G.R. No. L-53487 May 25, 1981
ANDRES GARCES, REV. FR. SERGIO MARILAO OSMEÑA, NICETAS DAGAR and JESUS EDULLANTES, petitioners, vs. HON. NUMERIANO G. ESTENZO, Presiding Judge of the Court of First Instance of Leyte, Ormoc City Branch V, BARANGAY COUNCIL OF VALENCIA, ORMOC CITY, et al., respondents.

FACTS

The Barangay Council of Valencia, Ormoc City, passed resolutions to revive the annual fiesta of San Vicente Ferrer, acquire his wooden image, and construct a waiting shed. Funds were raised through private solicitations and donations. Resolution No. 6 designated a layman, Councilman Tomas Cabatingan, as the image’s custodian for one year, making it available to the church during the feast day. After the 1976 fiesta mass, the parish priest, Fr. Sergio Osmeña, refused to return the image, claiming church ownership. This sparked mutual administrative and criminal complaints between the priest and barangay officials. The council subsequently passed resolutions to file a replevin suit to recover the image. Fr. Osmeña eventually surrendered the image after a bond was posted but later, together with other petitioners, filed a case seeking to annul the barangay resolutions for being unconstitutional.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the barangay resolutions, which involved the acquisition and custody of a religious image for a fiesta using privately raised funds, violate the constitutional principles on the separation of church and state and the non-appropriation of public funds for religious purposes.

RULING

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the barangay resolutions and affirmed the dismissal of the petition. The Court ruled that the barangay council was validly constituted, as the absence of the barangay youth chairman from the sessions where the resolutions were passed did not affect the quorum or the validity of the acts. On the substantive constitutional issue, the Court held there was no violation of the separation of church and state. The funds used to acquire the image were not public funds but private donations voluntarily given by residents. The fiesta celebration is a traditional socio-religious activity that does not involve the sponsorship or endorsement of a specific religion by the state. The barangay’s role was merely to regulate the secular aspects of the celebration for the community’s benefit. Citing Aglipay vs. Ruiz, the Court reiterated that not every governmental activity with a religious tint is unconstitutional. The purpose of the resolutions was to celebrate a traditional event, not to propagate a religion. The image, purchased with private funds, was barangay property, and the council had the right to determine its custody and to recover it via replevin.