THE video of a high-school student “using our Philippine flag as a floor mop” went viral in social media a couple of days ago. We immediately requested our Department of Education (DepEd) National Capital Region to investigate the incident. During media interviews, I was asked whether there is a penal sanction for such a very reprehensible act and whether such penal sanction is applicable to the minor high-school student involved in the incident.
On August 30, 2007, the DepEd issued an order enumerating the “Guidelines on the Proper Display of the Philippine National Flag.” Here, the provisions of Republic Act (RA) 8491, otherwise known as the Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines and its implementing rules and regulations, particularly the “prohibited acts” that may be committed against our flag, were substantially quoted.
RA 8491 aims, among others, to promote or sustain “reverence and respect for the Filipino flag, the national anthem and other national symbol, which embody national ideals and traditions.” Thus, under Section 34 of said law, it is stated that it is prohibited to “mutilate, deface, defile, trample on or cast contempt or commit any act or omission casting dishonor or ridicule upon the flag or over its surface.”
Some of the penalties that may be imposed for violation of the flag law are as follows: 1) after proper notice and hearing, “public censure,” which shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation; and 2) upon conviction by the proper trial court, a fine of P5,000 to P20,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court. It also states that the DepEd and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), “upon recommendation of the National Historical Institute and after proper notice and hearing, shall cause the cancellation of the recognition of permit of any private educational institution which fails or refuses to observe the provisions of the flag law for the second time.”
The applicability of the criminal penalties of fine and imprisonment provided under Section 48 of said law should be governed by the provisions of RA 9344, otherwise known as the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, as amended by RA 10630. Thus, Section 6 of RA 9344 as amended by RA 10630 states that “a child 15 years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subjected to an intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act.” Further, it provides that “a child above 15 years but below 18 years of age shall, likewise, be exempt from criminal liability and be subject to an intervention program, unless he or she acted with discernment.”
Therefore, if the student involved in the “using our national flag as a floor mop” incident and the one who took the video are 15 years of age or below, then they are exempt from criminal liability. If they are above 15 but below 18 years of age, they are only exempt from criminal liability if they acted without discernment. Otherwise, if they acted with discernment, then they shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings provided by RA 9344 as amended by RA 10630.
“Above 15 but below 18 years of age” means 15 years and 1-day old or above but below 18 years of age. “Discernment” means the capacity of the child at the time of the commission of the offense to understand the difference between right and wrong and the consequences of the wrongful act.
We hope this article would help in the proper interpretation of the penal provisions of the flag law in relation to a minor child.
Lawyer Toni Umali is the current assistant secretary for Legal and Legislative Affairs of the Department of Education (DepEd). He is licensed to practice law not only in the Philippines, but also in the state of California and some federal courts in the US after passing the California State Bar Examinations in 2004. He has served as a legal consultant to several legislators and local chief executives. As education assistant secretary, he was instrumental in the passage of the K to 12 law and the issuance of its implementing rules and regulations. He is also the alternate spokesman of the DepEd.
4 comments
Thank you for the clarification on the reprehensible act, Asec. Umali. It is nice to know our government’s provisions regarding this. I hope our youths learn a lesson on respect.
Is the law only intended and exclusive to Filipinos or is it also applicable to those foreigners who disgrace the Philippine flag?
Indeed. Our law only bound under the jurisdiction of the Philippines. However, the government shall coordinate in foreign country particularly using the ambassadors of the state to take legal actions.
Sir,
Good manners and Right Conduct…………..Morally and substantial initially established in our dear home. Thousands, thousands, and thousands, they’ve gave lives, still are giving their lives for Country (Flag), in country including our life, parents, siblings, realtions, etc, etc, etc, This is one of the gratest reason why I love my, Philippines and adopted country, symbolized the unity of the country. Respect, Love and Devotion. Sincerely Yours, Manolo