LAWS ON DIVORCE: A COMPARATIVE RESEARCH BETWEEN PHILIPPINE,

INTERNATIONAL, AND RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS

__________________

A Research Study

Presented to Atty. Mae Elaine Bathan

University of San Jose-Recoletos

Cebu City, Philippines

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for

LEGAL RESEARCH (LLB 115)

OFFER CODE 7057, TTH 6:00PM-7:00PM

__________________

By

JOHN FRANCIS B. AGUILAR

ABSTRACT:
All throughout history, different cultures and civilizations of the world regarded
family as an important part of their respective society. As defined by certain laws,
Family is the basic social institution of the society which the state must protect.
According to William Bennett of The New York Times, family is the nucleus of
civilization. It is a nature’s established association for the supply of mankind’s everyday
wants. It is also the first form of community and government. And that for a civilization to
succeed, family must succeed. In View of this belief, several states of the world
regarded family as an integral part of the nation, thus it must be protected. The
Philippine Constitution regards marriage and family with utmost importance. In fact,
Article XV of the said constitution states that;

The Family

SECTION 1. The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation.
Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total development.

SECTION 2. Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family

and shall be protected by the State.

SECTION 3. The State shall defend:

(1) The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious
convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood;

(2) The right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and
special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and
other conditions prejudicial to their development;

(3) The right of the family to a family living wage and income; and

(4) The right of families or family associations to participate in the planning and
implementation of policies and programs that affect them.

SECTION 4. The family has the duty to care for its elderly members but the State may
also do so through just programs of social security.

Marriage, being the first stage of establishing a family is also regarded with equal
importance. Thus, it needs protection of the state as well. However, several societies
around the world have different views in terms of protecting family. These views are
highly influenced by the dominant culture of each and every society, their religion, peers
and other environmental and psychological factors. This is perhaps the reason behind
why some society allows polygamy, some doesn’t. Some societies are patriarchal, while
some are neo-liberal. This comparative research aims to unlock such mystery.
Identifying society’s concept of marriage is an essential requisite in understanding each
society’s view in the matter of divorce.
In Western cultures marriage and divorce are common experiences. At around
40-50 percent of marriages in the United States alone ends up in divorce. Question may
be asked, what is the difference between how certain states like United States values
family compared to how other states like the Philippines values the same. Does this
necessarily mean that some states like United States takes family with lesser
importance a compared to other states like Philippines which prohibits divorce?
Union of two people in marriage is not only a civil act, but also a religious one.
Particularly in Roman Catholic which is the dominant religion all over the world,
marriage is a sacred covenant between husband and wife bond and made inseparable
by God. With this it is also interesting to know that while marriage for Christians are
supposed to be inseparable, the Catholic Canon Law is where the Spanish Civil Code is
based, which is also where the Philippine Civil Law took influence from. Thus, it is also
worthwhile to take a look at the principles of the Catholic Canon Law, and learn what
are its provisions, stand, and/or beliefs in terms of separation of spouses through
divorce.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The purpose of this research is to;
1. learn what are the concept of divorce in the Philippine Legal System, other
countries’ legal systems, and the Roman Catholic’s point of view in this matter.
2. Compare, contrast and differentiate the difference between the legal concepts of
divorce in the Philippine Legal System, other countries’ legal systems, and the
Roman Catholic’s point of view.
In this study we also hope to point the significance of the findings of this study
through finding and comparison of facts on whether or not divorce can possibly be
adopted in the Philippines. And if so, what is the extend of the Catholic church’s sphere
of influence in supporting/condemning it.

LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
This study intends to define the concept of divorce in the Philippines, in western
countries such as United States and Europe, other Asian countries, as well as the
concept of divorce in view of the Catholic Principle. In view of these concepts, we hope
to be able to compare and contrast, as well as understand the differences between
them.
 It is also the intention of this study to discover the historical development of
divorce in the Philippines as well as the western and Asian Countries. Whatever
conclusions or analysis that may be drawn out of this study will be solely based on the
facts gathered in the sources indicated in the bibliography. No actual survey or field
study that has been done to gather data.

