The Cebu City Government's proposed moral recovery program, which includes a weekly 45-minute Bible Study Fellowship for employees, is undergoing legal review over concerns regarding the separation of Church and State.
City Legal Office issued an opinion stating the program may proceed if participation is strictly voluntary, recommending a clarificatory directive ensuring non-attendance results in no administrative consequences.
Human resource officials formally endorsed the matter to the Cebu City Council for guidance and policy action, placing the internal values initiative under official legislative scrutiny.
A PROPOSED “moral recovery” initiative within the Cebu City Government, which sought to institutionalize weekly Bible Study Fellowship sessions for employees, was subjected to legal review amid concerns over possible constitutional issues involving the separation of Church and State.
The program, anchored on Proclamation 62, s. 1992 on moral recovery and values formation, was initially framed as part of the City’s broader push for the spiritual and moral upliftment of public servants.
In a memorandum issued by the City Human Resource Development Office, department and office heads were directed to schedule employees under the “Cebu City Government Moral Recovery Program 2026,” which included a weekly 45-minute Bible Study Fellowship (BSF) every Thursday.
Attendance was to be coordinated internally and treated as part of employees’ participation in City programs and activities, raising questions on whether it implied official expectation or obligation.
According to the memorandum, the program had been approved at the level of the city administrator.
However, concerns were later formally raised by employees under the City Hospitalization Assistance and Medicines Program (Champ), who sought a review from the City Legal Office (CLO), questioning whether institutionalizing participation in a religious activity within a government program could violate the constitutional principle of separation of Church and State.
The CLO acknowledged that while the memorandum did not explicitly impose penalties or clearly state that participation was mandatory, certain provisions, such as scheduling employees and classifying attendance as part of official functions, could be interpreted as implying compulsion.
In its legal opinion, the CLO said the initiative may still be implemented within constitutional bounds but emphasized a crucial safeguard: participation must remain strictly voluntary.
It recommended that the City issue a clarificatory directive explicitly stating that attendance in any religious activity under the program is optional and that non-participation must not result in any administrative or supervisory consequence.
The matter was then formally endorsed by HR officials to the City Council for guidance and possible legislative or policy action, effectively placing the issue under council scrutiny.
In a subsequent endorsement, council officials moved to include the legal opinion and related documents in the agenda of a regular session, signaling that the proposal — once framed as an internal values program — has now become a policy matter requiring further deliberation. / CAV