Revisiting annulment

With the passage of House Bill 9349, or the proposed Absolute Divorce Act, in the House of Representatives, the Philippines took a big leap towards instituting absolute divorce in the country. 

It is worth noting, however, that the bill shall now be transmitted to the Senate to undergo a similar process of deliberations before it is transformed into an actual law.  

While many are divided about the necessity for a divorce law, some are wondering how this differs from other available legal marital remedies, such as an annulment.

An annulment — how is it different from a divorce?

Basically, you can only opt for an annulment when your marriage is voidable, in the sense that there is a defect in any of the essential requisites of a marriage, such as the legal capacity of the contracting parties (must be a male and female) and the consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.  

Article 45 of the Family Code provides that a marriage may be annulled for: (i) lack of parental consent for parties aged 18-21; (ii) unsoundness of mind; (iii) the consent of either party was fraudulently, forcibly, or unduly obtained; (iv) either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage and such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable; and (v) affliction with a sexually transmissible disease (STD). 

An annulment under Article 45 presupposes that a valid marriage exists until the point of its annulment. The marriage may be suffering from an infirmity but the same can be ratified either by subsequent and free cohabitation of the parties or lapse of the period within which to file for an annulment. However, if the cause for annulment is absolute impotency or serious and incurable STD, ratification by subsequent and free cohabitation will not bar the healthy spouse from filing an annulment against the other subject to the period provided by law.

Another thing to consider is the time when the cause existed. In an annulment, the cause must exist at the time of the celebration of the marriage. If the cause arose after the marriage, it cannot be used as grounds for annulment. This is different from the proposed divorce bill, which adopted and modified the grounds for legal separation under Article 55 of the Family Code. Under this bill, divorce is allowed even if the grounds arise after the celebration of the marriage. 

Lastly, the proposed divorce bill provides for a longer period within which to initiate such action. The prescriptive period to file for an annulment is usually five years, either from the discovery of the fraud or the cessation of the force, intimidation, or undue influence. 

In the proposed divorce bill, the spouses are given a period of 10 years from the occurrence or discovery of the cause for divorce within which to initiate the action. In addition, the proposed divorce bill provides for an expeditious manner of resolving a petition for divorce without regard to technical rules, such as in cases where the spouses have been separated in fact for at least five years.  

Everyone has their opinion of the controversial divorce bill, but it appears that not everyone fully understands what the bill is truly about and what it aims to protect.  

Section 2 of the proposed divorce bill states that while the State continues to protect and preserve marriage as a social institution and as the foundation of the family, it shall also give the opportunity to spouses in irremediably failed marriages to secure an absolute divorce decree as an alternative mode for the dissolution of an irreparably broken or dysfunctional marriage under limited grounds and well-defined judicial procedures. 

Nevertheless, there is still a chance that the divorce bill will not be passed by the Senate, as it cannot be denied that religion has great influence over our country’s politics.