METHODOLOGY
Gathering of facts and collection of data through various sources such as:
a. Codes/Statutes/Rules
b. Books
c. News Articles
d. Web

No actual survey or field study that has been done to gather data.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Divorce as defined by Meriam Webster dictionary is a dissolution of a valid
marriage granted especially by the Court on specified statutory grounds such as
adultery, domestic violence, etc., arising after marriage. The most common ground of
divorce all over the world are, absence of marital home, alcohol and drug addiction,
adultery, cruelty, conviction of a crime, desertion, insanity, and non-support. Other
grounds vary from one country to another, from one culture to another.
There are two types of divorce. On one hand, the at-fault divorce which are
particularly characterized by the existence of an overt act/acts of either or both spouses
in violation of their marital vows, infidelity, or failure to perform their marital obligations.
On the other hand, there is a no-fault divorce which is characterized by mere loss of
love and/or willingness to live as husband and wife due to things which one or both
parties have no fault at all. Example of this are irreconcilable differences, and if spouses
has lived apart for a statutorily specified period of time.

The Catholic Church, Divorce, and Annulment

An annulment is commonly and incorrectly called a “Catholic divorce.” The

differences between divorce and annulment can be confusing to Catholics and non-
Catholics alike — especially when remarriage is a possibility. Divorce and annulment
aren’t the same thing; they differ in two ways:

 First, divorce is a civil law decree from the state, whereas an annulment is

a canon law decree from the Church. In other words:
o The state issues a marriage license; and the state issues a divorce
decree.
o The Church celebrates the Sacrament of Matrimony; and only the
Church can issue a Decree of Nullity (otherwise known as an annulment).
The Church does not believe in divorce.
 The second is the existence of the marriage after a divorce or annulment:
o A civil divorce basically says that what was once a marriage is no longer a
marriage. The marriage took place but ended. A previously married couple
no longer has the legal obligations of husband and wife.
o An annulment, on the other hand, basically says that the Sacrament of
Matrimony never took place to begin with.

Civil divorce ends a civil marriage; a Church annulment declares that the Sacrament of
Matrimony didn’t occur from day one.

Reasons for annulment

The main reason for getting an annulment is that the sacrament of marriage wasn’t
valid. In other words, if one or both spouses didn’t intend to enter a permanent, faithful,
and fruitful (if God wills it) union, then that deficiency renders the marriage invalid.

Even though a couple gets married in a Catholic church by a priest or deacon and has
every intention of entering into a valid sacrament, other factors can greatly obstruct the
validity anyway, even unknowingly and unintentionally. Who is at fault, if anyone, isn’t
the issue. The matter at hand is whether a supposed valid marriage is in fact invalid for
some serious reason. If a major impediment was present at the time of the wedding,
then the sacrament of marriage is invalid, and the man and woman are free to marry
someone else validly for the first time.

Aside from a bride or groom intentionally not wanting to enter a permanent, faithful, and
fruitful union, another impediment would be if either person was incapable of assuming
the duties and obligations of Christian marriage due to a severe addiction to drugs or
alcohol or some serious psychological disorder, which was present but unknown to
anyone at the time of the wedding.

Some other reasons for annulment of a marriage include mental incapacity, bigamy,

incest, force or grave fear, and refusal or inability to consummate the marriage.

