CHAVEZ, Potenciano Clarito C.

2015-079522
3LM

I. 96 Points

A. Declaration of Marriage as Null and Void due to Lack of Marriage License

Leila, this may be a valid option. A valid marriage license is a formal

requisite of marriage as provided in the Family Code. There are certain legal
requirements to get a valid marriage license. However, there are also instances
when it is required and when it is not.

Art. 4 of the Code provides that the absence of any of the essential or
formal requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio except as stated in
Article 35 (2). An irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect the validity
of marriage but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity shall be
civilly, criminally and administratively liable.

In fact, just right before your marriage, you filled out marriage-license
application forms. In short, there is no [valid] marriage license at the time of the
celebration of your marriage. In the comment of Pineda 1, it is stated that the
license must be valid. Otherwise, the marriage will be deemed celebrated without a
license in which the marriage is void. While in Abbas vs. Abbas 2, the Court ruled
that as the marriage license, a formal requisite, is clearly absent, the marriage of
[Gloria and Syed] is void ab initio. Art. 35, par. (3) of the Code states that a
marriage shall be void from the beginning when it is solemnized without
license. Lack of marriage license is only allowed in exceptional circumstances to
which you are not into.

Thus, it is a valid ground to declare your marriage null and void due to
lack of a marriage license.

B. Declaration of Marriage as Null and Void as non-members of the minister’s

Christian Church

Leila, this may be a valid option. A marriage ceremony which takes place
with the appearance of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer
and their personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in
the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age is provided in Art. 2 of
the Family Code as a formal requisite of marriage.

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 9
2
Abbas vs. Abbas, G.R. No. 183896, January 30, 2013
 Art. 4 of the Code provides that the absence of any of the essential or
formal requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio except as stated in
Article 35 (2). Meanwhile, an irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect
the validity of marriage but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity
shall be civilly, criminally and administratively liable.

In the comment of Pineda 1, the officiating officer must be clothed with the
power to marry. As regards the ecclesiastical solemnizers, their authority depends upon
the limit imposed in their written faculty granted by their respective churches or sects.

Art. 7, par. (2) of the Code provides that any priest, rabbi, imam or
minister of any church or religious sect duly authorized by his church or
religious sect and registered with the civil register general, acting within the
limits of the written authority granted him by his church or religious sect and
provided that at least one of the contracting parties belongs to the solemnizing
officer’s church or religious sect.

In your case, Leila your wedding was solemnized by a licensed non-

catholic christian minister to which you are not members of the minister’s
Christian church. Thereby, as Art. 35, par. (2) provides, the marriage may be
declared void from the beginning as it was solemnized by a person not legally
authorized to perform the marriage.

On that purpose, however, if you entered into the celebration believing

in good faith that the christian minister had the legal authority to do so, your
marriage is still valid.

C. Declaration of Marriage as Null and Void due to Psychological Incapacity

Leila, this may not be a valid option. Art. 36 of the Family Code provides
that a marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations
of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest
only after its solemnization.

In the book of Pineda2, it was stated that according to Dr. Gerardo

Veloso, a former Presiding Judge of the Metropolitan Marriage Tribunal of the
Catholic Archdiocese of Manila (Br. I), psychological incapacity must be
characterized by (a) gravity, (b) juridical antecedence and (c) incurability. It was
further discussed that the incapacity must be grave or serious such that the party
cannot carry out the ordinary duties required in marriage life.

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 9
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 69
 The essential marital obligations as enumerated in the Code is 1) to
procreate children, (2) to live together under one roof, (3) to observe mutual
love, respect and fidelity, (4) to render mutual help and support, (5) to jointly
support the family and (6) not to commit acts which will bring danger,
dishonor or injury to each other or to the family.

From the facts that you mentioned, you said that you have a marital
discord usually sourcing from your failure in becoming a lawyer and that in
your last fight, Antonio erupted and knocked you out. He, then left your
conjugal dwelling place and stopped talking to you and giving spousal and
child support. In this regard, this does not constitute enough support to declare
your marriage null and void.

