Just last week, in the column “Sometimes, TV doesn’t suck”, I asked whether religious persons make fair and objective leaders who will think, decide and act in favor of the common good rather than in compliance with their own religious biases. Today, I have to ask that question again in reaction to the Comelec’s resolution in SPP Case No. 09 – 228 denying accreditation to the Ang Ladlad LGBT Party.
The facts are not disputed. Ang Ladlad LGBT Party (Ladlad, for brevity) is composed of Lesbians, Gays, BisexuaIs, and Transgenders. It filed a petition with the Comelec seeking accreditation as a party to better represent the interests of its members and individuals in similar situation.
Ang Ladlad LGBT Party has complied with all legal requirements. In accordance with Republic Act 7941, it filed with the COMELEC a petition, attaching its constitution, by-laws, platform or program of government, list of officers, coalition agreement and other relevant information as the COMELEC may require.
In its petition, Ladlad averred that: it has nationwide constituency; it is not a religious sect or denomination; it does not advocate violence or unlawful means to seek its goal; it does not receive any support from any foreign government, foreign political party, foundation, organization, whether directly or indirectly; and it is not a party or organization that is an adjunct of, or a project organized or an entity funded or assisted by, the government.
The Comelec found nothing to hold any of these averments as untrue. Ergo, the Comelec should have granted the petition. But it didn’t. Why? Because, according to the resolution, homosexuality – as a status – is against the teachings of the Catholic Church and the Koran among other things.
The Comelec is a Constitutional Commission and the Constitution requires that majority of its members be comprised of lawyers “who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.” The intention is clear. Majority of the members of the Comelec should be well versed with the law and the application of that knowledge should prevail in resolving all issues before it.
But what does the resolution tell us? First, it quotes from the Bible. Then, it quotes from the Koran. Despite having complied with all legal requirements, Ladlad’s petition was denied because homosexuality is against the laws of two religions – a clear violation of civil rights, the exercise of which is based on what the law guarantees and not on what the church – any church – prohibits. Civil government and church are two distinct entities with separate sets of rules and spheres of authority. That is basic. That is something that even non-lawyers are aware of. How could the Comelec and all its legal thinktanks have missed that?
But, beyond the legality, what’s really mind blowing is the reasoning. The resolution sites the comment of the Comelec’s own Law Department which states that Ladlad advocates sexual immorality because homosexual relationships “serve no other purpose but to satisfy the market for violence, lust or pornography; offend any race or religion; tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited drugs; and are contrary to law, public order, morals and good customs, established policies, lawful orders, decrees and edicts.” Huh?
Based on news reports that we hear day in and day out, violence is more often engaged in by men who feel they’re so macho. Let’s not be hypocrites – lust is something that heterosexuals indulge in too. Even priests, for goodness sakes! Pornography is not something that only homosexuals make and watch. Offend any race? There are homosexuals in any race and all throughout history. Greek erotica, including those that depict homosexual acts, date back to 5th century BC. Tend to abet in the traffic and use of prohibited drugs? Where are the statistics? Drug trafficking is a global business. It doesn’t have anything to do with sexual orientation. Drug use is a global problem and it transcends social class, sex, race and religious belief.
Contrary to law, lawful orders, decrees and edicts? Which ones? I’m not sure if you’ve heard of the term bill of attainder. It is a law that punishes a person or persons for his or their STATUS and not because of something that he or they have done that constitutes an offense. A bill of attainder is unconstitutional because our legal system follows the principle that it is the act that is punishable rather than the status or condition of a person. That’s why there is no law punishing homosexuality. It would be a bill of attainder. Just like any law that punishes being ugly or being stupid. Even the condition of being corrupt is not punishable. One has to commit an act of corruption, as defined by law, to be held liable.
Offend any religion? Ah, now we really get into the meat of the issue. Despite all the instances cited, this is the only phrase that matters. Homosexuality does offend religion, the Comelec cited two, and it goes on to make a sweeping generalization as though to offend these two is to offend all. Even if homosexuality offends religion, so what? That is for religious authorities to deal with. That is not for civil government to dabble in.