DATA
I. Divorce in General

A. Definition
Divorce as defined by Meriam Webster dictionary is a dissolution of a valid
marriage granted especially by the Court on specified statutory grounds such as
adultery, domestic violence, etc., arising after marriage. The most common ground of
divorce all over the world are, absence of marital home, alcohol and drug addiction,
adultery, cruelty, conviction of a crime, desertion, insanity, and non-support. Other
grounds vary from one country to another, from one culture to another.
There are two types of divorce. On one hand, the at-fault divorce which are
particularly characterized by the existence of an overt act/acts of either or both spouses
in violation of their marital vows, infidelity, or failure to perform their marital obligations.
On the other hand, there is a no-fault divorce which is characterized by mere loss of
love and/or willingness to live as husband and wife due to things which one or both
parties have no fault at all. Example of this are irreconcilable differences, and if spouses
has lived apart for a statutorily specified period of time.
Through time, divorce has become an acceptable practice in many cultures
around the world. As a matter of fact, Only Philippines and Vatican City are the
remaining States where divorce is not allowed. In the case of Vatican City, the law on
divorce is not deemed necessary because, first, majority of the population of Vatican
City are Catholic Clergies of various national origins which are not even citizens. Thus,
having a divorce law in Vatican City is not deemed to be of that importance in the
opinion of many. While in the case of the Philippines, it is known to be a pre-dominantly
Catholic country. In such case, the religious beliefs play a big role to the fact as to why
divorce laws have not been successfully passed into law.

B. Historical Concept and Development

The history of divorce can be traced back to as early as the time of ancient City
of Athens sometime 508 BC around the same time, Greeks, introduced to the world the
so-called “democracy”. The ancient Athenians liberally allowed divorce, but the person
requesting divorce had to submit the request to a magistrate, and the magistrate could
determine whether the reasons given were sufficient. With the spread of the Greek
culture in Europe, the concept of divorce has also been spread along with it. It was also
embraced in the early Roman Culture though divorce was rare Roman Empire. But as
the Roman Empire grew in power and authority, Roman Civil Law embraced the maxim
“matrimonia debent esse libera” which means that marriages ought to be free. Either
husband or wife can renounce the marriage at will. The Christian Emperors Constantine
and Theodosius restricted the grounds for divorce to grave cause, but this was relaxed
by the Justinian in the 6th Century.
After the fall of Roman Empire, familial life was regulated more by ecclesiastical
authority than civil authority. The Catholic and Orthodox Church had, had among others
a differing view of divorce. Although divorce, as known today, was generally prohibited
in the Catholic lands after the 10 th century, separation of husband and wife and
annulment of marriage were well-known. What is today referred to as “separate
maintenance” or “legal separation” was termed as “divorce a mensa et thoro” (divorce
from bed and board). The husband and wife physically separated and were forbidden to
live or cohabit together, but their marital relationship did not fully terminate. The Catholic
Church held that the sacrament of marriage produced one person from two, inseparable
from each other. By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in law, that is, the
very being of legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage or at least
incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband under whose wing, protection
and cover, she performs everything. Since husband and wife became one person upon
marriage, recognition of that oneness could be rescinded only on the grounds that the
unity never existed to begin with or that the proclamation of marriage was erroneous
and void from the start.
After the era of Reformation in Europe, marriage came to be considered a
contract, especially in the Protestant regions of Europe. On that basis, civil authorities
gradually asserted their power to decree a “divortium a vinculo matrimonii” or divorce
from all bonds of marriage.
Sometime 1643-1645, during English Civil War, John Milton introduced the idea
of no-fault divorce. Such idea became extremely controversial and religious figures
sought to ban his tracts. With the spread of the idea of no-fault divorce, countries from
all around the world have gradually adopted its legitimacy over time, formulated their
own ground as they seem fit with their culture. Today, as said earlier in this research,
only Philippines and Vatican City are the states that don’t have a divorce law.