In the case of Perez-Ferraris vs. Ferraris 1, it was ruled that while

petitioner's marriage with the respondent failed and appears to be without
hope of reconciliation, the remedy however is not always to have it declared
void ab initio on the ground of psychological incapacity. The Court further
expressed that an unsatisfactory marriage, however, is not a null and void
marriage. It was explained that the abandonment and lack of support, of the
respondent are not rooted on some debilitating psychological condition but a
mere refusal or unwillingness to assume the essential obligations of marriage.

Thus, psychological incapacity may not be a valid option to declare your

marriage null and void.

D. Annulment of Marriage due to Lack of Parental Consent

Leila, this may not be a valid option. You are 18 years of age while
Antonio was 19 at the time of the celebration of your marriage [or on 29
November 1990]. Therefore, as required by Art. 2 of the Family Code, you both
have the legal capacity to marry while not being barred by any impediment.

Subsequently, Art. 14 of the Code provides that in case either or both of the
contracting parties, are between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one, they shall, in
addition to the requirements of the preceding articles, exhibit to the local civil registrar,
the consent to their marriage of their father, mother, surviving parent or guardian, or
persons having legal charge of them, in the order mentioned. Such consent shall be
manifested in writing by the interested party, who personally appears before the proper
local civil registrar, or in the form of an affidavit made in the presence of two witnesses
and attested before any official authorized by law to administer oaths. The personal
manifestation shall be recorded in both application forms for marriage license and the
affidavit, if one is executed instead, shall be attached to said applications.

1
Perez-Ferraris vs. Ferraris, G.R. No. 162368, July 26, 2006
 Based from the facts you mentioned, you said that Antonio did not tell
his parents about the wedding because he was afraid they will object and stop
the wedding. Although, his parents were not present, you had your parent’s
presence to which the requirement of having two witnesses of legal age was
also met. However, the requirement of parental consent is still necessary since
both you and Antonio are between the ages of 18 and 21 at the time of
celebration of your marriage, thus it may be a valid cause for annulment. In this
regard, Art. 45, par. (1) of the Code would apply, to wit: A mariage may be
annulled, when at the time of the marriage, the party in whose behalf it is sough to have
the marriage annulled was eighteen years of age or over but below twenty-one, and the
marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parent, guardian, or person having
substitute parental authority over the party, in that order, unless after attaining the age
of twenty-one, such party freely cohabited with the other and both lived together as
husband and wife.

Since today you are already 48 years of age, it may not be a valid option
to raise this cause as a ground for annulment.

E. Annulment of Marriage due to Vitiated Consent

Leila, this may be a voidable ground to annul your marriage with

Antonio. Art. 2, par. (2) of the Family Code provides that no marriage shall be
valid unless consent is freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer. It
is an essential element in marriage. In the comment of Pineda 1, it means
conformity. The mandate of the law is clear. It must be free—not the result of force,
intimidation or threat. Further, a marriage where the consent is not free, but tainted
with fraud, force, intimidation or threat is voidable.

Art. 4, par. (2) of the Code also prodivides that a defect in any of the
essential requisites shall render the marriage voidable as provided in Article 45.
As Art. 45, par (3) provides a marriage may be annulled when the consent of
either party was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless the same
having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as
husband and wife. In the case of Carlos vs. Roxas 2, the Court held that to be a
ground for annulment of marriage, the threat or intimidation must be of such
nature as to prevent the party upon whom it is employed from acting as a free
agent.

Based from the facts of your story, as Antonio was about to leave your
house, Tito Christopher, your father, brought out his service fully-loaded M-16
rifle and aimed it at him. Further, he was told by the words, “If you do not
marry my daughter tomorrow, I will kill you. If after the wedding, you decide
to have your marriage with my unica hija terminated, I will also kill you.”

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 9
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 129
Evidently, Antonio turned pale and started to tremble although he was able to
muster enough strength to walk home from your house in Sta. Mesa.

