Republic of the PhilippinesHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESQuezon CityELEVENTH CONGRESSFirst Regular SessionHOUSE BILL NO. 6993 By Representative Manuel C.

Ortega AN ACTLEGALIZING DIVORCE, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE TITLE II ANDARTICLES 55 TO 67 THEREUNDER OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 209,AS AMENDED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 227, OTHERWISE KNOWNAS THE FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled: SECTION. 1. Title II of Executive Order No. 209, as amended by Executive Order No. 227, otherwise known as the FamilyCode of the Philippines, is hereby amended to read as follows:"TITLE II [LEGAL SEPARATION] DIVORCE." SEC. 2. Articles 55 to 67 of the same Code are hereby amended to read as follows:"Art. 55. A petition for [legal separation] DIVORCE may be filed on any of the following grounds: (1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner; (2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation; (3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement; (4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned; (5) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;(6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent; (7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad; (8) Sexual infidelity or perversion; (9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner; or (10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year. For purposes of this Article, the term "child" shall include a child by nature or adoption.

IN ADDITION, A PETITION FOR DIVORCE MAY BE FILED UPON A SHOWING THAT THERE IS AN IRREMEDIABLE BREAKDOWN OF THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP DUE TO IRRECONCILABLE MARITALDIFFERENCES. SAID PETITION MUST SPECIFICALLY ALLEGE THE GROUNDS WHICH DESTROY THE LEGITIMATEENDS OF THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP AND PREVENT ANY REASONABLE EXPECTATIONS OFRECONCILIATION. ""Art. 56. The petition for [legal separation] DIVORCE shall be denied on any of the following grounds: (1) Where the [aggrieved party] PETITIONER has condoned the offense or act complained of; (2) Where the [aggrieved party] PETITIONER has consented to the commission of the offense or act complained of; (3) Where there is connivance between the parties in the commission of the offense or act constituting the ground for [legal separation] DIVORCE; (4) Where both parties have given ground for [legal separation] DIVORCE; (5) Where there is collusion between the parties to obtain the decree of [legal separation] DIVORCE; [or] (6) Where the action is barred by prescription[.]; (7) WHERE THE IRRECONCILABLE MARITAL DIFFERENCES ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFYDIVORCE; OR (8) WHERE THE PETITIONER HAS NOT RESIDED WITHIN THE PHILIPPINES FOR AT LEAST ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE FILING OF THE PETITION, UNLESS THE CAUSE UPON WHICH THE PETITION ISBASED OCCURRED WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE PHILIPPINES." "Art. 57. An action for [legal separation] DIVORCE shall be filed within ONE YEAR FROM THE TIME THEPETITIONER BECOMES COGNIZANT OF THE CAUSE AND WITHIN five years from the time of the occurrence of the cause. IN THE CASE OF GROUNDS OR CAUSES FOR DIVORCE WHICH OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVITY OFTHIS ACT, THE ACTION MAY BE FILED WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF ITSEFFECTIVITY: PROVIDED THAT SAID AMENDMENTS ARE MADE WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THEDATE OF ITS EFFECTIVITY.""Art. 58. An action for [legal separation] DIVORCE shall in no case be tried before six months have elapsed since the filingof the petition.""Art. 59. No [legal separation] DIVORCE may be decreed unless the

court has taken steps toward the reconciliation of thespouses and is fully satisfied, despite such efforts, that reconciliation is highly improbable.""Art. 60. No decree of [legal separation] DIVORCE shall be based upon a stipulation of facts or a confession of judgment.In any case, the court shall order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal assigned to it to take steps to prevent collusion betweenthe parties and to take care that the evidence is not fabricated or suppressed.""Art. 61. After the filing of the petition for [legal separation] DIVORCE, the spouses shall be entitled to live separately fromeach other.The court, in the absence of a written agreement between the spouses, shall designate either of them or a third person toadminister the absolute community or conjugal partnership property. The administrator appointed by the court shall have the same powers and duties as those of a guardian under the Rules of Court.""Art. 62. During the pendency of the action for [legal separation] DIVORCE, the provisions of Article 49 shall likewise

