-wielding men, who later tore down a wall and occupied the facility. The Council of Bishops of the United Church of Christ of the Philippines (UCCP) demanded a public apology and a full statement by the members of the paramilitary group responsible for the incident. Police who were in the vicinity took no action.
In February 2020, the Philippine government’s Anti-Money Laundering Council froze the bank accounts of certain Church organisations for alleged “terrorism financing.” The missionary organisation whose bank accounts were affected issued a statement saying that such action “is only depriving the rural poor of the help and services they deserve and that the government refuses to provide.” The group added that they have been accused in the past of being a communist and terrorist front, lamenting that their members have been harassed and threatened as a result of such accusations.
Also in February 2020, a court in Manila issued warrants for the arrest of two Catholic priests, a former senator, and eight others for conspiracy to commit sedition. The two priests denied the accusations. The Department of Justice concluded that a similar complaint against four bishops lacked evidence. The two priests, Flaviano Villanueva, SVD and Albert Alejo, SJ, appeared in court in October 2020 to formally plea “not guilty.”
In July 2020, an anti-terrorism law championed by President Duterte was passed. It authorises the President to jail suspects without charges. Although intended to prevent “terrorism,” many human rights activists are concerned that the government can use the law to discourage activism by criminalising the defence of basic human rights.
The law gives security forces sweeping powers — with almost no judicial approval or oversight — to pursue suspects, conduct up to 90 days of surveillance and wiretaps, and detain suspects for up to 24 days. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) published a letter written by Bishop Broderick Pabillo strongly denouncing the anti-terrorism measure. Considering the criticisms against the administration by Christian groups, there is a real and imminent danger that the government could use the new law to target Christian leaders who have been critical of President Duterte and his policies.
In late July 2020, shortly after the anti-terrorism law was passed, Bishop Gerardo Alminaza observed that “[a]mid a global health crisis, unjust killings across the country continue. We, sadly, must admit that it is unlikely for our government to use its power to stop this, because from the very start of the Duterte administration, it is officially endorsed.” The prelate also criticised the administration’s practice of “red tagging” — i.e. labelling human rights and social justice organisations as communist fronts, which has in turn led to warrantless arrests, detention, torture, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings. Further, the Bishop notes that “the war on drugs has rippled into a war-on-rights, spilling blood among our flock.”
During a Sunday Mass in July 2020, the pastor of San Isidro Labrador Parish caught uniformed police officers taking photographs of him. Local authorities claimed that they were performing routine inspections to make sure the parish was following COVID-19 restrictions on gatherings. However, the incident left the clergyman fearing for his safety due to previous death threats he received after speaking out against Duterte’s war on drugs.
In August 2020, Jolo saw twin terrorist attacks by the wives of slain jihadists. At least seven soldiers, six civilians, and a policeman were killed, while 80 others were wounded.
In October 2020, the authorities captured an Indonesian woman and two Philippine women believed to be married to Abu Sayyaf militants. Found with suicide vests, they were suspected of plotting a suicide attack in Jolo. The authorities believe that the detained individuals may be connected to those responsible for the cathedral attack in Jolo in January 2019.
Despite government criticism, the Catholic Church has received widespread praise for its efforts and fund raising to help the needy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many Church foundations and charity groups launched nationwide drives to help cushion the effects of COVID-19 and have effectively coordinated with local government authorities to provide aid.
Despite the constitutional safeguards for religious freedom and separation of Church and state, the criminal justice system under Article 133 has the potential to shield certain office holders, institutions, practices, ideas, and viewpoints from public criticism and debate over religious matters. With the demographic and cultural dominance of Catholicism in the Philippines, minority religious groups feel vulnerable to legal harassment if they express views the Catholic majority considers offensive.
President Duterte’s administration has presented several challenges directly related to religious freedom. While the constitution guarantees religious freedom, recent developments and violent incidents point to a problematic trajectory in the coming years.
The anti-terrorism law creates significant challenges and paves the way for potential legal abuses by people in authority, i.e. the Duterte administration, against government critics, including Church leaders and Church-supported human rights defenders. Churches and Christian organisations in the Philippines have forcefully criticised this and similar policies.
The open verbal and legal attacks by President Duterte against Church leaders remain a serious threat to religious freedom, a central element of which is the freedom of religious leaders and communities to contribute to public deliberations about the common good, particularly in defence of the most vulnerable.
Furthermore, Christians and other minority groups in Mindanao continue to be targeted in violent attacks by extremist groups. Despite the ratification and enactment of the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL) in 2019, a truly durable and comprehensive solution to violent Islamist extremism and Mindanao’s ongoing conflicts appears to be elusive. This threatens the prospects for full religious freedom and peaceful coexistence in the restive region in the future.
Philippines