II. Philippine Concept of Divorce

A. Cultural View/Opinion
It would be seemingly impossible to understand the Filipino concept of divorce
without touching our past. History played a very important role in the formulation of our
culture in which our idea of divorce is greatly based. Surprisingly, pre-colonial Filipinos
were more liberal than today’s Filipinos when it comes to the concept of terminating
marriages or divorce. It has been chronicled among the Tagbanwans of Palawan,
Gadangs of Nueva Viscaya, Sagadans and Igorots of the Cordilleras, Manobos,
B’laans, and Muslims of Visayas and Mindanao. As a matter of fact, this liberal attitude
of the pre-colonial Filipinos was considered as one of the obstacles of introducing
Catholicism in the archipelago.
During the Spanish era, Catholicism was introduced. Moreover, Philippines was
under the Spanish rule, and because of that, it was also governed by the Spanish civil
code which only relative divorce or what is similar to today’s Family Code as “legal
separation” was allowed. Marital ties itself was not extinguished but it allowed the
couples freedom from obligation to live together. This went on for more than 300 years
mired as it were in the theocracy that was Spain and Catholic Church.
When Philippines was ceded by Spain to the United States via the Treaty of
Paris, a wave of cultural and religious pragmatism premised on the Principle of
Separation of Church and State and religious freedom dominated the islands. The
matter of marriage was not to spared by these new western philosophies from the new
colonial ruler. The restrictive intrusions of the Catholic Church into marriage were seen
as impermissible religious interference in a very personal decision which only the state
should be able to regulate. In 1917, Act No. 2710 was passed which allowed divorce
under one single ground of criminal conviction of adultery in the case of a woman, and
adultery in the case of a woman. Because of the difficulty of obtaining divorce, several
attempts were made to further liberalize the ground for obtaining divorce. However,
these attempts were not successful, the over 300 years of colonial Spanish and Catholic
Church domination could not be undone that easily.
It took World War II and an Asian neighbor to finally allow for an honest to
goodness divorce law in the Philippines. With the blessing of Commander in Chief of
Japanese forces in the Philippines, E.O 141 was enacted on 1943 which repealed Act
2710 and allowed divorce. However, the law only lasted barely three years with the end
of the World War II. When Marcos came into power in 1972, Presidential Decree 1083
was passed promulgating a code recognizing system of Filipino Muslim Laws, codifying
Muslim Personal Laws, and providing for its administration. The law provided for
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.
To sum up the historical antecedents, the long period of Spanish and Catholic
domination in the Philippines slowly but surely engineered the culture of Filipinos in
such a way similar to the teachings of Catholic Canon Law and of Spanish Civil Code
where marriage is an inviolable and inseparable union between husband and wife.
Thus, divorce is not allowed.

B. Legal View/ Opinion

On February 4, 2020, a bill proposing the legalization of divorce in the Philippines
was approved by the Committee on Population and Family Relations of the Philippine
House of Representatives. Opponents of this initiative argue that, if divorce is allowed, it
will destroy the institution of marriage. The author of the bill, Rep. Edcel Lagman,
challenged this argument, stating in his sponsorship speech for the bill that, because
the proposed divorce law cannot undo centuries of dearly held Filipino customs and
traditions honoring and celebrating marriage and the family, it will still be at the heart of
the Filipino way of life. Lagman further stated that spouses who are willing to consider
divorce do so when they no longer have a functioning marriage. And it is because of
failed marriages and the impossibility of reconciliation that the bill’s explanatory note
says that the Philippine state has the duty to provide spouses in such relationships with
the possibility of divorce.

The bill looks upon divorce as a women’s rights issue. Not being able to get out
of an eventual loveless, unhappy, and even abusive marriage is a human rights concern
for women, thus, it is a pro-woman legislation because it would allow Filipina wives to
be liberated from abusive relationships and regain dignity and self-esteem. Senator
Riza Hontiveros, a legislator who previously attempted to propose a bill legalizing
divorce, once said in an interview sometime in 2019 that divorce should be legalized in
the Philippines to address the concern of abused women. Divorce sets more grounds
compared to annulment and legal separation. And because it is cheaper and more
accessible, it would allow even the lower-class women to be able to avail the law
instead of annulment which is lengthy and expensive. Senator Hontiveros further said,
that since most of the legislator is seemingly allergic to the term “divorce” she is also
willing to entertain change of the term into “dissolution of marriage” to make is somehow
acceptable in the ears of the people. In either case, the bill by essence will be somehow
like an upgraded and cheaper version of our existing annulment. And definitely unlike
the traditional divorce commonly known in United States and other western countries.
The grounds for divorce under the proposed bill among others are the following;

