1.

A solemnizing officer is a person who has the authority to solemnize

marriages in articulo morits or at the point of death. In the absence of
judges, consul, priest or minister; a solemnizing officer could be a ship
captain or a pilot of the airplane in which the persons that are getting
married are riding. The said solemnizing officers are allowed to hold the
wedding as long as it is at the point of death or articulo mortis. As also
stated in Executive Order no. 209 in the Family Code of the Philippines, the
marriages in articulo mortis can also be held during flights or stopovers at
ports of call.

2. As stated in Article 2 of the Executive Order No. 209: The Family Code of
the Philippines, the essential requisites of marriage are

a. Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and a

female; and
b. Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.

In Article 3 of the same executive order, the formal requisites of marriage

are as follows:

a. Authority of the solemnizing officer;

b. A valid marriage license except in the cases provided for in Chapter 2 of
this Title; and
c. 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.

3. Since no marriage license was procured, the marriage of Adam and Eve is
null and void. In other words, their marriage was never valid in the first
place. Other consequences would be their children will become illegitimate
and their marriage’s community property will be subject to dissolution and
distribution between the spouses.

There are cases wherein a marriage can be exempted from a license

requirement. These are as follows:
  Marriage license shall not be required in marriages in articulo mortis
or at the point of death.
 Marriage license shall not be required for parties cohabiting for at
least 5 years and without legal impediment to marry each other.
 Marriage license shall not be required for marriages among Muslims
or members of ethnic cultural communities provided they are
solemnized in accordance with their customs, rites or practices.

Unfortunately for Adam and Eve, none of the aforementioned cases apply
to them, thus, their marriage is invalid.

4. If the Solemnizing Officer’s license is expired, this would make Cong and
Ivy’s marriage null and void since the Solemnizing Officer does not have the
authority to do so in the absence of a valid license. As mandated by law,
Solemnizing Officers are required to renew their license at the Certificate of
Registration of Authority to Solemnize Marriage (CRASM) for them to
officiate a wedding.

However, marriages that are solemnized by any person not legally

authorized to perform marriages can still be valid as long as both parties
were, in good faith, led to believe that the solemnizing officer had the legal
authority to do so as stated in Article 35 (2) of the Family Code.

5. a. No. The marriage will not prosper. As stated in Article 32 of the Family
Code of the Philippines, “A military commander of a unit, who is a
commissioned officer, shall likewise have authority to solemnize marriages
in articulo mortis between persons within the zone of military operation,
whether members of the armed forces or civilians.” So, if the commanding
officer is present, then it is he who should be performing the marriage of
both Julia and the dying Gerald instead of the military doctor.

b. Marriage in articulo mortis is defined as marriage wherein one of the

parties is at the point of death. Those who are authorized to officiate the
said marriage are ship captains, airplane pilots, or a unit military
commander who is a commissioned officer in a military operation zone.
T III

a. I think it is high time that divorced be legalized here in the Philippines

for the reason that some marriages are already irreparably broken.
As a young woman, I do feel for my fellow women who have been
assaulted whether physically, sexually, verbally, and emotionally by
their abusive husbands. To them, their toxic marriage is a trap and
the absence of a divorce law makes it impossible for them to get out
of it. Also, the absence of a divorce law hampers their right to choose
their future partners and live a happy and blissful life that they
deserve. But here’s the question, is our country ready? I would say
no. The Philippines is one of two countries that disallows divorce (the
other being Vatican City) and for a largely conservative country such
as ours, a divorce law would face stiff opposition from the church.
Even our very own President Rodrigo Duterte (who ironically is a
product of a failed marriage) is very much against divorce, so much
so that even if the bill legalizing divorce passes in the Senate, Duterte
is still expected to veto it. So, the way I see it, divorce should be
legalized to end marriages that are no longer tenable. However, it
might not apply to a country such as ours wherein the influence of
the church is even more powerful than the Government itself.

b. As what I have answered in question a, I do feel that this divorce bill

should be enacted into law. As described by its author Rep, Edcel
Lagman, the bill will pave the way for countless wives, who are
battered and deserted, to regain their humanity, self-respect and
freedom from irredeemably failed marriages. I do feel strongly about
this as I would not want to be stuck in a dysfunctional union myself.
Also, this bill is not just an ordinary bill wherein spouses will find an
avenue to get out of their toxic marriage but also will also come
along with provisions such as on court-assisted petitioners;
community-based pre-nuptial and post-matrimonial programs; and
community-based women’s desks to provide assistance and support
to victims of violence and abuse. It also allows the divorced spouses
to remarry. I do feel that this bill is tailor made for those who are
victims of domestic abuse and with its provisions, it should be
enacted into law.