Sepublic of the Philippines HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE Quezon city FIFTEENTH CONGRESS First Regular Session vouse duis 1799 Tntvoduced by GABRIELA Wamen's Party Representatives LUZVIMINDA C. LAGAN and EMERENCIANA A. DE JESUS EXPLANATORY NOTE Underpinning this proposal isa commitment to the palicy of the State to protect anc! strengthen marriage and the family as basic social institutions, to value the dignity of every human person, to guarantee full respect for human rights, and to ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men. In the Filipina culture, marriage is regarded as a sacred union, and the family founded on marriage is considered as a fount of love, protection and care. Philippine society generally rowns upon and discourages marital break-ups and so provides cultural and legal safeguards 10 preserve marital relations. Cultural prescriptions and religious norms keep many couples taxether despite the breakdown af the marriage. But the cultural prescriptions for wemen men differ, Women are traditionally regarded as primanily responsible for making the nuarriage work and are expected to sacrifice everything to preserve the marriage and the solidarity of the family. While absolute fidelity is demanded of wives, men are granted soxual license to have atfaits outside marriage. Yet when the marriage fails, the woman is blamed for its failure Reality alls us that theew are many failed, unhappy marriages across all Filpino classe Many couples especially from the marginalized sectors, who have no access to the cout uinwply end up separating without the benefit of fegal pracesses. The sheer number of petitions that have been fled since 1988 for the declaration of the nullity af the mariage under Artie 36 of the Family Code (commonly known as “anoulment") shows that there are just (oo many couples who are desperate to get out of failed mariage. Even when couples start out well in their marriage, political, economic and scctl realities take their toll an their relationship. Some are nat prepared so handle the intricacies of the onartied life. For a large number ef women, the inequalities and violence in mariage negate ts ideals as the embodiment of love, care and safety and erode the bases upow wich mariage 6 founded. The marital relations facilitate the commission of violence and perpetuate slwwir oppression. Official figures in 2009 showed that nineteen woinen were victims of martal violence everyday. Among the different forms of violence and abuse against women committed in 2009, wife battery ranked highest at 6,783 or 72% according to the Philippine National Police {PNP}. The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) likewise recorded marital violence as highest among different farms of violence against wornen at 1,933. Previous reports of the PNP about thiee of ten perpetrators of violence against women were husbands of the victims, Huswands accounted for 28 per cent of the violence ayainstGiven these realitias, couples must have the option ta av: of remedies that will pave tho way for the attainment of their full human development and selffulfillment and the protuction of their human rights. Existing laws are nat enough to guarantee and protect these rughts, To quote the Women's Legal Bureau, Inc., a legal resource NGO for women “the present jaws relating to separation of couples ond termination of marriage are inadequate (0 respond ta the myriad causes of failed marriages. Particularly, the remedies of decfaration of nullity and annulment do not cover the prablems that occur during the existence of marriage. Legal separation, 0” the other bond, while covering problems during marriage, does not put an end to marriage.” “Though bath divorce and a dectaration of aulity of a marriage atfow the spouses to remarry, the twe remedies differ i concept and basis. A declaration of ullity presupposes that the mariage is vaid from the beginning and the court declares its om-existence... Beyond the) grounds specified fin the law), declaration of nublity is nat possibie.” “Wn annulment, the marriage of the porties is declored defective from the heginning, albeit it is considered valid until annulled. The defect cam be used 10 nullify the marriage within a specified period but the same may be ignored and the marriage becomes perfectly valid after the lagse of that period, or the defect may be cured through some act. The defect relates to the time of the celebration of the marriage and has nothing te do with cireunsstances occurring after the morriage is celebrated. In annulment, the marriage is legally concelfed, and the ‘man and woman are restored fo their single status.” ‘Since August 3, 1988, couples have been given @ way out of failed marriages through Article 36 of the Family Cade... The cemedy provided und Antcle 36 's dectarotion of nullity of the marriage. The article voids a marriage wuhere one party is “psychologically mcapacttated” to comply with the essentials Of marital ebfigations. Consistent with the concept of