- Irreconcilable differences
- Psychological incapacity
- Marital rape
 - Abandonment for at least 5 years by either spouse

Critics of the said bill argues that enactment of divorce law will violate the
principle embedded in Article XV of the Constitution which states;

Section 1. The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the
nation. Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its
total development.

Section 2. Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the

family and shall be protected by the state.

Further, critics contends that this provision of the Constitution arises from the
heart of the Filipino culture which values marriage as a sacred institution, a life-long
commitment and perseverance to protect and defend family against all odds. In an
opinion stated by Atty. Aldwin Salumbides, a known anti-divorce lawyer, that laws
should be passed to strengthen marriages from trials and storms. Absolute divorce is
not a solution, it is a quick escape in the context of family. We cannot afford to give up
easily. Children advocates also concluded that in divorce, children suffer the most
damage when their parents get divorced. Children of divorced parents re likely to suffer
adverse effects on their academic performance, physical and mental health with an
increase possibility to be exposed to drugs, alcohol and even sexual abuse.

C. Legal/Statutory Impediments
At present, divorce is illegal in the Philippines. The primary legal impediment in
legalizing divorce is the 1987 Constitution itself particularly Article XV which imposes on
the State the duty to protect and defend families as an inviolable social institution and
the foundation of the nation.
Over the years, the political will of the Filipino people has been tested to its
breaking point culminating in the People Power Revolution of February 1986.
Thereafter, a revolutionary Government was established. Among the revolutionary laws
passed is the Family Code of the Philippines. It allowed for the filling of petition for
declaration of nullity of marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity which has
been argued by many critics as a form of divorce since the ground must have existed
upon the celebration of marriage. A declaration of nullity of marriage renders the
marriage void ab initio or from the very beginning, but produces legal effects as to the
status of children and treatment of property of spouses.

III. International/Foreign Concept of Divorce

 A. Cultural View/Opinion
All throughout the history, divorce has become a generally accepted practice of
many citizens. Although, in view of the different cultures of different countries, divorce
varied from one country to another. Most Muslim societies in the world accepts no-fault
divorce but only if the husband avails for it. If the wife wants to divorce, she must go to a
court, providing evidence of her husband’s ill treatment, his inability to sustain her
financially, his sexual impotence, or her dislikes of his looks. The husband may be given
time to fix the problem but if he fails, the judge will grant the divorce. This system of
getting divorce is common in Arab countries and other Asian countries where citizens
are predominantly Muslims.
In the western world, divorce has become even more liberal. Perhaps western
view of divorce is the most liberal. Either fault-divorce or no-fault divorce may be avail
by either spouse. And that grounds for availing are not too hard to obtain. Under no-fault
divorce system, dissolution of marriage does not require an allegation or proof of either
party. In recent years, United States federal government legislated more laws affecting
the rights and responsibilities of divorcing spouses. The decree of divorce has become
easy to obtain. As a matter of fact, in United States alone, 40-50% of marriages do not
last up to 20 years. Mediation is a growing way of resolving divorce issues. It tends to
be less adversarial (particularly important for any children), more private, less
expensive, and faster than the traditional litigation. Collaborative divorce on the other
hand is another way of obtaining divorce. Though it is similar in concept, it gets more
support than Mediation. In collaborative divorce, both sides are represented by
attorneys, commit to negotiating a settlement without engaging in litigation. Some
believe that mediation may not be appropriate for all relationships, especially those that
included physical or emotional abuse or an imbalance of power and knowledge about
the parties’ finances.
Other countries like Bulgaria, Australia, and China, divorce can be availed only
by mere mutual consent of the spouses. They simply have to go to a notary public
officer, or office of civil affairs (in China), show their valid National IDs, and express their
willingness to obtain a divorce decree. Thus, with all of these, it can simply be
interpreted that divorce has already been widely accepted practice of people.

