XIV.

Education

ACADEMIC FREEDOM

Sec. 5(2) Academic freedom shall

be enjoyed in all institutions of
higher learning.
BELONGS TO FACULTY AND INSTITUTUION

Academic Freedom:
(1)

For the Professor (FACULTY)

The right of a faculty member to
pursue his studies and publish
the results without fear of
retribution or penalties (IN PURSUIT OF
TRUTH OR IDEA.. NO NEED TO FEAR)-

(2)

For the Institution The right to

Decide the aims and objectives

of the institution and how best to
attain them without interference and
coercion, except when theRe is an
overriding public concern (NOT ABSOLUTE.: ALSO
THE RIGHT TO

HIGH SCHOOL AND ELEMENTARY ARE NOT INCLUDED:

[3. Student .

ACADEMIC FREEDOM OF
It includes:
The right to decideINSITUTION
1.
2.
3.

4.

What to teach CURRICULUM

How to teach MANNER AND METHOD
Who should teach CHOICE OF
FACULTY
Whom to teach CHOICE OF STUDENT
1.

Hence, you cannot complain to court when you the school expelled a
person or suspend in accordance with its rules LAYING DOWN
GRADING SYSTEM ADMISION..

Cases:
UP v. CSC: Commission ordered that a teacher be dropped?

FACTS: A TEACHER TOOK A LEAVE MORE THAN ONE YEAR.. UNDER THE CSC RULES, YOU CAN BE THROWN
OUT IF LEAVE TAKEN IS MORE THAN 1 YEAR.. CSC ORDERED HIM TO BE DROPPED HELD: CSC CANNOT
COMPELL UP TO DROP HIM AS THE LATTER HAS ACADEMIC FREEDOM AS TO WHO SHOULD TEACH.. RIGHT
OF CHOICE WHO SHOULD TEACH CHOICE OF FACULTY

Camacho v. Corises Method of teaching/innovate

Benguet State v.COA rice allowance

Can a student insist on getting admitted? Tanggonan-

Can a student insist that he will complete the course? Non v.

Dames- ONCE YOU ARE ADMITTED, YOU ARE EXPECTED TO COMPLETE YOUR COURSE UNTIL YOU

FACTS: A
TEACHER DID NOT REQUIRE STUDENTS TO ATTEND CLASSESS BUT HE GAVE THEM GOOD AND PASSING
GRADES IT WAS IMPUGNED: HELD: IT INVOLVES ACADEMIC FREEDOM ON THE MANNER OR METHOD OF
TEACHING
TO TEACHERS ( WHICH WAS
DISALLOWED BY COA- HELD: ACADEMIC FREEDOM HAS NO RELATION RICE ALLOWANCES) NOT COVERED
NO! THE
SCHOOL HAS THE RIGHT OF CHOICE OF STUDENTS- RIGHT AS TO WHOM TO TEACH- AS LONG THE
STANDARDS ARE REASONABLE

GRADUATE PROVIDED THAT THE STUDENT COMPLIES ITS STANDARDS. UNLESS YOU FAIL..

5(2) Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all

institutions of higher learning.
1973: All institutions of higher learning shall
enjoy academic freedom. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT IS THAT

1987 CONSTITUTION INCREASED THE SCOPE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM AS IT POSSIBLE

MAY INCLUDE STUDENTS BUT AS OF THE MOMENT, THERE IS NO RULING AS TO
THE INCLUSION OF STUDENTS

2007, No. 1: True or False: The 1987 Constitution

has increased the scope of academic freedom
recognized under the previous Constitution.
TRUE

Can state intervene in Conferment of

Degrees/Honors/Disciplinary Measures? NOTE: THE INSTITUITON HAS THE

RIGHT TO Decide the aims and objectives of the institution and how best to attain them without interference
and coercion, except when there is an overriding public concern: THESE ARE THE FOLLOWING:

1.

Due process(EX. IF YOU ARE DISMISSED FROM THE SCHOOL FOR BREACH OF SCHOOL RULES WITHOUT
APPROPRIATE INVESTIGATION OR NO NOTICE AND HEARING) REFER TO ANG TIBAY DOCTRINE

2.

Equal protection

(IF SCHOOL POLICY DO NOT ADMIT STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES- BISAYA, OR DO

NOT ADMIT BOLANON THAT IS DISCRIMINATORY VIOLATION OF EQUAL PROTECTION )

1989: What do you understand by academic freedom?

(1)

(2)

For the Professor (FACULTY) The right of a faculty member to pursue his studies and publish the results without fear of
retribution or penalties (IN PURSUIT OF TRUTH OR IDEA.. NO NEED TO FEAR)For the Institution The right to Decide the aims and objectives of the institution and how best to attain them without
interference and coercion, except when theRe is an overriding public concern (NOT ABSOLUTE.: ALSO HIGH SCHOOL AND
ELEMENTARY ARE NOT INCLUDED: HOW, WHO. WHAT, WHOM TO TEACH

1990: What is academic freedom? Discuss the extent of Academic freedom

enjoyed by institutions of higher learning.

