A.M. No.

P-02-1651
June 22, 2006

ALEJANDRO ESTRADA, complainant

VS
SOLEDAD S. ESCRITOR, respondent

ISSUE Whether or not the respondent is guilty of the administrative charge of gross and immoral
conduct and be penalized.

RULING The administrative complaint is dismissed on the following bases:

On the sincerity of religious belief, the OSG conceded that the sincerity and centrality of the
respondents claimed religious belief and practice are beyond serious doubt. This is evidenced
by the respondents execution of the Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness before she was
employed in the judiciary.
The State's broad interest in protecting the institutions of marriage and the family is not
compelling enough to defeat the free exercise claim of the respondent since the State never
sought to prosecute the respondent nor her partner for concubinage or bigamy charges.
Furthermore, the free exercise of religion is a fundamental right that enjoys a preferred position
in the hierarchy of rights.
Even if the OSG proved the compelling state interest, they failed to present any evidence that
the State adopted the least restrictive means to respondents religious freedom.

FACTS:
On July 27, 2000, Alejandro Estrada requested Judge Jose F. Caoibes, Jr. (Presiding judge of
Branch 253, RTC of Lad Pias) for an investigation of Soledad Escritor for cohabiting with a man
not her husband, and having borne a child within this conjugal arrangement
Estrada charged Escritor with committing disgraceful and immoral conduct under Book V, Title
I, Chapter VI, Section 46(b)(5) of the Revised Administrative Code
The Revised Administrative Code provides:
Section 46. Discipline: General Provisions.
a) No officer or employee in the Civil Service shall be suspended or dismissed
except for cause as provided by law and after due process.
b) The following shall be grounds for disciplinary action:
(5) Disgraceful and immoral conduct

Escritor's defense:
a. She was already a widow when she joined the judiciary as a court interpreter in 1999
(her husband died in 1998)
b. Although she started started living with Luciano Quilapo, Jr. 20 years ago without the
benefit of marriage, her husband is already living with another woman
c. As members of the Jehovahs Witnesses and the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society,
their conjugal arrangement has the approval of their congregation upon their execution
of the Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness July 28, 1991 (after 10 years of living
together)
On August 4, 2003, the Court remanded the complaint to the Office of the Court Administrator
(OCA), and ordered the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to intervene in the case so it can:
 a. Examine the sincerity and centrality of respondents claimed religious belief and
practice;
b. Present evidence on the States compelling interest to override respondents religious
belief and practice; and
c. Show that the means the State adopts in pursuing its interest is the least restrictive to
respondents religious freedom
In the 2006 proceedings, the Court was left to examine the report and the documents
submitted, and to apply the compelling state interest test.

*Underlying the compelling state interest test is the notion that free exercise is a fundamental right and
that the laws burdening it should be subject to strict scrutiny.

Freedom of Religion
Article III, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines provides: 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.