THIRTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 
Second Regular Session 
SENATE 
S. No. 
2269 
INTRODUCED BY SEN. MANNY VILLAR 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
Article 11, Section 14 of the Constitution declares: 
“The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, 
and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women 
and men.” 
Consistent with the constitutional mandate, in the Family Code, the terms 
“adu/tery”(on the part of the wife) and “concubinage” (on the part of the husband) 
has been replaced with ‘‘sexual infidelity” (on the part of either spouses) as one 
of the grounds for legal separation (Article 55 of EO 209, as amended). 
However, long after the passage of the Family Code in 1987, the Revised 
Penal Code has yet to remove the distinction between adultery (Art. 333) and 
concubinage (Art. 334) as felonies, thus perpetuating the disadvantaged position 
of the wife, who is penalized with a heavier penalty than the husband, and whose 
single act of infidelity consummates the offense. This is different in the case of 
the husband, whose marital indiscretion is not treated as a felony unless 
attended by the circumstances enumerated in Article 334. 
This disparate treatment of wives and husbands is recognized in the 
Philippine jurisprudence: 
“To our legislators adultery is not a violation of the laws 
relating to marriage. It is a violation of those laws only when it is 
committed by a woman. The husband can break those laws without 
committing adultery. She, in other words, is, in reality, the only 
person capable of committing the crime under the law of the 
Philippines Islands .... (US. vs. Topino & Guzman, dissenting 
opinion of Moreland, J., 35 Phil. 901, 916)” 
The bill seeks to end the discriminatory treatment of wives-and 
effectively, to harmonize the Revised Penal Code with the present provisions of 
the Family Code-by 
doing away with the distinction between adultery and 


concubinage, and instead criminalizing any and all acts of sexual infidelity, 
regardless of which spouse commits it. The proposed amendment also 
abrogates the traditional essence of adultery, that is, the danger introducing 
spurious heirs into the family. Sexual infidelity becomes now, as it should be, a 
violation of the laws relating to marriage. 
In view of preserving the fundamental equality of women and men as 
guaranteed by the Constitution, the passage of this bill is earnestly sought. 


THIRTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE 
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 
Second Regular Session 
INTRODUCED BY SEN. MANNY VILLAR 
AN ACT 
ACCORDING EQUAL RIGHTS TO WIVES AND HUSBANDS IN THE 
PHILIPPINES BY AMENDING ARTICLES 333,334 AND 344 OF THE 
REVISED PENAL CODE 
Be enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
Philippines in congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code is hereby amended to 
read as follows: 
“Art. 333. Who are guilv of [adultery] SEXUAL 
lNFlD€LlTY.- 
[Adultery] SEXUAL INFIDELITY is committed by 
any married [woman] PERSON who shall have sexual intercourse 
with [a man] ANOTHER PERSON not HIS OR her [husband] 
SPOUSE, and by the [man] PERSON who has carnal knowledge of 
HIM OR her, knowing HIM OR her to be married, even if the 
marriage be subsequently declared void. 
“[Adultery] SEXUAL INFIDELITY shall be punished by 
prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods. 
“[If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while 
being abandoned without justification by the offended spouse, the 
penalty next lower in degree than that provided in the next 
preceding paragraph shall be imposed. ]” 
SECTION 2. Article 334 of the Revised Penal Code is hereby amended to 
read as follows: 
“Art. 334. [Concubinage] MAINTAINING A PARAMOUR.- 
Any [husband] MARRIED PERSON who shall keep a [mistress] 
PARAMOUR in the conjugal dwelling, [or shall have sexual 
intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is 
not his wife,] or shall cohabit with [her] A PARAMOUR in any other 


place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and 
medium periods. 
“The [concubine] PARAMOUR shall suffer the penalty of 
destierro. 
“AS USED IN THIS ARTICLE, “PARAMOUR SHALL 
INCLUDE ANY PERSON WHO COHABITS WITH A MARRIED 
PERSON OF EITHER SEX UNSER CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE 
THET ASSUME AND EXERCISE TOWARD EACH OTHER THE 
RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES WHICH PROPERLY BELONG TO 
PERSONS MARRIED TO EACH OTHER.” 
SECTION 3. The first two paragraphs of Article 344 of the Revised Penal 
Code, are hereby amended to read as follows: 
“Art. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of [adulteryl 
SEXUAL 
INFIDELITY, 
[concubinage] 
MAINTAINING 
A 
PARAMOUR, seduction, 
abduction, 
rape and acts 
of 
lasciviousness- The crimes of [adultery] SEXUAL INFIDELITY 
and [concubinage] MAINTAINING A PARAMOUR shall not be 
prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended spouse. 
“The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution 
without including both the guilty parties, if they are both alive, nor, 
in any case, if he OR SHE shall have consented or pardoned the 
offenders[.], NOR, IN ANY CASE, IF HE OR SHE IS LIKEWISE 
GUILTY OF 
SEXUAL 
INFIDELITY OR 
MAINTAINING A 
PARAMOUR, NOR, IN ANY CASE, IF HE OR SHE SHALL HAVE 
ABANDONED THE GUILTY SPOUSE WITHOUT JUST CAUSE 
FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR . . . . ’ I  
SECTION 4. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its 
publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. 
Approved.