Sec. 3 (3) At the option expressed in writing by the

parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be
taught to their children or wards in public elementary
and high schools within the regular class hours by
instructors designated or approved by the religious
authorities of the religion to which the children or wards
belong, without additional cost to the Government.
1999, No. 2: What is the constitutional provision
concerning the teaching of religion in elementary and
high schools in the Philippines.
1. IT MUST BE EXPRESSED IN WRITING BY THE PARENTS
2. IT APPLIES ONLY IN PUBLIC AND ELEMENTARY AND HIGH
SCHOOLS- HIGHER LEARNING IS NOT INCLUDED
3. WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COST TO THE GOVERNMENTMEANING NO ADDITIONAL SALARY COMPENSATION IS
PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

Religious Instructions-

2009, No. 15. The principal of Jaena High School, a public school
wrote a letter to the parents and guardians of all the school's
pupils, informing them that the school was willing to provide
religious instruction to its Catholic students during class
hours, through a Catholic priest. However, students who
wished to avail of such religious instruction needed to secure
the consent of their parents and guardians in writing.
1. Does the offer violate the constitutional prohibition against the
establishment of religion? (3%) NO! FOR AS LONG AS
ADDITIONAL COST IS PAID BY THE GOVERNMENT.. EXPRESSED
IN WRITING BY PARENTS BACK PAGE ANSWER
2. The parents of evangelical Christian students, upon learning of
the offer, demanded that they too be entitled to have their
children instructed in their own religious faith during class
hours. The principal, a devout Catholic, rejected the request.
As counsel for the parents of the evangelical students, how
would you argue in support of their position? (3%) IT MUST BE
ARGUED ON EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE.. IT MUST BE OPEN
TO ALL RELIGION

2010, XIX
To instill religious awareness in the students of Doa Trinidad
High School, a public school in Bulacan, the Parent- Teachers
Association of the school contributed funds for the
construction of a grotto and a chapel where ecumenical
religious services and seminars are being held after school
hours. The use of the school grounds for these purposes was
questioned by a parent who does not belong to any religious
group. As his complaint was not addressed by the school
officials, he filed an administrative complaint against the
principal before the DECS. Is the principal liable? Explain
briefly. (5%) THIS IS NO LONGER ALLOWABLE: WHAT IS
GUARANTEED IN THE CONSTITUTION IS RELIGIOUS
INSTRUCTION DURING SCHOOL HOURS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
COST.. IT DOES NOT GUARANTEE CONSTRUCTION

Re: Letter of UP Law, 644 SCRA 543 (2011)

Due to allegations that portions of the ponencia of Justice
del Castillo in Vinuya v. Executive Secretary were plagiarized
from the works of foreign legal scholars, 38 law professors of
the University of the Philippines issued a statement titled
Restoring Integrity, which was widely circulated. The
statement included phrases such as a reprehensible act of
dishonesty and misrepresentation by the Highest Court of the
land and the supposed alarming lack of concern of the
members of the Court for even the most basic values of
decency and respect. At the time the statement was issued, a
motion for reconsideration of the decision was pending before
the Court. Ordered to show cause why they should not be
disciplined, respondents claimed that their Statement was
issued in the exercise of their academic
freedom as teachers in an institution of higher
learning.

Held: There is nothing in the Show Cause Resolution that dictates upon
respondents the subject matter they can teach and the manner of their
instruction. Moreover, lawyers who are also law professors
cannot invoke academic freedom as a defense in an
administrative proceeding for intemperate statements tending
to pressure the Court or influence the outcome of a case or
degrade the courts. Implied in the jurisprudence is that the
constitutional right to freedom of expression of members of the Bar may
be circumscribed by their ethical duties as lawyers to give due respect to
the courts and to uphold the publics faith in the legal profession and the
justice system. To our mind, the reason that freedom of expression may
be so delimited in the case of lawyers applies with greater force to the
academic freedom of law professors. Thus, their actions as law
professors must be measured against the same canons of professional
responsibility applicable to acts of members of the Bar as the fact of
their being law professors is inextricably entwined with the fact that they
are lawyers.

REMEMBER ACADEMIC FREEDOM OF TEACHERS- TO PURSUE HIS IDEAS

AND PUBLISH THE RESULTS WITHOUT FEAR OF RETRIBUTION
THE COURT IS TELLING US.. THAT LAWYER PROFESSORS HAS LIMITED
ACADEMIC FREEDOM COMPARED TO OTHER PROFESSORS NOT MEMBER
OF THE BAR FOR THE VERY REASON THAT THE FORMER ARE GOVERNED
BY CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS