Page 1 of 3
THE LEGALIZATION OF DIVORCE IN THE PHILIPPINES
______________________________________________
I don't see divorce as a failure. I see it as the end to a story.
In a story, everything has an end and a beginning.
---Olga Kurylenko
_______________________________________
Introduction
By definition 1divorce is a legislatively created, judicially administered process
that legally terminates a marriage no longer considered viable by one or both of the
spouses. Divorce is also known as dissolution of marriage. Traditionally, divorce was
fault based. In other words, there was an "innocent or injured" party and a party that had
done "wrong" with the "innocent" party being able to obtain relief or a divorce. This
system was adversarial in nature. Even if both parties wanted a divorce, one party had to
allege wrongdoing by the other. In the 1970's this system was reformed and a "no fault"
system was put in place.
Significantly, statistics says that as of 2003, it was recorded that 4 out of 25
marriages in the Philippines end up in Legal Separation. Other couples decide not to
legalize their separation simply because they cannot afford it. This is one of the many
reasons why many politicians are pro divorce. Divorce is the legal dissolution of a
marriage by court or other competent bodies (Oxford, nd.). It is way cheaper than
annulment and legal separation. Philippines is the only country in the world that does not
allow divorce because the Church is against it.
All countries including predominantly Catholic countries in the world like Spain,
Poland, and Mexico permit divorce. Maybe the Church there has opposed it, but the state
has recognized the right of couples to choose the life they want (Wallace, 2013). The
divorce bill has been languished in the Philippine Congress for 13 years. Although the
Church is against Divorce, it should still be legalized in the Philippines because it is
beneficial to battered wives, couples with unsuccessful marriages, and the children of
separated couples.
Hence, this paper on legal research endeavours to argue the premises why divorce
should be legalized in the country.
1
Debate.Org, September 20, 2014
Page 2 of 3
Propositions to the legalization of divorce
Divorce is not yet legalized in the Philippines. However, legal separations and
annulments are allowed here in our country. In legal separation, the spouses are allowed
to live separately but remain married to each other. Legal separation may be granted
when there is marital betrayal, homosexuality, repeated physical violence, attempt on the
life of the other spouse, and abandonment without reasonable cause for more than one
year. In annulments, the marriage can be voided but the couples are not allowed to re-
marry.
Annulments may be granted when either of the couples can prove that the
marriage was invalid from the start according to a certain set of grounds such as
impotence, homosexuality, mistaken identity, or psychological incapacity. Most of the
grounds are difficult to validate and require a lot of money to prove before the court. The
proposed divorce law does not require too much money and it allows couples to re-marry,
with added protection, such as child support, alimony and child custody.
Ursua once stated that lack of divorce law in our country further complicates the
marital and family problems of many Filipinos. Therefore, the Congress has to pass a
divorce law and contemplates further to the better tomorrow it will give to families in
conflict and has continuously succumbed to marital problems and nuances.
To this end, the following arguments are advanced for the legalization of divorce:
a. Divorce is beneficial to battered wives because in the Philippines,
infidelity and physical abuse are not grounds for annulment.
According to the Philippine Commission on Women, “physical
injuries and/or wife battering remains to be the most prevalent case
across the twelve-year period, from 1997–2009, accounting nearly
half (45.5 percent) of all reported violence against women (VAW)
cases nationwide” (p. 147). For instance, the marriage worked for 8
years, but later the husband becomes violent and unfaithful to his wife.
These may not be used for annulment under Article 36, unless it can
be proved that these are manifestations of psychological inability that
preceded the marriage. The divorce law will provide a solution that
Article 36 cannot support. “A divorce law will provide a
straightforward remedy to a marital failure for it does not concern
itself with validity or invalidity of a marriage and it terminates a
Page 3 of 3
marriage based on a ground that occurred during the marriage”
(Ursua, 2013).
b. Moreover, divorce law does not destroy a family. In fact, no law could
actually destroy a family. It is only the members of the family who can
do that. Legalizing divorce law is accepting that some marriages work
and some do not. “In cases where a union is more harmful than
beneficial, a divorce can be a benevolent and less hurtful way of
severing ties with your partner.” (Santos, 2011). Some marriages and
families have survived to this day and it will still survive after the
divorce law has been passed. The Church should not interfere in the
approval of this law because we are a secular state. Thus, no religious
group could dictate any law or policy for the whole country. The law
should only give people a choice, to be exercised according to their
own personal beliefs. (Wallace, 2013). Besides, there are also
grounds to be considered when filing a divorce. A husband or wife
cannot file a divorce unless he or she has a valid reason.
c. The divorce bill is for couples that cannot bear to live with each other
for some valid reasons. If the couple truly loves each other, they will
not be affected with the legalization of divorce. Therefore, the
legalization of the divorce bill will not destroy the relationship of
happy and contented families.
Conclusion
Hence, divorce law does not mean to eradicate morality in one’s moral values nor
does it aim to diminish the value system of the Filipino families. It is however an answer
to families who are in constant conflict and does not agree anymore or to those couples
who have fallen out of love.
If we mean to preserve the relationship of one’s family, a divorce law does not
hinder such for a divorce law in its practical sense aims to preserve the remaining respect
left for each spouses. For a spouse who is in constant quarrel or has fallen out of love
must not be forced to lived with the same for it will only breed anger, frustration, and
hate which surely will affect the psychological and emotional development of the
common children of both parties concerned. To this end, it is indeed high time that a
divorce law be given a quite a consideration.