The Comelec resolution does not carry the weight of criminal law and the denial of Ladlad’s petition does not include the imposition of a penalty – at least, at first blush, because in modern society, penalty in law is either imprisonment or fine. But what the Comelec imposes on Ladlad – and on all homosexuals, bisexuals and transgenders – is a deprivation of the right of representation which, had the party consisted of heterosexuals, would have been readily granted.
From one perspective, this denial of right of representation is even worse than the imposition of a penalty. Imprisonment is not forever. Heck, even life imprisonment has a maximum. A fine once paid is finished and done with. But if the legality of the Comelec resolution is accepted, this denial of rights may be for far longer than the lifetime of the members of Ladlad. And it will affect people who have not even been born yet.
I smell certiorari in the air. And it’s a smell that I welcome.
(To be continued…)
Let us hope that the Supreme Court will overturn a decision that is so full of prejudice it can make the Ku Klux clan blush. I would not be surprised though if the Supreme Court affirms the decision, after all, the Philippines is still a country under the influence of the Church.
Ang Ladlad LGBT is a legitimate marginalized section of our society. Denying them representation given to other marginalized sectors of society granted by the party list law is unjust, illegal and incomprehensible.
what are they so afraid of?
gay marriages
Robert is right. But that will be in thursday’s column.
Oh man, you know I wrote 3 columns in 2 days just so I can take a vacation? And I’m still a column short. HAHAHAHA
Ang Ladlad did not get accreditation because they did not play the game and pay 15 million pesos to be accredited.
This country is run by idiots. Run!
I’m tempted, believe me. Sorely tempted.
I say, give in to the temptation, Connie!
I bet you’re cruising right now! …
Not yet cruising hehehe 1 tulog na lang
If Catholics in the Philippines are faithful to the teachings of the Vatican, they would exert pressure to uphold the dignity of the GLBT community. To
isolate passages in the Bible without looking at the bigger picture, reforms of Vatican II, is narrowed thinking indeed.
As for same sex marriage issues that may come down the road, why not cross those bridges when they come? To outright deny citizens their rights, that’s cruel as cruel gets.
So when it comes to the Comelec lawyers, the separation of the Church and State is just a figment of imagination.
This is the first time I heard a legal decision based on the laws of 2 religions instead of state laws. It did not speak well how these Comelec lawyers passed the bar at all.
I can agree with everybody here that COMELEC was wrong in their justifications in rejecting Ladlad (makes me wonder why Ladlad, baka pwede namang Partido Magpakatotoo) application for party-list accreditation. Correct me if I’m wrong – just because these presidential appointed officials were sworn into their office with their hand on the bible does not mean they can always cite the bible as their guidance in promulgating their decisions.
The law – “Republic Act 7941 or the Party List law aimed to “enable Filipino citizens belonging to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become members of the House of Representatives.”
Perhaps if Ladlad have found the clause from the above that qualifies them to be an accredited party-list (…contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole), by and by, the COMELEC should based their decision on the same legalities.
Caveat – Knowing the local press bias, there could be something more on this issue that meets the eyes. There could be some other justifications.
COMELEC has rejected the party-list accreditation of the sabungeros (who, IMO, have the same rights as gays) -
“In a resolution, the Comelec’s Second Division under Commissioner Nicodemo Ferrer ruled that the petition of Alyansa ng mga Sabungero did not conform to Sec. 5 of Republic Act 7941 or the Party-List System Act.
“The resolution said the group’s petition does not include the group’s constitution and by-laws, platform of government, list of officers, agreement, and other relevant information that are required under the law.”
BTW, has anybody here bothered to review what these elected party-list candidates have accomplished so far in congress ever since?
It is funny though how Comelec imposes its religious beliefs by the decision and insisted it is grounded on morality not religion. No matter how Commissioner Ferrer twisted his words, the decision is simply a religious edict when LADLAD had already complied with law.
