Lawmakers in the 20th Congress have revived the effort to legalize absolute divorce in the country after the Senate failed to act on the contentious proposal that narrowly passed in the House of Representatives in the previous Congress.

At least two measures were filed at the opening of the 20th Congress on 30 June. House Bills 108 and 210 both seek to legalize divorce as another legal recourse, aside from the expensive and time-consuming annulment, to dissolve an irreparably broken or dysfunctional marriage.

From page 1

HB 108 filed by 4Ps Rep. JC Abalos proposes a reconciliation period of 60 days for married couples in crisis, while HB 210 of Makabayan lawmakers Antonio Tinio and Renee Co would impose a mandatory six-month cooling-off period.

The proper courts will be mandated to exert all efforts to reunite and reconcile spouses under these time frames, which would be activated only after the filing of a petition for absolute divorce.

Under Makabayan’s proposal, however, the cooling-off period “shall not apply in cases that involve acts of violence against women and their children, or [an] attempt against the life of the other spouse, a common child, or a child of the petitioner.”

According to a study cited by Abalos, at least 17.5 percent of women between 15 and 49 years have experienced physical, sexual, or emotional abuse from their partners.

Abalos said the enacted bill will “safeguard children from marital strife and empower vulnerable spouses, particularly those in abusive relationships, to rebuild their lives.”

“In the context of divorce, a marriage is recognized as valid but is terminated. The termination occurs not due to any defect or omission at the time of the marriage ceremony, but rather as a result of circumstances that arise during the marriage itself — which is a reality that most individuals often fail to acknowledge,” the explanatory note reads.

The Makabayan bloc’s bill adopts the consolidated version of a similar measure passed by the House in the 19th Congress, which cited serious physical or sexual violence, compulsive gambling, bisexuality, and separation for at least five years with no possibility of reconciliation as grounds for divorce.

Other grounds include psychological incapacity, gender reassignment surgery undergone by a spouse, the disappearance for at least four years by a foreign spouse without communication.

The proposed Absolute Divorce Act narrowly passed the deeply divided House in May last year. Its counterpart measure in the Senate, however, languished at the committee level.

The Philippines is the only country, aside from the Vatican — the seat of the Roman Catholic Church — that outlaws absolute divorce, preserving the sanctity of marriage.

Enacting an absolute divorce has been the subject of a decades-old controversy and a flashpoint between progressive and religious groups.

The Catholic church, along with conservative groups and anti-divorce lawmakers, argue that breaking a marital union is a grievous act against God.

Moreover, they have branded it a blatant violation of the Constitution, which considers marriage an inviolable social institution, a foundation of the family that the state shall safeguard.

The proposal in the 19th Congress sought to allow formerly married couples to remarry after having secured an absolute divorce on specific grounds and judicial processes.

The contentious measure was first passed by the House in 2018 during the 17th Congress, but the bill effectively died due to the Senate’s failure to pass the counterpart measure.

Anti-divorce lawmakers have long proposed making marriage annulment more affordable and accessible rather than legalizing absolute divorce.