(Part 2)
Bishop Gregorio Aglipay, the Supreme Head of the Philippine Independent Church, questioned the constitutionality of the act of the Director of Posts for using and selling commemorative stamps for the 33rd IEC in 1937 in the City of Manila.
Don Vicente Sotto, the legal counsel of Aglipay, anchored its opposition on religious freedom of the Constitution. The Philippine Republic was young then, barely a year old, with its first elected President, Manuel Quezon chosen by the Filipino people on September 16, 1935. Just as young was the Constitution which was drafted in a constitutional convention in 1934, with the Sotto brothers being delegates.
Solicitor General Tuason contended that the writ of prohibition was the not proper remedy. Justice Jose Laurel became the ponente (writer) of case on behalf of the Supreme Court (during the war he became president in 1942 under the Japanese) and said:
“We are much impressed with the vehement appeal of counsel of the petitioner to maintain inviolate the complete separation of church and state and curb any attempt to infringe by indirection a constitutional inhibition. Indeed, in the Philippines, once the scene of religious intolerance and prescription, care should be taken that at this stage of our political development nothing is done by the Government or its officials, that may lead to the belief that the Government is taking sides or favoring a particular religious sect or institution.
But, upon very serious reflection, examination of Act No. 4052, and scrutiny of the attending circumstances, we have come to the conclusion that there has been no constitutional infraction in the case at bar. Act No. 4052 grants the Director of Posts, with the approval of the Secretary of Public Works and Communications, discretion to misuse postage stamps with new designs ‘as often as may be deemed advantageous to the Government’.
Even if we were to assume that these officials made use of a poor judgment in issuing and selling the postage stamps in question still, the case of the petitioner would fail to take in weight. Between the exercise of a poor judgment and the unconstitutionality of the step taken, a gap exists which is yet to be filled to justify the court in setting aside the official acts assailed as coming within a constitutional inhibition.”
The case was decided by the Supreme Court on March 13, 1937. The 33rd International Eucharistic Congress in Manila City was held from February 3 to 7, 1937. The Director of Posts said that the only purpose in issuing and selling the stamps was to advertise the Philippines and attract more tourists to an event of international importance. It was not sold and issued to favor or benefit the Roman Catholic Church.