The proposed measure which would legalize absolute divorce in the country has been approved by the House committee on population and family relations.
During its meeting on Tuesday, the committee unanimously approved the substitute bill to the proposed Absolute Divorce Law.
Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman said the bill seeks to reinstate absolute divorce because it was already practiced during the pre-Spanish times, the American colonial period, and during the Japanese occupation.
“Today is a momentous occasion for countless wives, who are battered and deserted, to regain their humanity, self-respect and freedom from irredeemably failed marriages and utterly dysfunctional unions,” Lagman said following the unanimous approval of the bill.
This means the measure will now be brought to the plenary for further discussions and possible approval by the House.
What the measure says
According to Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, who is one of the authors of the measure, among the grounds for divorce, as stated in the bill, are as follows:
– separation in fact for at least five years at the time the petition for absolute divorce is filed;
– when one of the spouses undergoes a gender reassignment surgery or transitions from one sex to another;
– irreconcilable marital differences as defined in the bill;
– domestic or marital abuse;
– valid foreign divorce secured by either the alien or Filipino spouse; and;
– a marriage nullified by a recognized religious tribunal
RELATED STORY: Hontiveros: Divorce does not break marriages
Aside from this, the measure also states that the grounds for legal separation, annulment of marriage, and nullification of marriage based on psychological incapacity under the Family Code of the Philippines are included as grounds for absolute divorce.
Lagman highlighted that the Philippines is the only country in the world today that outlaws absolute divorce, aside from the almost celibate Vatican City state.
“It is hard to believe that all the other countries collectively erred in instituting absolute divorce in varying degrees of liberality and limitations. An en masse blunder is beyond comprehension. An erroneous unanimity on such a crucial familial institution defies reason and experience. Obviously, the rest of the world cannot be mistaken on the universality of absolute divorce,” he said. (NM)