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 9
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 129
 Thereafter, the celebration of your marriage proceeded and Antonio did
not also leave you the day after your marriage and even years afterwhich.

Even before your marriage, I can sense that you and Antonio are really
in love with each other. As such if given the choice, you will still love each other
with or without a marriage. Further, your marriage with Antonio stayed strong
though shaky for nearly 30 years. As such, you and Antonio shared more years
of love even after the celebration of your marriage. Thus, you have to be aware
also that it can still be ratified by free cohabitation.

F. Difference of Nullity of Marriage and Annulment of Marriage

Leila, in the Philippines we have the concepts of nullity of marriage and

annulment of marriage. You have to be familiar with these concepts not only
for your own knowledge but more importantly for the sake of your four
children.

Chapter 3 of the Family Code governs void and voidable marriages. On

one hand, nullity of marriage declares it void ab initio or void from the
beginning, as if it never existed. Arts. 35-44 of the Code discuss the grounds for
such marriages. On the other hand, instances discussed in Arts. 45-54 of the
Code can declare a marriage voidable upon filing of the petition for annulment
of marriage and declare it void only after having been granted by the court.

Art. 43, par. (1) of the Code provides that the termination of the subsequent
marriage referred to in the preceding Article shall produce the children of the
subsequent marriage conceived prior to its termination shall be considered legitimate,
and their custody and support in case of dispute shall be decided by the court in a
proper proceeding. In the comment of Pineda, it was said that children conceived
prior to the termination of the subsequent marriage (although born thereafter) are
legitimate.

Art. 54 of the Code provides that children conceived or born before the
judgement of annulment or absolute nullity of the marriage under Article 36 has
become final and executory, shall be considered legitimate. Children conceived or born
of the subsequent marriage under Article 53 shall likewise be legitimate. Those
children born afterwhich, therefore would be considered illegimate.

G. Effect of a Decree of Nullity of Marriage on Properties Acquired

Leila, in the Philippines we have the concept of nullity of marriage. You

have to be familiar with this concept as this instance may affect the property
regime that covers your marriage with Antonio including your conjugal

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 123
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 66
dwelling in Dasmarinas Village in Makati. Chapter 3 of the Family Code
governs void and voidable marriages. Arts. 35-44 of the Code discuss the
grounds for marriages declared void ab initio.

With regards to the effect of a decree of nullity of marriage on the

properties acquired by you and Antonio, Art. 43, par. (2) of the Code provides
that the absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership, as the case may
be, shall be dissolved and liquidated, but if either spouse contracted said marriage in
bad faith, his or her share of the net profits of the community property or conjugal
partnership property shall be forfeited in favor of the common children or, if there are
none, the children of the guilty spouse by a previous marriage or, in default of children,
the innocent spouse.

Art. 50 of the Code provides that in the proper cases to marriages which are
declared void ab initio or annulled by final judgement under Articles 40 and 45 shall
provide for the liquidation, partition and distibution of the properties of the spouses, the
custody and support of the common children, and the delivery of their presumptive
legitimes, unless such matters had been adjudicated in previous judicial proceedings.
The following paragraph then provides that all creditors of the spouses as well as of
the absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be notified of the proceedings
for liquidation. It was also provided that in the partition, the conjugal dwelling and
the lot on which it is situated, shall be adjudicated in accordance with the provisions of
Articles 102 and 129.

In the comment of Pineda1, the effects of declaration of nullity is further

discussed. Among which is that, dissolution of the absolute community of property
or conjugal partnership, as the case may be; forfeiture of the share of the spouse in bad
faith in the net profits thereof.

H. Declaration of Marriage as Void due to Bigamy

Leila, as provided in Art. 35, par. (4) of the Family Code, a marriage shall
be void from the beginning if the marriage is bigamous or polygamous marriage not
falling under Art. 41. In the comment of Pineda2, it was further discussed that
bigamy is committed when a person contracts a second or subsequent marriage before
the former marriage has been legally dissolved (Art. 349, Revised Penal Code). There is
an exception, however, that Pineda cited as in Art. 41 of the Code and that is
when the subsequent marriage contracted by a party whose spouse had been absent for
at least four consecutive years, and the party present had a well-founded belief that the
absent spouse was already dead.

