Legal framework on freedom of religion and actual application
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. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.” 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, 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 to secure tax-exempt status. Institutions engaged in “religious, charitable, or educational” activities under Article VI (Section 28) are given tax-free 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 great 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 Roman Catholic Church retains an influential position in national politics, shaping, for example, the country’s educational system. One aspect 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 (5-6 percent), particularly concentrated on the large southern island of Mindanao (93 percent). Most Muslims in Mindanao are Sunni, but a small minority of Shi‘a Muslims live in the provinces of Lanao Del Sur, in central Mindanao, and Zamboanga Del Sur on the western part of the island.
The integration of the Muslim minority has been a significant and unresolved issue in the country’s politics. In Mindanao, the followers of Islam who were referred to as Moros (Moors) by the Spanish, make up one quarter of the local population but are a majority in some of the westernmost provinces. 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 going on since 1969.
Following peace agreements signed in 2018 between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), then President Rodrigo Duterte signed the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL). Ratified in 2019, the latter formally abolishes the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. The new law provides the area’s Muslim majority with greater autonomy and a somewhat larger area.
According to former 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 against non-Muslim religious communities forcing their displacement.
The Philippine 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 legal action in a Shari‘a court they must travel to the districts in Mindanao with recognised Shari‘a courts, which have authority only in matters of Muslim customary and personal law. Their jurisdiction is restricted to Muslims, and they 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 1930, 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, Bill No. 5170 was introduced in the Philippine House of Representatives to repeal Article 133, which criminalises offending religious feelings. The proposed piece of legislation was tabled after the death in 2019 from a heart attack of artist and cultural activist Carlos Celdran, the only Filipino to be convicted under this provision. So far, it has not been passed; if it were, all pending criminal cases and related civil cases that fall under Article 133 would be dismissed.
Incidents and developments
On 30 June 2022, Ferdinand "Bongbong" Romualdez Marcos Jr., was sworn in as the 17th President of the Philippines, bringing the Marcos family back into power after 36 years. His election came at a time of rampant corruption and public dissatisfaction, resulting in a landslide victory. His decision to surround himself with “social media personalities and vloggers” instead of engaging in election debates left speculation open as to how he would govern.
The previous Duterte administration was strongly criticised regarding the former president’s war on drugs and reinstatement of the death penalty. The anti-drug crackdown fuelled police brutality and resulted in the death of more than 6,000 people in over 220,000 anti-drug operations, this according to the government, but perhaps as many as 30,000, according to other sources. The drug-related killings since Marcos Jr.’s election have not abated.
On 7 October 2022, Percival Mabasa, a journalist, was killed due to his outspoken criticism of the human rights violations committed by the Duterte and Marcos administrations. Since 1986, approximately 195 journalists have been killed making the Philippines one of the most dangerous places for journalists.
On 15 December 2022, three homemade bombs were found on the premises of two Catholic churches in Jolo town. The terrorist group, Abu Sayyaf, an Islamist separatist organisation heavily influenced by al-Qaeda, was suspected to have planted the explosive devices.
As a gesture of good will, President Marcos Jr. declared 26 December as a special non-working day, to “give the people the full opportunity to celebrate the holiday with their families and loved ones.”
In 2020, then President Duterte pushed through the Philippine Congress the Anti-Terrorism Act. This law established an Anti-Terrorism Council with the power to designate individuals as “terrorists” and authorised the government to detain suspects without a warrant or charges for up to 14 days. The law has been criticised by human rights advocates of discouraging activism and criminalising the defence of basic human rights.
The Anti-Terrorism Act has also escalated the practice of “red tagging” – i.e., labelling human rights activists and social justice advocacy groups as communist fronts; this has, in turn, led to arrests without a warrant, detention without charges, torture, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings.
In August 2022, a criminal case was filed against 16 people, including several nuns, for “allegedly financing terrorists and violating the Philippines’ anti-terrorism law.” The nuns, who belong to the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, were accused by the government of financing the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA). Human rights groups, however, stated “the Justice Department railroaded the filing of the case in secrecy before the accused could defend themselves”.
Despite the troubling trends, on 1 December 2022 the Philippine House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved the Religious Freedom Act (256 in favour, one against, and three abstentions), which require the state and all its agencies to protect every citizen’s right to exercise freedom of religion.
Prospects for freedom of religion
While the constitution guarantees freedom of religion, the anti-terrorism law remains a concern allowing authorities, through abusive practices such as red tagging, to crack down on government critics including religious leaders and human rights advocates.
Christians and minority groups continue to be targeted in violent attacks by extremist groups in a growing number of regions. Despite the ratification and enactment of the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL) in 2019, a truly durable and comprehensive solution to violent Islamist extremism appears elusive.
Finally, while the Religious Freedom Act is a positive step, the fate of freedom of religion will depend on the way it is implemented and enforced. Thus, the prospects for religious freedom are unclear and should remain under observation.
Philippines