IV. Catholic Concept of Divorce

A. General Religious Concept of Marriage

The general Catholic concept of marriage can be seen in BOOK IV, Title VII
(Cann. 1055-1165) of the Catholic Code of Cannon Law. In Cann. 1056, it states that
“the essential properties of marriage are unity and indissolubility, which in Christian
marriage obtain a special firmness by reason of the sacrament”.
B. Church’s Stand in Terms of Divorce
 The Roman Catholic Church’s does not allow or honor decree of divorce
however Church’s stand with regards to separation of spouse is discuss in Chapter IX of
the Cannon Law.

CHAPTER IX

THE SEPARATION OF SPOUSES

Art. 1.

DISSOLUTION OF THE BOND

Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human

power and by no cause, except death.

Can. 1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated
marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized
party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.

Can. 1143 §1. A marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons is dissolved by

means of the pauline privilege in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism
by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the same party, provided that the
non-baptized party departs.

§2. The non-baptized party is considered to depart if he or she does not wish to cohabit
with the baptized party or to cohabit peacefully without aVront to the Creator unless the
baptized party, after baptism was received, has given the other a just cause for
departing.

Can. 1144 §1. For the baptized party to contract a new marriage validly, the non-
baptized party must always be interrogated whether:

1/ he or she also wishes to receive baptism;

2/ he or she at least wishes to cohabit peacefully with the baptized party without aVront
to the Creator.

§2. This interrogation must be done after baptism. For a grave cause, however, the local
ordinary can permit the interrogation to be done before baptism or can even dispense
from the interrogation either before or after baptism provided that it is evident at least by
a summary and extrajudicial process that it cannot be done or would be useless.

Can. 1145 §1. The interrogation is regularly to be done on the authority of the local
ordinary of the converted party.

This ordinary must grant the other spouse a period of time to respond if the spouse
seeks it, after having been advised, however, that his or her silence will be considered a
negative response if the period passes without effect.
 §2. Even an interrogation made privately by the converted party is valid and indeed licit
if the form prescribed above cannot be observed.

§3. In either case, the fact that the interrogation was done and its outcome must be
established legitimately in the external forum.

Can. 1146 The baptized party has the right to contract a new marriage with a Catholic
party:

1/ if the other party responded negatively to the interrogation or if the interrogation had
been omitted legitimately;

2/ if the non-baptized party, already interrogated or not, at first persevered in peaceful

cohabitation without aVront to the Creator but then departed without a just cause,
without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. 1144 and 1145.

Can. 1147 For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can allow a baptized party
who uses the pauline privilege to contract marriage with a non-Catholic party, whether
baptized or not baptized; the prescripts of the canons about mixed marriages are also to
be observed.

Can.  1148 §1. When he receives baptism in the Catholic Church, a non-baptized man
who has several non-baptized wives at the same time can retain one of them after the
others have been dismissed, if it is hard for him to remain with the first one. The same is
valid for a non-baptized woman who has several non-baptized husbands at the same
time.

§2. In the cases mentioned in §1, marriage must be contracted in legitimate form after
baptism has been received, and the prescripts about mixed marriages, if necessary, and
other matters required by the law are to be observed.

§3. Keeping in mind the moral, social, and economic conditions of places and of
persons, the local ordinary is to take care that the needs of the first wife and the others
dismissed are sufficiently provided for according to the norms of justice, Christian
charity, and natural equity.

Can. 1149 A non-baptized person who, after having received baptism in the Catholic
Church, cannot restore cohabitation with a non-baptized spouse by reason of captivity or
persecution can contract another marriage even if the other party has received baptism
in the meantime, without prejudice to the prescript of  can. 1141.