Based from the facts of your case, Antonio met Mocha and was possesed
by her ethereal beauty so he married her in January 2019, just a year after he left
your dwelling place. He contracted a second marriage without legally

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 123
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 66
dissolving your marriage with him. He can not also avail of the exception
provided by the

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 123
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 66
Code since you were not even absent for at least four consecutive years, and not
even dead. In this regard, this may be a valid option to declare his marriage
with Mocha as void due to bigamy.

In the case of Vitangcol vs. People 1, the Court stated that persons
intending to contract a second marriage must first secure a judicial declaration of
nullity of their first marriage. If they proceed with the second marriage without the
judicial declaration, they are guilty of bigamy regardless of evidence of the nullity of the
first marriage.

I. Declaration of Second Marriage as Valid

Leila, if you are sure that you are ready to love once again, you must be
familiar with the certain provisions of the Family Code to declare your second
marriage valid. Art. 40 of the Code provides that the absolute nullity of a previous
marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final
judgement declaring such previous marriage void.

In the comment of Pineda 2, it was stated that a previously married party

who is contracting a subsequent marriage on the basis that the previous marriage is
void, can only do so if there is already a final judgement declaring such previous
marriage void.

In Domingo vs. Avera3, the Court said that where the absolute nullity of
a previous marriage is sought to be invoked for purposes of contracting a
second marriage, the sole basis acceptable in law for said projected marriage be
free from legal infirmity is a final judgment declaring the previous marriage
void.

J. Legal Separation

Leila, there are some grounds that may be applicable in your case if you
want to pursue legal separation. Title II of the Family Code governs the
provisions on legal separation. We can raise the grounds enumerated in Art. 55
of the Code that a petition for legal separation may be filed when (7) contracting by
the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or
abroad, and (10) abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for
more than one year.

In the book of Pineda, a ruling in Carratala vs. Samson 4 was cited saying
that a subsequent marriage entered into during the lifetime of the first spouse is illegal

1
Vitangcol vs. People, G.R. No. 207406, Janury 13, 2016
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 104
3
Domingo vs. Avera, G.R. No. 104818, September 17, 1993
4
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 162
5
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 165
and void. Further, in the same book, his comment 5 on prima facie presumption of
abandonment, to wit: there are two instances of presumption: (1) when the spouse
has

1
Vitangcol vs. People, G.R. No. 207406, Janury 13, 2016
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 104
3
Domingo vs. Avera, G.R. No. 104818, September 17, 1993
4
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 162
5
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 165
 left the conjugal dwelling for a period of no less than three months, or (2) when within
the same period he failed to give any information as to his or her whereabouts although
these two instances can still be contested by a clear, strong and convincing
evidence. Further, for purposes of legal separation, the law requires an abandonment of
the other spouse for more than one year which must be justified.

In your case, Leila, Antonio left your conjugal dwelling right after your
fight. He stopped talking to you and giving spousal and child support. He
purchased a penthouse unit and started living there. And then, he contracted
marriage with another girl after a year. Clearly, we can file a petition for legal
separation citing the aforementioned grounds.

For us to secure a favorable court decision for legal separation, we must

assure that the grounds cited in Art. 56 are not present. Also, we should file as
soon as possible or within five years from the time of the occurence of the cause
as required in Art. 57 of the Code and that the action shall in no case be tried
before six months shall have elapsed since the filing thereof (Art. 58).
Reconciliation should also be highly improbable (Art. 59). And although we
have presented a stipulation of facts or confession of judgement (Art. 60), we
should prepare other proofs, whether direct or circumstancial as cited in the
case of Ocampo vs. Florenciano 1. In this regard, we must also be careful as the
comment of Pineda2 cited a ruling in Lemberger vs. Lemberger saying that the
testimony of one spouse in corroboration with that of the other for the purpose of
proving the cause for legal separation will not be considered.