apply to the support of the spouses and the custody and support of the common children.""Art. 63. The decree of [legal separation] DIVORCE shall have the following effects: (1) THE MARRIAGE BONDS SHALL BE DISSOLVED ONE YEAR AFTER THE DATE ON WHICH THEDECREE BECOMES FINAL. The DIVORCED spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other ANDTO REMARRY THEREAFTER [, but the marriage bonds shall not be severed]; (2) The absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be dissolved and liquidated [but the offending spouse].IF THE DECREE OF DIVORCE IS GRANTED PURSUANT TO THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE55, THE NET PROFITS OF THE ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY OR CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP SHALL BEDIVIDED EQUALLY BETWEEN OR IN A MANNER AGREED UPON BY THE PARTIES. IN THE EVENTTHAT THERE IS AN ADJUDGED OFFENDING SPOUSE, SAID SPOUSE shall have no right to any share of the net profits earned by the absolute community or the conjugal partnership, which shall be forfeited inaccordance with the provisions of Article 43 (2); (3) The custody of the minor children shall be awarded to the innocent spouse, OR, IN THE CASE OF A DECREEOBTAINED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 55, TO THESPOUSE ADJUDGED TO BE MORE CAPABLE IN ENSURING THIER MORAL, MENTAL ANDPHYSICAL WELL-BEING, subject to the provisions of Article 213 of this Code; [and] (4) The [offending spouse] DIVORCED SPOUSES shall be disqualified from inheriting from [the innocent spouse]EACH OTHER by intestate succession. Moreover, provisions in favor of the offending spouse mad in the will of the innocent spouse shall be revoked by operation of law[.]; (5) CHILDREN OF DIVORCED PARENTS SHALL BE ENTITLED TO SUPPORT AS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THIS CODE. IN ADDITION, THESE CHILDREN

SHALL BE DELIVERED THEIR RESPECTIVELEGITIME ONE YEAR AFTER THE DECREE OF DIVORCE BECOMES FINAL, OTHERWISE, THEDECREE SHALL NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE SPOUSE WHO DEFAULTSON SUCH OBLIGATION.CHILDREN OF DIVORCED SPOUSES SHALL LIKEWISE RETAIN ALL RIGHTS OF SUCCESSION WITHRESPECT TO THEIR PARENTS BUT SHALL BRING TO COLLATION THE LEGITIME PREVIOUSLYRECEIVED UNDER THIS PROVISION WITHOUT ANY OBLIGATION TO RETURN ANY AMOUNTSUBSEQUENTLY DETERMINED TO BE IN EXCESS OF THE VALUE THEY ARE ENTITLED TORECEIVE."Art. 64. After the finality of the decree of [legal separation] DIVORCE, the innocent spouse OR BOTH SPOUSES INCASE OF DECREES PURSUANT TO THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 55, may revoke the donations made by him or her in favor of the [offending] OTHER spouse, as well as the designation of the latter as beneficiary in any insurance policy, even if such designation be stipulated as irrevocable. The revocation of the donations shall be recorded in the registries of property in the places where the properties are located. Alienations, liens and encumbrances registered in good faith before the recording of thecomplaint for revocation in the registries of property shall be respected. The revocation of or change in the designation of theinsurance beneficiary shall take effect upon written notification thereof to the [insured] INSURER.The action to revoke the donation under this Article must be brought within five years from the time the decree of [legalseparation] DIVORCE has become final.""Art. 65. If the spouses should reconcile, a corresponding joint manifestation under oath duly signed by them shall be filedwith the court in the same proceeding for [legal separation] DIVORCE.""Art. 66. The reconciliation referred to in the preceding Article shall have the following consequences: (1) The [legal separation] DIVORCE proceedings, if still pending, shall thereby be terminated at whatever stage; and(2) The final decree of [legal separation] DIVORCE shall be set aside, but the separation of property and anyforfeiture of the share of the guilty spouse already affected shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to revive their former property regime.The court's order containing the foregoing shall be recorded in the proper civil registries.""Art. 67. The agreement to revive the former property regime referred to in the preceeding Article shall be executed under oath and shall specify:(1) The properties to be contributed anew to the restored regime;(2) Those to be returned as separated properties of each spouse; and(3) The names of all their known creditors, their addresses and the amounts owing to each.The agreement of revival and the motion for its approval shall be filed with the court in the same proceeding for [legalseparation] DIVORCE, with copies of both furnished to the creditors named therein. After due hearing, the court shall, in its order,take measures to protect the interest of creditors and such order shall be recorded in the proper registries of properties.The recording of the order in the registries of property shall not prejudice any creditor not listed or not notified, unless thedebtor-spouse has sufficient separate properties to satisfy the creditor's claim." SEC. 3. Separability Clause. - If any part or provision of this Act is declared invalid, the remainder or any provision thereof not affected shall remain in force and effect.

