‘Confident’ Carlos Celdran appeals conviction over ‘Damaso’ act before SC
Cultural activist and tour guide Carlos Celdran appears before the Supreme Court on Friday, October 23, 2015 to appeal his conviction over a 2010 protest at the Manila Cathedral. YUJI VINCENT GONZALES/INQUIRER.NET
Cultural activist and tour guide Carlos Celdran took to the Supreme Court on Friday to appeal his conviction over a 2010 protest at the Manila Cathedral seeking to abolish the law that penalizes “offending religious feelings.”
Noting that the Bill of Rights enshrines the freedom of speech, Celdran told INQUIRER.net that he is confident that the high court, as “gatekeeper of the Constitution,” will side with him in declaring Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code (RP) unconstitutional.
READ: Unfazed, convicted activist Carlos Celdran to go to SC | CA affirms Celdran’s conviction in ‘Damaso’ act
“This case has been going through the Philippine justice system for the past five years. So now we’re on our final leg—we’re now going to question the constitutionality of Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code. And this is, like what I said, the final chance for us to see if this will push through,” Celdran said.
“And I know that the Supreme Court is the gatekeeper of the Philippine Constitution and I’m very confident that they will see it our way,” he added.
Celdran previously appealed his case before the Court of Appeals (CA), but in a ruling released in January this year, it upheld the activist’s Dec. 14, 2012 conviction by the Manila Metropolitan Trial Court.
Celdran was meted with the penalty of two months and 21 days to one year, one month and 11 days of imprisonment for protesting with a “Damaso” placard and shouting during ecumenical services at the Manila Cathedral in 2010.
Calling for the Church to stop meddling with government affairs at the height of reproductive health debates, the placard was in reference to the oppressive friar who was a character in Jose Rizal’s novel “Noli Me Tangere.”
Celdran said he does not regret what he did five years ago as “anyone can be offended by anything.”
He reiterated his apology to those who were offended by his act, but stressed that his protest was well within his rights.
“Sorry if I offended their feelings five years ago. But clearly freedom of speech supersedes any sort of theocracy going on in this country,” Celdran said.
In its ruling, the CA rejected Celdran’s bid to declare Article 133 of the RPC as unconstitutional and maintained that the freedom of speech was not an “unbridled right.”
“It imposes a penal sanction on anyone who performs acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful done inside a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony. The petitioner (Celdran) cannot give any additional meaning to the clear and plain language of the law,” the court said.
“It should be borne in mind that religious freedom, although not unlimited, is a fundamental personal right and liberty, and has a preferred position in the hierarchy of values,” it added.
Celdran said it’s about time that he and the Catholic Church move on from the issue and work together for “better things” instead.
“I hope I and the Catholic hierarchy can find a better relationship from here on. Mag-move on na tayo….(Let’s move on.) There’s a lot of good things that we can work on together, better than if we fight,” he said. CDG