K. Custody of a Minor

Leila, upon the finality of the decree of legal separation of your marriage
with Antonio, you can have custody of Antonio Jr., who is 9 years old as of
today. This is a valid option. As provided by Art. 63 of the Family Code, the
decree of legal separation shall award the custody of the minor children to the innocent
spouse, subject to the provisions of Article 213 of this Code. In the comment of
Pineda, minor children above seven years of age may choose the parent they wish to
live with, whether the guilty or innocent; their choice shall be respected unless the
parent so chosen is unfit.

Title IX of the Code governs parental authority. Art. 213, par. 1 of the
same Code provides that in case of separation of the parents, parental authority shall
be exercised by the parent designated by the court. The court shall take into account all
relevant considerations, especially the choice of the child over seven years of age, unless
the parent chosen is unfit. Further, in the comment of Pineda 3, he discussed the
concept of relevant consideration or anything which has something to do in
assuring the welfare of the child. There are several foreign jurisprudence that

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 175
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 175
3
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 509-511
illustrated these relevant considerations such as previous care and devotion,
religious

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 175
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 175
3
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 509-511
considerations, home environment, time availability for care of child and financial
considerations.

In the case of Espiritu vs. CA1, the Court cited Art. 363 of the Civil Code
which states that in all questions on the care, custody, education and property of the
children, the latter's welfare shall be paramount. No mother shall be separated from her
child under seven years of age, unless the court finds compelling reasons for such
measure. Although Antonio Jr. is 9 years old, the aforementioned instances is
enough support for us to win the case considering that he has lived under your
care for most part of his life and that you are not also unfit to take care of him.
However, we still need to consider and talk to Antonio Jr. for his side. In the
same case, the court ruled that discretion is given to the court to decide who can best
assure the welfare of the child, and award the custody on the basis of that consideration .
Let us hope for the best.

L. Valid Termination of Spousal Support

Leila, Title VIII of the Family Code discusses support. In your case, Art.
195 of the same Code would apply in claiming spousal support from Antonio.
In the comment of Pineda2, that the spouses are under the obligations to support
each other to the whole extent set forth in Article 194. It further cited the case of
Yangco vs. Rohde where the obligation of the spouses to support one another arises
from the fact of marriage and is imposed by law in obligating them to “render mutual
help and support” (Art. 68). It is therefore essential that a valid marriage should exist
for support to have legal basis.

In your case, Leila, we can avail of the support should we declare that
your marriage with Antonio existed as a valid marriage. Further, Pineda once
again cited the case of Dela Cruz vs. Santillana that the suport for the wife is a
preferred one, meaning, it enjoys priority. The husband therefore cannot in action for
support set up the defense that he had other persons to support. In this manner, for as
long as there is still a need for support, we can validly claim for such to him
even if he has a second family to provide for.

However, Leila you have to be aware that spousal support may be

validly terminated. Art. 198 of the Code provides that during the proceedings for
legal separation or for annulment of marriage, and for declaration of nullity of
marriage, the spouses and their children shall be supported from the properties of the
absolute community or the conjugal partnership. After the final judgement granting
the petition, the obligation of mutual support between the spouses ceases. However, in
case of legal separation, the court may order that the guilty spouse shall give support to
the innocent one, specifying the terms of such order. Pineda further discussed that
the obligation of mutual support between the spouses as required by Art. 68 shall cease.
However, in case

1
Espiritu vs. CA, G.R. No. 115640, March 15, 1995
2
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 473
of legal separation, the court may order the guilty spouse to give support. This is not
however a matter of right but is discretionary on the part of the court taking into
consideration the interest of justice.

Antonio cannot simply refuse to give spousal support on you, Leila.