SEC. 4. Repealing Clause. - The provisions of any law, executive order, presidential decree or other issuances inconsistentwith this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. SEC. 5. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its complete publication in the Official Gazette or in atleast two (2) newspapers of general circulation.Approved,

EXPLANATORY NOTE This bill seeks to amend Executive Order No. 209, otherwise known as the FamilyCode of the Philippines, as amended by Executive Order No. 227, by allowing absolute divorce( a vinculomatrimonii ) and thereby granting legally separated spouses the right to remarry.Today not all marriages succeed as a permanent union. An increasing number of married individuals find themselves subjected by their marriage partners to physical violence,grossly abusive conduct and other acts of or offenses that -- rather than promote blissful,harmonious conjugal and family life -- impair, debase or destroy the legitimate ends of themarriage relationship. This bill thus seeks to give spouses whi are shacked by an irretrievably broken marriage the freedom to remarry and possibly succeed in attaining a stable and fulfillingfamily life.Divorce is not a novel legal right granted by Philippine civil laws: the Family Code of the Philippines sanctions relative divorce ( a mensa et thoro ). Under the provision of Title II of said Code, legal separation, or separation from bed and board, is a recognized remedy for victims of failed marriages. To be sure, our civil laws have always recognized the need to allowmarried individuals to sever conjugal ties under certain justifiable conditions. Neither is divorce an institution exclusive to contemporary times. Historical recordsindicate that long before the advent of Spanish colonial rule beginning in the early 16thcentury, absolute divorce had been widely practiced among our ancestral tribes -- theTagbanwas of Palawan, the Gadang of Nueva Vizcaya, the Sagada and Igorot of theCordilleras, the Manobo, Bila-an and Moslems of Visayas and Mindanao islands, to name afew. During the Spanish regime, the law on divorce was the SietePartidas which allowed onlylegal separation. The Spanish Civil Code on the subject were among those suspended byGovernor General Weyler in 1889, and was never enforced since.In 1917 Act 2710 was passed by the Philippine Legislature repealingthe SietePartidas by allowing divorce on the grounds of adultery on the part of the wife andconcubinage on the part of the husband. During the Japanese Occupation, a new law onabsolute divorce, E.O. No. 141, was promulgated providing for ten grounds for divorce. Thelaw lasted until 1944 when Gen. Douglas MacArthur re-established the CommonwealthGovernment by proclamation which in effect repealed E.O. No. 141

and revived Act 2710.In 1950, Act 2710 was repealed by the Civil Code of the Philippines which allows onlylegal separation. The draft of the Code, however, had provisions on absolute divorce which wassubsequently eliminated and substituted with legal separation. The present Family Code of thePhilippines also does not allow divorce (except a divorce obtained by the alien spouse of aFilipino citizen abroad), but it has expaded the grounds for legal separation to ten. Indeed,quoting a respected Filipino historical writer, "the law has come full circle".While the Family Code of the Philippines allows relative divorce, it prohibits lawfullyseparated spouses from exercising the right to remarry. Under our present laws, legal separationdoes not dissolve the marriage bond between legally separated spouses; said parties areconsidered married individuals for all legal intents and purposes. Our civil laws on marriage justify and allow the separation of married individuals but does not confer them the legal rightor remedy to extricate themselves from the ordeal of a broken marriage. In a Philippine context, people are against the divorce bill due to three main reasons: 1) the sanctity of marriage--- but as I see it,husbands who abuse their wives and couples who engage in extramarital affairs are already violating said sanctity, are they not?There comes a time when you have to choose between preserving a social construct or getting out of an impossible situation, and,from a human rights point of view, the choice should never have to always be the former; 2) religion--- I've said this so many timesalready, but, once again, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS NOT THE PHILIPPINES, okay, it makes no sense to oppose a legal statute onreligious grounds because not everyone in this country subscribes to Catholic doctrine but everyone IS subject to the law; and 3)the kids--- but, think about it, aren't the offspring of unhappy marriages already miserable in their own right, and doesn't denyingtheir parents the right to end the marriage prolong that agony? I'm not saying I'm pro-divorce, but I'm pro-the choice to divorce,because, let's face it, everyone makes mistakes. Anyone can marry an abusive husband or a psychotic wife. The question is, shoulda mistake have to overshadow the rest of one's existence? I mean, yeah, so maybe you once loved this person enough to want tospend the rest of your life with them, but people and circumstances do change, and perhaps it would just be best to move on. It isour right as human beings to flourish and to make progress, and sometimes that means being able to let g