Case Summary (G.R. No. 217453)
Petitioner
Denmark S. Valmores, whose faith strictly prohibits non-religious undertakings from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset, requested accommodation for classes and examinations rescheduled to Saturdays, offering to make up missed work.
Respondents
Dr. Cristina Achacoso, Dean of the MSU–College of Medicine, and Dr. Giovanni Cabildo, Histo-Pathology instructor, who denied Valmores’s exemption requests and assigned a failing grade for a Saturday laboratory examination.
Key Dates
• June–August 2014: Classes/exams moved to Saturdays
• September 13, 2014: Histo-Path lab exam on a Saturday
• September 15, 2014: Church certification issued
• September 19, 2014: Reconsideration letter to Dean Achacoso
• January 6, 2015: CHED Regional Office indorsement to MSU President
• March 25, 2015: Final counsel letter to Dean Achacoso
• July 19, 2017: Supreme Court decision
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution, Art. III, § 5 (free exercise of religion)
• Rule 65, Rules of Court (writ of mandamus)
• CHED Memorandum No. 1, series of 2010 (remedial work for religious observance)
• Republic Act No. 7722 (CHED charter)
Antecedent Facts
Valmores informed MSU-College of Medicine in writing of his Sabbath observance and sought excusal from Saturday classes and exams, proposing makeup work. He secured a certification from his church’s pastor. Despite CHED Regional Office indorsement and the MSU President’s directive to enforce the 2010 CHED Memorandum, respondents failed to act. Valmores’s counsel warned of legal action before filing a mandamus petition directly with the Supreme Court.
Issue
Whether a writ of mandamus may compel the Dean and faculty member of MSU–College of Medicine to enforce the 2010 CHED Memorandum in accommodating a student’s religious obligations.
Procedural Exception
Though Rule 65 ordinarily requires filing in the Regional Trial Court, the Supreme Court exercised its discretionary jurisdiction due to compelling constitutional questions, the urgent need to protect Valmores’s religious freedom, and the exhaustion of available remedies.
Constitutional Framework
Art. III, § 5 of the 1987 Constitution guarantees absolute freedom to believe and a qualified freedom to act, subject to reasonable regulation. Jurisprudence recognizes that accommodations must be granted unless overridden by compelling state interests.
CHED Memorandum Requirements
CHED directed all higher education institutions to:
- excuse students from conflicting activities;
- offer optional remedial work within school rules without grade penalty;
- accept a religious-leader certification as proof.
The memorandum uses mandatory language (“shall be enjoined,” “strict compliance”) and imposes a ministerial duty on HEIs.
Mandamus as Remedy
A writ of mandamus compels the performance of a clear, ministerial duty. Here, once Valmores submitted the required certification, MSU officials had no discretion to deny exemption from Saturday obligations.
Sufficiency of Certification
The September 15, 2014 certification, signed by the Adventist pastor, expressly covered absence from Saturday cla
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 217453)
Antecedent Facts
- Petitioner Denmark S. Valmores is a bona fide member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church whose fundamental beliefs mandate strict Sabbath observance from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday.
- During Academic Year 2014-2015, Valmores was a first-year student at the Mindanao State University-College of Medicine (MSU-COM).
- To prevent conflict between his religious worship on Saturdays and academic schedule, Valmores requested by letter to Dean Cristina Achacoso that he be excused from classes or examinations rescheduled to Saturdays, offering to make up missed work.
- From June to August 2014, several of his lectures and examinations were indeed moved to Saturdays.
- On September 13, 2014, Valmores was unable to take a Histo-Pathology laboratory exam administered by Dr. Giovanni Cabildo when it fell on a Saturday—no accommodation was granted and he received a failing grade of “5” with no opportunity to retake.
- Church officers, including Pastor Hanani P. Nietes, issued a September 15, 2014 Certification attesting to Valmores’s membership and Sabbath obligations, explicitly supporting his exemption from all Sabbath classes and exams.
- Despite further letters of reconsideration (September 19, 2014 and March 25, 2015), respondent Achacoso failed to grant relief or respond formally.
Procedural Posture
- Valmores elevated his grievance to the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), which, by indorsement dated January 6, 2015, directed MSU President Macapado Abaton Muslim and Dean Achacoso to act on the 2010 CHED Memorandum.
- President Muslim hand-wrote an “Urgent!” note ordering strict enforcement of the CHED policy, yet respondents still did not accommodate Valmores.
- Thereafter, Valmores filed a petition for mandamus under Rule 65 directly with the Supreme Court, seeking enforcement of CHED Memorandum No. 1, series of 2010.
Issue
- Whether a writ of mandamus will lie to compel respondents—MSU-COM Dean Achacoso and faculty member Cabildo—to enforce the CHED Memorandum of November 15, 2010 and thereby excuse Valmores from academic activities that conflict with his Sabbath observance and allow remedial work.
Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts and Exceptions
- Rule 65 generally requires petitions for mandamus against officers to be filed in the Regional Trial Court of proper venue.
- The Supreme Court holds concurrent jurisdiction but recognizes the hierarchy of courts as a policy against forum shopping.
- In Maza v. Turla and The Diocese of Bacolod v. Commission on Elections, the Court carved exceptions allowing direct recourse when (i) pressing constitutional issues arise; (ii)