However, either upon annulment or declaration of nullity of your marriage
with him, the mutual support ceases. It is only by the determination of the court
to compel Antonio to provide you support. This support should be of need in
your daily living and that properties cannot also support the said needs.
BIBILIOGRAPHY (FOR PART ONE)

Leonen, J. (2016). Vitangcol vs. People of the Philippines. The LawPhil

Project. Retrieved from:
https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2016/jan2016/gr_207406_2016.html

Melo, J. (1995). Espiritu vs. CA. The LawPhil Project. Retrieved from:
https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/mar1995/gr_115640_1995.html

Official Gazette of the Philippines (N.D.). Executive Order No. 209, s.

1987. Official Gazette. Retrieved from:
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-
1987/

Pineda, E. (2011). The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated. Central

Book Supply, Inc.

Romero, J. (1993). Domingo vs. Avera. ChanRobles Virtual Law Library.

Retrieved from:
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1993septemberdecisions.php?id=709

Velasco Jr., J. (2013). Syed Azhar Abbas v. Gloria Goo Abbas.

ChanRobles Virtual Law Library. Retrieved from:
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2013januarydecisions.php?id=77

Ynares-Santiago, J. (2006). Ma. Armida Perez-Ferraris vs. Brix Ferraris.

The LawPhil Project. Retrieved from:
https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/jul2006/gr_162368_2006.html
II. 4 Points

There are a lot of considerations to be taken into account should the

Philippines allow same-sex marriage. It has been a discussion over the decades.
And in recent years, the issue has been more active in the conversations not
only in the Congress but more imminently in the internet world.

In an online article from Business Insider in 2019, it was mentioned that 28

countries around the world legalizes same-sex marriage. Meanwhile, in the
Asia-Pacific region where the Philippines belong, there are only three nations
enumerated in the article of Pew Research Center that have legalized same-sex
unions: New Zealand, Australia and Taiwan. It is important to note how the
culture, values and tradition in these areas run to be able to understand the
rationale behind such declaration.

Legalizing same-sex marriage in the country is not only a question of law

but also a question of fitness of such act in the context of Filipino norms. Center
for Global Education cites that the Philippines proudly boasts to be the only Christian
nation in Asia. Looking back in the history of the Catholic faith, Human Rights
Campaign mentions the 1986 Letter which states that, “Although the particular
inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong
tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself
must be seen as an objective disorder.” To be fair, Pope Francis in later years
reached out to the members of LGBT community and showed support to their
gender identity. However, with regards to the issue at hand it has been noted
by Archbishop Fisher that Pope Francis has been unequivocal on this issue, with the
Pope stating that any change to the legal definition of marriage to include same-sex
couples would be “a step backwards for humanity” and would gravely harm all in
society.

Human Rights Watch published an article in 2018 reporting that the

Philippine Supreme Court heard a long-awaited argument that could open the door
to same-sex marriage in the overwhelmingly Catholic country. Further, the article
discusses the case, which was filed by a gay lawyer named Jesus Falcis in 2015, urges
the court to declare the marriage restriction in the country’s Family Code – which
limits marriage to one man and one woman – unconstitutional. It also asks the court to
recognize marriage equality in the Philippines. Falcis argues that the marriage
restrictions violate his rights to due process, equal protection, and forming a family
under the Philippine Constitution.
 Title I, Article 1 of the Family Code provides that marriage is a special
contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance
with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life.

In the comment of Pineda1, it cited a ruling in Silverio vs. Republic

stating that the sex of a person is determined at birth, visually done by the birth
attendant by examining the genitals of the infant. And considering that there is no law
legally recognizing sex reassignment, the determination of a person’s sex made at the
time of his or her birth, if not attended by error, is immutable. To continue, it was also
mentioned that in the absence of any law, a homosexual who had his sex reassigned by
medical operation, will still meet problems if he marries a male partner. Some laws are
needed to give some solution to the problem.

The legislation of same-sex marriage would need to make amends with

the current jurisprudence, moreso to the Family Code.