There is no government policy that ban homosexuality because it is immoral or illegal. So this is the first time that a branch of government by its decision declared homosexuality as immoral.
Guys, this is the Philippines’ Commission on Elections.
Stop.
Bow.
Hello Garci?
Aahh, just a short one— maybe there are priests, bishops and other religious fundamentalists / fanatics running the Comelec? Or maybe the thin line separating the Church and State has been erased?
Let’s not just focus on the COMELEC, albeit its medieval second division. Public opinion is silently in support of their decision despite the media coverage enlightened citizens are getting and using to air their dissent and defense of Ang Ladlad.
It simply means that Philippine society in general and at present, is not yet prepared to accept such a group so openly into the governing process.
So what would it be? Dura sed lex because the law is clearly in favor of Ang Ladlad’s petition? Or Vox populi, vox dei, which means the people, at least the majority is in silent approval of the 2nd Division’s decision?
Ha ha ha Jhay, why do I get the feeling that what you have commented is also lingering into my thought.
LOL. It’s because we too are part of the same Filipino society I’m talking about. We may not agree with the language and religious tone masked as legal opinion in the COMELEC’s decision but somehow, deep inside us, we are in agreement to it because so far, the only ones raising torches and pitchforks are the ‘enlightened ones’ in the upper classes of society.
Tolerance is the key word here, we’re still far from ‘acceptance’.
“Tolerance” and “acceptance”.
Jhay balikan kita next time on this.
Right now now my definition on tolerance is you are tolerating. Acceptance is you passed the tolerance stage and you’re accepting it.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
The trouble for me is on what level.
“Vox populi, vox dei”
Hey, wasn’t Jesus crucified by an angry mob of his own people?
The public being silent cannot be taken as in favor of the decision in the same way the public being silent to be taken as in favor of the state of governance (corruption) in the country.
I would like to see how the high court dispense with erroneous constitutional commission decision in this case.
I beg to disagree. The public is not totally silent about their disgust of the state of (mis)governance in the country. They have just found another way of expressing dissent by giving GMA the lowest approval and trust rating of any president in this country’s history.
I agree with dOdOng on this one. We cannot expect the public to heed to the streets at every issue. That does not necessarily mean they agree or disagree on anything. Interpretation of our laws must reflect equality, regardless of gender.
The public being silent on our state of governance (corruption)?
Duh…
Hi.
I’m a first-time visitor on your blog, but I am especially concerned with the case of Ladlad. I may not be gay, but I doubt I have to be to see the bigotry behind Comelec’s decision.
Moreso that I’m a non-believer – I find it incredibly absurd that Comelec would claim homosexuality was immoral just because their choice of religious book says so. And It’s a book, mind you, that has openly condoned the eradication of entire nations (Book of numbers), incest (Lot and his daughters), and…killing people for eating shellfish (Leviticus).
I’ve said enough.
To lay it straight – I like your commentary and the way you presented the facts on the matter. I’ll be looking forward to your second column regarding this case.
Cheers!
Hi Twin-Skies,
Your comment -
“Moreso that I’m a non-believer – I find it incredibly absurd that Comelec would claim homosexuality was immoral just because their choice of religious book says so. And It’s a book, mind you, that has openly condoned the eradication of entire nations (Book of numbers), incest (Lot and his daughters), and…killing people for eating shellfish (Leviticus).
I’ve said enough.”
I think you’ve not said enough.
I’m not familiar with Book of Numbers. Maybe if you can educate us of the verse or where the readers of this blog can find that eradication of entire nation was openly condoned in that Book.
Or the incest (Lot and his daughters). You did not provide context or additional details on how it happened and what was the intention of his daughters. Take note that it was not Lot who instigated the incest. Did you intentionally omit that? (Or if Lot was the one who instigate it, what is the issue.? Onanism, Judas betrayed Jesus, Peter lied, Sodom and Gomorrah… They are all part of bible’s narrations).
Killing people for eating shellfish? Where is that in Leviticus?