void morriages (where the remedy is declaration of aullty), the Jaw requires that the incapacity must hove sted at the time of the celebration of the morioge...In practice, Articse 36 a> become a form of divorce, as valid marriages are declared void every day inthe ‘use of "psychological incapacity.” The innumerable Article 36 cases brought to tial courts is an indication of the efasticity of Article 36 to accommodate the needs of mony couples desiring to terminate ineir marriages. itis proof that livorce is needed in the Phlippiaes. Antcie 36 provides a remedy only for spouses who can prove “psychological incapacity”. The concept certainly cannot accommodate all cases where divorce would be necessary. What me need i divorce fow that defines clearty and unequivocally the grounds and terms for terminating @ marrioge. That law wil put an end to the creative efforts played dlaly in courtrooms across the country to accommodate a wide range of cases in order to prove “psychological incapacity.” (Women's Legal Bureau, Inc., The Relevance of Divorce n the Philippines, 1998) Thus, this bill seeks to intreduce divorce as another option for couples in failed anc irceparable marriages.hi ill was crafted in consultation with women lawyers and inspired by the studies ane puts of variaus women's groups and the experiences of spouses gathered ly GABRICLA fu its various chapters nationwide: The bill seeks to introduce divorce An Philippine law with a strang sense af confidence thot it will be used responsibly by Filipino couples. This confidence stems from the experience Filipino families that show that separation is usually the last resart af many Filipina couples hase evarriage has failed, Cases of battered women alsa support this, Battered women ably seek separation only after many years of trying to make the marriage work n only becomes imperative for thei when they realize that if is necessary for thet unt thew children’s survival, Bivoree could actually provide protection to battered women Jie how chiiren trom further violence and abuse, With the predominance of the Catholic faith fe Philippines, the fear that diverse will erade personal values on marriage appes unfounded. The experience of Italy, where the Vatican is located, and Spain, two predominantly Catholic countries whieh practice divaree, supports this. Those countries have a low rate at divorce, Haly registers a 76 sate while Spain registers 15%. The figures reflect the strong influence of religious beliefs and culture on individuals in deciding to terminate marctal stations Historically, divorce had been part of our legal system. in the beginning of the 10" cnuey, efore the Spanish colonial rule, absolute divorce was widely practiced amon ancestral tribes such as the Tagbanwas of Palawan, the Gadangs of Nueva Vizeaya, the Sagadans and Igorots of the Cordilleras, and the Manobos, B'laans and Moslems of the Visayas 4nd Mindanag islands. Divorce was also available during the American period, staring from LOL? (under Act No, 2710 enacted by the Philippine Legislature), and daring the Japanese occupation (under Executive Order No, 141) and after, until 1950, le was enly on August 30 1950, when the New Civil Code took effect, that divorce was disallowed under Philippe law nly lex Separation was avaslable. The same rule was adapted by the Family Code of 198%, ‘shich replaced the provisions of the New Civil Code on marriage and the family, althovg the Family Code introduced the concept of "psychological incapacity” as a basis for declaeing the marriage woidl In recognition af the history of divorce in the Philippines, the framers of the 1987 Philippine Constitution left the wisdom of legalizing divorce to the Congress. Thus, the 1987 Constitution does not prohibit the legalization of divorce. {his bill respectful of and sensitive to differing religious belies in the Philippines 1 recognizes that the plurality of religious beliefs and cultural sensibilities in the Philippine: dlemand that different remedies for failed marriages should be made available. For this reason the bill retains the existing remedies of legal separation, declaration of nullity of the marriage snd anoulmient and only adds divorce as one more remedy. Couples may choose fram these remedies depending on their situation, religious beliefs, cultural sensibities, and emotional state, While divorce under this proposed measure severs the bonds of mardi divorce a3 a remedy need not be for the purpose of re-marriage; it may be resorted to by indwiduals to achieve peace of mind and facilitate their pursuit of full human develapme This bil ao se2ks to make Philippine lave consistent in the way ik treats raligious beliefs with fespoct to termination of marriage. Philippine law through the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No, 1083 [1977]} allows divorce among Filipine Muslin», ielerence to the Islarme faith whieh recognizes divorce. Non-Muslim Filipinos should have the same option under Philippine law, in accordancé with their religious betiefs