This year, the Supreme Court just ruled against same-sex marriage
petition with finality. This case would be a subject of controversy not only in
today’s time but in the whole of judicial history—Jesus Nicardo M. Falcis III vs.
The Civil Registrar-General.

In the report of ABS-CBN News, the Supreme Court junked the petition
in September last year, citing lack of legal standing, failure to raise an actual
justiciable issue and violation of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts. Assoc. Justice
Marvic Leonen is the ponente of the decision where it holds that the Court
recognized the history of discrimination and marginalization faced by the lesbian, gay,
bisexual transgender, queer, intersex, and other gender and sexual minorities
(LGBTQI+) and their struggle for equality but said official recognition of their
partnerships should be addressed to Congress.

Thereby, House Bill 3179 introduced by Hon. Lagman explains that in

the Philippines wherein the traditional culture is still very much embedded in the social
fabric and the church has a certain degree of influence to the state affairs, gay marriage
has no place in the government agenda. But sooner or later, time will come when the
congress must face and debate on the issue of same sex marriage. The aforementioned
bill is not about same sex marriage but governs only property rights and
obligations of two persons of the same sex that opted to cohabitate with each other.

1
See: The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated (Pineda, E.), p. 5
 In 2019, Senate President Vicente Sotto III expressed his sentiments on
the controversial Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression
(SOGIE) Equality bill. In a text message reported in ABS-CBN News, he said
"Anti-discrimination on persons pwede. Pero focused on gays, which the
SOGIE bill is, and religious and academic freedom impeded plus smuggling of
same sex marriage? No chance!" This bill was passed in the House of
Representatives in 2017 and until the present time its Senate version has not yet
been released.

Evidently, the country is not yet ready for same-sex marriage. Both the
judiciary and the legislative does not approve for its existence. The traditional
standpoint of the majority of the Filipinos would remain, for now.

Besides, not because some countries do it, it is rightful for the Philippines
to recopy it. It is a sense of identity.
BIBILIOGRAPHY (FOR PART TWO)

ABS-CBN News. (2019). Sotto: SOGIE Bill ‘No Chance’ Passing in Senate.
ABS-CBN News. Retrieved from: https://news.abs-
cbn.com/news/08/22/19/sotto-sogie-bill-no-chance-passing-in-senate

ABS-CBN News. (2020). SC Junks Same-Sex Marriage Petition with

Finality. ABS-CBN News. Retrieved from: https://news.abs-
cbn.com/news/01/06/20/sc-junks-same-sex-marriage-petition-with-finality

Archdiocese of Hobart. (N.D.). Does Pope Francis Support Same-Sex

Marriage? No, According to Archbishop Fisher. Archdiocese of Hobart.
Retrieved from: https://hobart.catholic.org.au/media/news/does-pope-
francis-support-same-sex-marriage-no-according-archbishop-fisher

Hunt, R. (N.D.). The Pope Says God Made Gay People Just As We
Should Be—Here’s Why His Comments Matter. The Guardian. Retrieved from:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2018/may/21/the-pope-
says-god-made-gay-people-just-as-we-should-be-heres-why-his-comments-
matter

Masci, D. & Desilver, D. (2019). A Global Snapshot of Same-Sex

Marriage. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/29/global-snapshot-same-
sex-marriage/

Miller, J. (N.D.). Religion in the Philippines. Asia Society. Retrieved

from: https://asiasociety.org/education/religion-philippines

Official Gazette of the Philippines (N.D.). Executive Order No. 209, s.

1987. Official Gazette. Retrieved from:
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-
1987/

Perper, R. (2019). The 28 Countries Around the World where Same-Sex

Marriage is Legal. Busines Insider. Retrieved from:
https://www.businessinsider.com/where-is-same-sex-marriage-legal-world-
2017-11

Pineda, E. (2011). The Family Code of the Philippines Annotated. Central

Book Supply, Inc.
 Thoreson, R. (2018). Philippine Supreme Court Considers Same-Sex
Marriage. Human Rights Watch. Retrieved from:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/19/philippine-supreme-court-
considers-same-sex-marriage