Divorce in the Philippines

Spanish colonial era During the Spanish era in the Philippines, absolute divorce was unrecognized. The colony was under the jurisdiction of the Siete Partidas, which only ever granted couples "relative divorce," which is mensa et thoro or legal separation and does not legally dissolve actual marital ties. The following are prerequisites for a relative divorce under the Siete Partidas: • One spouse seeks to enter religious life with consent from the other • Adultery has been committed by either spouse • Heresy has been demonstrated by one of the spouses, or the spouse has converted to Islam or Judaism American colonial era The United States would colonize the Philippines after the conclusion of the Spanish–American War. During this period, Act No. 2710, or the Divorce Law, became law on March 11, 1917. The legislation provided for divorce a vinculo matrimonii or absolute divorce. Divorce permissibility was fault-based, with the following prerequisite. Post-Commonwealth and contemporary era Following the Philippine independence from the United States in the Philippines in 1946, Act No. 2710 remained applicable for a time. Until the enactment of the Republic Act No. 386 or the Civil Code on August 30, 1950 which only allowed for legal separation or what was before known as 'relative divorce' and does not allow for absolute divorce. Benigno Aquino III, and Rodrigo Duterte expressed they would not support the passage of an absolute divorce bill during their terms, although Aquino mentioned he was open to a 'legal separation' law which would allow couples to remarry. Judicial recognition of foreign divorce decree and declaration of capacity to remarry The Family Code allows Philippine courts to recognize any divorce obtained by Filipinos from foreign spouses overseas, on condition the proceeding is valid under the law of the foreign spouse's country. In addition, a regional trial court can take cognizance of a conjunctive petition for declaration of the capacity to remarry. A widely-known example of this is the case of former celebrity couple Carla Abellana and Tom Rodriguez. Rodriguez is a United States citizen, and it is unclear if he had reacquired Filipino citizenship. A publication about the topic implied it was not possible both of them had Filipino citizenship at the time of divorce. ==By custom or rite==

Indigenous peoples Several indigenous peoples' cultures recognize divorce as a means to dissolve marriages including the Ibaloi of Benguet, Muslims The Code of Muslim Personal Laws of 1977 allows divorce for Filipino Muslims, many of whom identify as the Moro people. Divorce is unavailable for Muslims, including converts, who are married under the Civil Code. Transnational marriages Where a non-Filipino is married to a Filipino citizen and a divorce is obtained overseas by the non-Filipino spouse, the Filipino spouse can remarry under Philippine law (see judicial recognition of foreign divorce decree and declaration of capacity to remarry), even if the non-Filipino spouse acquired foreign citizenship after the marriage. ==Legalization==

Current proposals The following are the current proposals to legalize divorce in the current 19th Congress of the Philippines. • Instituting absolute divorce and dissolution of marriage in the Philippines / House Bill No. 4998 – by Davao del Norte 1st district representative Pantaleon Alvarez; • Dissolution of Marriage Act (2022) – by Senator Risa Hontiveros; no-fault divorce; proof of criminal offense or 'psychological incapacity' of one party would not be required. • Unnumbered consolidated bill – absence of no-fault provision, excluded chronic unhappiness as grounds. • Senate Bill 2443 - On September 20, 2023, the Philippine Senate Committee on Women, Children, Family Relations and Gender Equality Panel's Committee Report 124 recommended the approval of Senate Bill 2443 It is a substitution of consolidated Senate Bills 147, 213, 237, 554, 555, 1198 and 2047 on the "Dissolution of Marriage Act" sponsored by committee chair Sen. Risa Hontiveros. The bill defines absolute divorce as the “legal termination of a marriage by a court in a legal proceeding.” Absolute Divorce Act On May 15, 2024, the House of Representatives in a plenary session presided by Aurelio Gonzales Jr. via voice vote approved on "Second Reading" "Edcel Lagman" House Bill 9349, the proposed "Absolute Divorce Act". As the spouses' fourth way to separate, the bill enumerated limited grounds of the petition as defined by Loreto B. Acharon: Article 45 of the Family Code on annulment of marriage, spouses' de facto 5 years separation, gender-affirming surgery by a spouse or gender transition, psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code, irreconcilable differences, domestic, marital abuse or physical violence under Republic Act 9262, the Violence against women and Their Children Act of 2004 and moral pressure to change religious or political affiliation. The legal separation grounds under the Article 97 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines (2) and Article 55 of the Family Code of the Philippines (10) are also, for now, absolute divorce grounds. The bill also provides validity recognition of a foreign divorce decree by either the alien or Filipino spouse with proper authentication by the Philippine Consul. ==Opposition==

The legalization of divorce has been opposed on religious grounds, with the Catholic Church and conservative churches being the most vocal opponents. Opponents of legalization of divorce have also argued that the state sanctioning such process is unconstitutional on the basis of the provision which mandates the state to uphold the "sanctity of marriage and its being the foundation of the family". ==Views of religious groups==

Catholic Church The Catholic Church in the Philippines through the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) has historically lobbied against any legislation to legalize absolute divorce in the country viewing the sanction of the state of such process as "anti-marriage" and "anti-family". It maintains that the process of legal separation and annulment for aggrieved married couples are sufficient. Socrates Villegas, the CBCP President in 2015, in a published position argued that legalizing divorce is contrary to human rights, especially of children of divorce couples. He said that allowing divorce would deter couples from working on their relationship first. He added that children whose married parents availed legal separation are already traumatized and that divorce would allow "a total stranger" to enter their lives in a form of a new legal spouse which would make their situation worse. In May 2024, the CBCP's Fr. Jerome Secillano told the Philippine Daily Inquirer that it strongly opposes the bill's approval for being "anti-family, anti-marriage and anti-children and a betrayal of their constitutional mandate to uphold marriage and the family.” The Catholic lay ecclesial movement Couples for Christ also strongly opposes any divorce law in the Philippines. In June 2024, it published a manifesto stating "Marriages formed in love and mutual understanding can be happy, enduring, and fulfilling." It stressed that single parent children become victims of parental breakup resulting in permanent emotional, psychological, financial or even physical social stigma. Other Christian groups The Iglesia ni Cristo prohibits its members from availing divorce, and maintains that couples in troubled marriages should settle their differences. Bishop Modesto Villasanta of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) meanwhile expressed his group is open to discussing the issue of divorce. Villasanta added it is "up to the Church on how they will teach their people the importance of marriage and not on barring its (a divorce bill's) approval". ==Alternatives to divorce==

While divorce is largely not recognized by the state, marriages can be ended in the Philippines through annulment or declaring it null and void. Couples can also avail of legal separation. ==Opinion polling==