Can. 1150 In a doubtful matter the privilege of faith possesses the favor of the law.

Conclusion

Divorce has become an acceptable practice in many cultures around the world.
Only Philippines and Vatican City are the remaining States where divorce is not
allowed. In the case of Vatican City, the law on divorce is not deemed necessary
because, first, majority of the population of Vatican City are Catholic Clergies of various
national origins which are not even citizens. Thus, having a divorce law in Vatican City
is not deemed to be of that importance in the opinion of many. While in the case of the
Philippines, the primary legal impediment in legalizing divorce is the 1987 Constitution
itself particularly Article XV which imposes on the State the duty to protect and defend
families as an inviolable social institution and the foundation of the nation. Secondly,
Philippines is known to be a pre-dominantly Catholic country. In such case, the religious
beliefs play a big role to the fact hence divorce laws have not been successfully passed
into law, however as of the moment, a bill proposing the legalization of divorce in the
Philippines was approved by the Committee on Population and Family Relations of the
Philippine House of Representatives. Annulment of marriage on the other hand is
accepted and practice in the Philippines instead of divorce.
An annulment is commonly and incorrectly called a “Catholic divorce.” The
differences between divorce and annulment can be confusing specially when
remarriage is a possibility. Divorce and annulment isn’t the same thing; they differ in two
ways:
First, divorce is a civil law decree from the state, whereas an annulment is a canon law
decree from the Church. In other words:
The state issues a marriage license; and the state issues a divorce decree.
The Church celebrates the Sacrament of Matrimony; and only the Church can issue a
Decree of Nullity (otherwise known as an annulment). The Church does not believe in
divorce.
The second is the existence of the marriage after a divorce or annulment: A civil
divorce basically says that what was once a marriage is no longer a marriage. The
marriage took place but ended. A previously married couple no longer has the legal
obligations of husband and wife. An annulment, on the other hand, basically says that
the Sacrament of Matrimony never took place to begin with. Civil divorce ends a civil
marriage; a Church annulment declares that the Sacrament of Matrimony didn’t occur
from day one.
The difference between annulment of marriage in Civil Code of the Philippines
and of the Roman Catholic Church is that in Civil Code, the marriage is valid until
annulment of marriage is being granted while in Roman Catholic Church, annulment of
marriage declares that the Sacrament of Matrimony didn’t occur from day one.
 References

A. Codes/Statutes/Rules
1. Philippine Constitution, Article XV Sec. 1-5
2. FAMILY CODE
3. CANNON LAW, BOOK IV, Title VII (Cann. 1055-1165)

B. Books
1. J. Lopez, The Law on Annulment of Marriage (2001).
2. R.B. Rodriguez, Legal Research (2002).
3. Meriam Webster Dictionary

C. Research/ Articles
1. Roberto, Aboradura and et. al.,No Hard and Fast Rule :The Judicial Standards in
Determining Grounds for Nullity of Marriage.

D. Web
1. News Article Philippine House Bill on Divorce
https://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/philippines-house-bill-on-divorce-
approved-in-committee/#:~:text=(Mar.,the%20Philippine%20House%20of
%20Representatives.&text=The%20bill%20looks%20upon%20divorce%20as%20a
%20women's%20rights%20issue.
2. Divorce in Philippines a Legal history
https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/divorce-in-the-philippines-a-legal-history-
45701#:~:text=To%20date%2C%20the%20Philippines%20stands,to%20allow%20for
%20absolute%20divorce.&text=Absolute%20divorce%20was%20prohibited%20under,as
%20legal%20separation%20was%20allowed.

3. Religion, Christianity, Catholicism

https://www.dummies.com/religion/christianity/catholicism/the-catholic-church-
divorce-and-annulment/
4. Divorce Laws by country- Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_law_by_country
5. Definition of divorce-Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce