ANNULMENT AND

DIVORCE :
MARRIAGE ON TRIAL
 BIBLICAL DEFINITION:
• MARRIAGE – IS DESCRIBED AS A HOLY COVENANT BEFORE GOD.

CHURCH DEFINITION:
• MARRIAGE - THE MATRIMONIAL COVENANT, BY WHICH A MAN AND A
WOMAN ESTABLISH BETWEEN THEMSELVES A PARTNERSHIP OF THE
WHOLE OF LIFE, IS BY ITS NATURE ORDERED TOWARD THE GOOD OF THE
SPOUSES AND THE PROCREATION AND EDUCATION OF OFFSPRING; THIS
COVENANT BETWEEN BAPTIZED PERSONS HAS BEEN RAISED BY CHRIST
THE LORD TO THE DIGNITY OF A SACRAMENT.

 DEFINED BY THE CONSTITUTION:

• 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.
YEARLY NULLITY AND ANNULMENT CASE FROM 2001-2014
 REASONS FOR SEPARATION : OPTIONS: (E. O. 209, s 1987)
• ABUSE (PHYSICAL OR VERVAL) • LEGAL SEPARATION
• ADDICTION • ANNULMENT
• ALCOHOLISM • PhP 50,000.00 – PhP 200,000.00
• RAPE • AT LEAST 2 YRS. LEGAL
• IMMORALITY (INCEST) PROCESS
• INFIDELITY
• VIOLENCE
• PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY- AS A GROUND TO NULLIFY A MARRIAGE,
SHOULD REFER TO NO LESS THAN A MENTAL — NOT MERELY PHYSICAL —
INCAPACITY THAT CAUSES A PARTY TO BE TRULY INCOGNITIVE OF THE BASIC
MARITAL COVENANTS THAT IS SIMULTANEOUSLY MUST BE ASSUMED AND
DISCHARGED BY THE PARTIES TO THE MARRIAGE.
SUGGESTION: IS TO HAVE AN INCLUSION OF DIVORCE IN E. O. 209, s 1987

IS THE IDEA OF HAVING A DIVORCE LAW NEW IN THE

PHILIPPINES?

HISTORY OF DIVORCE IN THE PHILIPPINES:

• DURING THE AMERICAN PERIOD DIVORCE IS LEGALIZED UNDER

ACT NO. 2710 ENACTED BY THE PHILIPPINE LEGISLATURE.
• DURING THE JAPANESE OCCUPATION UNTIL 1950 THE DIVORCE LAW
WAS UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 141.
• DURING THE MARTIAL LAW YEARS FORMER PRESIDENT FERDINAND
E. MARCOS ISSUED PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 1083, THE LAW PROVIDED
FOR THE CREATION OF SHARIAH COURTS IN THE PHILIPPINES AND
ALLOWED FOR DIVORCE AMONG MUSLIMS, OR WHEN THE
HUSBAND IS MUSLIM, AND THE MARRIAGE WAS CELEBRATED
UNDER MUSLIM RITES. THIS LAW IS THE ONLY EFFECTIVE DIVORCE
LAW IN THE PHILIPPINES AND REMAINS IN FULL FORCE AND
EFFECT.
THE ARGUMENTS, REBUTTAL AND SUGGESTIONS:

• IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

• ARTICLE III THE BILL OF RIGHTS, SECTION 1 SPEAKS OF THE EQUALITY

UNDER THE PROTECTION OF THE LAW. SO I GUESS IT IS SAFE TO SAY THAT
LAWMAKERS SHOULDN’T LIMIT THE BENEFIT OF DIVORCE AMONG MUSLIMS
AND NOT ON CATHOLICS AND OTHER NON-CATHOLICS. BEING A SECULAR
NATION OUR LAW SHOULD NOT BE INFLUENCED BY ANY BELIEF, CUSTOMS,
CULTURE AND RELIGION.  IT SHOULDN’T BE SELECTIVE IN TERMS OF
IMPLEMENTATION TO GUARANTEE EQUALITY OF THE LAW AS STATED IN OUR
CONSTITUTION.

• THAT IT IS OFFENSIVE TO FILIPINO CULTURE AND IT IS IMMORAL

• THE COUNTRY OF MALTA WHOSE POPULATION IS 90% CATHOLIC AND SPAIN

WHO BROUGHT CHRISTIANITY IN THE PHILIPPINES HAVE A DIVORCE LAW.
THEY DON’T FIND DIVORCE TO BE OFFENSIVE, THEY DON’T EVEN CONSIDER
THEMSELVES AS BEING IMMORAL.
 THE ARGUMENTS, REBUTTAL AND SUGGESTIONS:

• THAT IT WILL DESTROY THE FILIPINO FAMILY

• THE CATHOLIC CHURCH NEED NOT TO WORRY, BECAUSE THE FILIPINO FAMILY HAS SURVIVED
THROUGH THE YEARS AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO SURVIVE EVEN WITH A DIVORCE LAW.

• THAT IT WILL BE ABUSED BY SPOUSES WHO FIND IT EASIER TO GIVE UP ON THEIR MARRIAGE
RATHER THAN TRY TO RECONCILE THEIR DIFFERENCES

• I WILL SUGGEST A COOLING OFF PERIOD OF NOT ONLY SIX MONTHS BUT UP TO A YEAR BEFORE THE
BEGINNING OF A LEGAL PROCEEDING. THIS WILL SOMEHOW GIVE COUPLES MORE TIME TO THINK
AND RECONSIDER THEIR MARRIAGE. A CONDITION OF ONLY COUPLES MARRIED FOR MORE THAN
TEN YEARS ARE ENTITLED TO FILE A DIVORCE WILL GUARANTEE THAT THE LAW ITSELF WILL NOT
BE ABUSED AND WILL RETAIN ITS MAIN PURPOSE.

• THAT IT WILL LEAD TO CUSTODY BATTLES AND THAT IT WILL BE DETRIMENTAL FOR THE CHILDREN.

• AN INCLUSION OF DIVORCE IN OUR FAMILY CODE WILL SAVE COUNTLESS VICTIMS OF ABUSE FROM
SPOUSES WHO ARE VIOLENT, INDOLENT, ALCOHOLIC, DRUG ADDICTS OR SPOUSES WHO ABANDONED
THEIR FAMILY. A DIVORCE LAW GUARANTEES SAFETY, CLOSURE AND HAPPINESS AMONG VICTIMS OF
FAMILY DRIFTING APART DUE TO VIOLENCE, ABUSE AND DIFFERENCES.
CONCLUSION:

SO, LET’S GIVE FILIPINO A FULFILLING LIFE. LET’S ALLOW DIVORCE, NOT
RESERVE IT FOR THE RICH UNDER THE FARCICAL EXCUSE OF
ANNULMENT. THE POOR DESERVE A HAPPY LIFE, TOO. WE ARE NOT
TRYING TO DESTROY FAMILIES, WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE THE BEST
OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE HAPPY FAMILIES. WE HAVE TO
REMEMBER THAT A LAW PROVIDES US WITH CHOICES WHICH WE THINK
ARE BEST FOR US.