Dear Lana,

Article 334 of Revised Penal Code of the Philippines defines concubinage

and explicitly provides for the penalties to be imposed upon erring
individuals:

“Art.334. Concubinage – Any husband who shall keep a mistress in the

conjugal dwelling, or shall have sexual intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with her
in any other place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods.

The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.”

It can be gleaned from the foregoing provision that, in order to obtain a

judgment of conviction, it is necessary for you to establish by proof
beyond reasonable doubt that your husband is either keeping a mistress in
your conjugal dwelling; or having sexual intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances, with another woman; or cohabiting with another woman in
any other place.

The messages you saw in your husband’s mobile phone only suggest that
said woman was flirting with him, thus we believe that this will not suffice
to pursue a case in court for concubinage.

We deem it best to advise you to only pursue the case if you have clear and
convincing evidence. In addition, a complaint for concubinage can only be
prosecuted if both the erring husband and his concubine are impleaded.
This holds true even if the penalties imposed against them, as stated under
the law, are different. Pursuant to Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code:
“Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction,
rape and acts of lasciviousness. – The crimes of adultery and concubinage
shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended
spouse.

The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including

both the guilty parties, if they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall
have consented or pardoned the offenders.