Position Paper on the Approval and Implementation of

Divorce Law

Opposition Side

The approval or the legalization of Divorce here in the

Philippines is one of the controversial topics being argued not
only by our lawmakers but also the students and the
concerned citizens. Considering all the arguments and points
of both sides, I am inclined to disagree with the legalization of
divorce. In the Family Code of the Philippines, marriage is
considered to be a special contract of permanent union, and
an inviolable social institution. If we are going to create a law
that easily dissolves a marriage, then we might as well amend
the provisions regarding the permanency and the inviolability
of such union.

Presently, we have remedies which cater situations

pertaining to marital problems and abuses. We have the Anti
Violence Against Women and Their Children Law or Anti
VAWC Law (RA 9262), Legal Separation and Annulment. The
first one is intended to provide protection to women against
abuses of their partners. Legal Separation is a remedy which
grounds are enumerated in the Family Code. It does not sever
the marriage and it provides a cool off period or a reasonable
time for parties to reflect with their actions or decisions and
it also promotes reconciliation of the partners. The order of
separation, however, may be permanent, depending on the
gravity of the offense for the protection of the aggrieved
spouse. Lastly, we have Annulment. The Family Code
provides a strict enumeration of grounds and specific
prescription periods for Annulment to be availed. The scope
of these remedies is so wide that it covers all the possible
scenarios or situations that may arise during marriage.
Hence, there is no longer a need for the Divorce Law to be
implemented.

We can also consider Psychological Incapacity as one of

the remedies. The determination of whether a married person
or both the married couple are suffering from Psychological
Incapacity is left solely to courts, so as long as the guidelines
or requisites laid down in the Molina case are present. This

1
remedy, when granted, does not sever the marriage, rather it
declares that the marriage is void from the beginning. In the
case of Te vs Te (GR 161793) the Court stated that, “In
dissolving marital bonds on account of either party’s
psychological incapacity, the Court is not demolishing the
foundation of families, but it is actually protecting the
sanctity of marriage, because it refuses to allow a person
afflicted with a psychological disorder, who cannot comply
with or assume the essential marital obligations, from
remaining in that sacred bond.

The Divorce Law aims to save or give a chance to the

suffering individuals forever trapped in their defective
marriages. This solution, however, is not a guarantee that the
next marriage (assuming that the divorce was granted and
that the availing party remarried since the main purpose of
the Divorce Law is to allow a then-married person to remarry)
is already a happy and functional one. If in case the second
marriage did not meet the specific person’s standard of
marriage, will he or she again try to avail of the divorce? If the
Divorce Law will be implemented, married individuals having
problem with their marriages will no longer try or make an
effort to fix their marital problems but will already aim to get
a divorce declaration. Personally I don’t see it as a chance to
a better relationship or a better married life but a chance to
commit another mistake since there is no guarantee that the
next marriage or the next one after that, is the marriage that
the person has been dreaming of.

Divorce Law as proposed is only an improvement of the

existing remedies that we have. It is suggested to be more
affordable comparing to Annulment and that it only requires
lesser time to expedite. Then, why don’t we just modify the
provisions on Annulment or propose that its process and cost
be compatible with the current demand. Divorce Law does not
also provide specific grounds which are not covered by
present remedies.

A better approach would be to further educate couples

intending to get married. Aside from the counseling provided
prior to the celebration of the wedding, they should also be
informed thoroughly regarding the Anti Violence Against
Women and Children Law, Legal Separation and Annulment.

2
In this way, they will learn the consequences of their would-
be actions and know that the law is replete with solutions that
can be availed in case a problem should arise. This can be
helpful for it provides vital information such as the
prescription periods, the grounds for annulment and legal
separation, about the ratification, the proper parties to file a
case, and the like. If this is implemented, then there is no
need for us to approve of make effective the Divorce Law.

Oft-given example of the downside of the Divorce Law is

its effect on the children. Yes, the mother or the father will
have another shot of having a better marriage but it’s the
children of the nuclear family who will suffer, not to mention
that the occurrence of half-siblings is more likely to happen,
which, according to statistics and research, has detrimental
effect on the rearing of the children. Just on paper, the
Divorce Law already appears to be a threat to the image of a
traditional Filipino family.

With all these statements, arguments and points, it is

only reasonable to declare that the proposed Divorce Law is
not the answer to our problems. It is not essential and
needed, and even if we consider it as a solution, it is not a
hundred percent effective for it poses a lot of disadvantages.
There is no logic when we take a medicine which side effect is
more dangerous and more severe than the sickness we are
aiming to cure.

Vicman T. Mondejar Jr.