HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTAT)
Batasan Complex, Quezon Cit!

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS BY:
First Regular Session

2380 F yos

presmanion unrr °6e]/t

INDEX SERVICE

House Bill No.

Introduced by:
Gabriela Women’s Party Reps. Emmi A, De Jesus and Arlene D. Brosas

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Underpinning this proposal is a commitment to the policy of the State to
protect and strengthen marriage and family as basic asocial institutions, to value
the dignity of every human person, to guarantee full respect for human rights, and
to ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men,

In the Filipino culture, marriage is regarded as a sacred union, and the
family founded on marriage is considered as a fount of love, protection and care.
Philippine society generally frowns upon and discourages marital break-ups and so
provides cultural and legal safeguards to preserve marital relations. Cultural
prescriptions and religious norms keep many couples together despite the
breakdown of the marriage. But the cultural prescriptions for women and men
differ. Women are traditionally regarded as primarily responsible for making the
marriage work and are expected to sacrifice everything to preserve the marriage
and the solidarity of the family, While absolute fidelity is demanded of wives, men
are granted sexual license to have affairs outside marriage. Yet when marriage fails,
the woman is blamed for its failure.

Reality tells us that there are many failed, unhappy marriages across all
Filipino classes. Many couples especially from the marginalized sectors, who have
no access to the courts simply end up separating without the benefit of legal
processes, The sheer number of petitions that have been filed since 1988 for the
declaration of the nullity of the marriage of the marriage under Article 36 of the
Family Code (commonly known as ‘annulment)) shows that there are just too many
couples who are desperate to get out of failed marriages.

Even when couples start out well in their marriage, political, economic and
social realities take their toll on their relationship. Some are not prepared to handle
the intricacies of the married life. For a large number of women, the inequalities
and violence in marriage negate its ideals as the embodiment of love, care and
safety and erode the bases upon which a marriage is founded. The marital relations
facilitate the commission of violence and perpetuate their oppression. Official
figures show that 14.4 % of married women experience physical violence and 23 %
experience emotional violence. According to the Philippine National Police, within


the context of rising VAW incidence through 2004 to 2012, physical injuries
account for 21%,

Since the ratification of the Philippine Constitution in 1987, many things
beyond the control of spouses did happen to our society that put tremendous
pressure on the stability of Filipino families. Our government has intensified its
labor export program, tearing hundreds of thousands families apart and placing
husbands and wives helpless in distant lands, aggravating their vulnerabilities to
extramarital indiscretions and resulting in rising incidence of OFWs seeking
annulment of their marriages. Moreover, one economic crisis after another, with
their endless increases in the prices of basic commodities and attended by the
government’s abandonment of the state responsibility to provide essential social
services, have forced both husbands and wives to hook on to multiple odd-jobs and
do extra work hours for augmenting their devalued income, but thereby reducing
the quality time necessary to nourish family relationships. The interconnectivity
brought about by advances in modern transportation and information technology
has also increased the number of mixed marriages among Filipinos, exposing them
to foreign family cultures that often grate against their marriages.

‘These social forces constitute a veritable assault on the Filipino family,
shoving upwards the number of couples looking for an ‘escape hatch’ from their
troubled marriages other than those already provided by our marriage laws. Thus,
according to the Department of Justice, petitions for nullity and annulment have
significantly risen - more than doubled - in the last ten years, from 4,520 in 2001
to 10,528 in 2011, If the 2011 figure is to be broken down, this means 29.6
petitions a day, Interestingly, the figure refers only to annulment and declaration of
nullity cases invoking the grounds of psychological incapacity and inherent defects
in the validity of the marriage. It does not include legal separation and annulment
based on other grounds such as presumptive death (read: abandonment). It also
does not include marital dissolution cases based on petitions for judicial
recognition of divorce decrees obtained in foreign forums which constitute 47 % of
the total marital dissolution cases handled by our courts, suggesting of a growing
number of aggrieved parties who are using foreign judicial systems to skirt around
the absence of divorce law in the country.

Given these realities, couples must have the option to avail of remedies that
will pave the way for the attainment of their full human development and self
fulfillment and the protection of their human rights, Existing laws are not enough
to guarantee and protect these rights. To quote the Women’s Legal Bureau, Inc., a
legal resource NGO for women:

‘The present laws relating to separation of couples and termination of
marriage are inadequate to respond to the myriad causes of failed marriages.
Particularly, the remedies of dectaration of nullity and annulment do not cover
the problems that occur during the existence of marriage. Legal separation, on
the other hand, while covering problems during marriage, does not put an end
to marriage.’

‘Though both divorce and a declaration of nullity of a marriage allow the
spouses to remarry, the two remedies differ in concept and basis. A
declaration of nullity presupposes that the marriage is void from the beginning

Page | 2


and the court declares its non-existence... Beyond [the] grounds specified [in
the law), declaration of nullity is not possible.’

‘in annulment, the marriage of the parties is declared defective from the
beginning, albeit it is considered valid until annulled. The defect can be used
to nullify the marriage within a specified period but the same maybe ignored
and the marriage becomes perfectly valid after the lapse of that period, or the
defect maybe cured through some act. The defect relates to the time of the
celebration of the marriage and has nothing to do with circumstances
occurring after the marriage is celebrated, In annulment, the marriage is
Tegally cancelled, and the man and woman are restored to their single status,’

‘Since August 3, 1988, couples have been given a way out of failed marriages
through Article 36... The remedy provided under Article 36 is declaration of
nullity of the marriage. The article voids a marriage where one party is
‘psychologically incapacitated’ to comply with the essentials of marital
obligations, Consistent with the concept of void marriages (where the remedy
is declaration of nullity), the law requires that the incapacity must have
existed at the time of the celebration of the marriage...In practice, Article 36
has become a form of divorce, as valid marriages are declared void every day
in the guise of ‘psychological incapacity’, The innumerable Article 36 cases
brought to trial courts are an indication of the elasticity of Article 36 to
‘accommodate the needs of many couples desiring to terminate their marriages.
It is proof that divorce is needed in the Philippines. Article 36 provides a
remedy only for spouses who can prove ‘psychological incapacity’. The
concept certainly cannot accommodate all cases where divorce would be
necessary. What we need is a divorce law that defines clearly and
unequivocally the grounds and terms for terminating a marriage. That law will
put an end to the creative efforts played daily in courtrooms across the country
to accommodate a wide range of cases in order to prove ‘psychological
incapacity’ (Women’s Legal Bureau, The Relevance of Divorce in the
Philippines, 1998).

‘Thus, this bill seeks to introduce divorce as another option for couples in
failed and irreparable marriages.

This bill was crafted in consultation with women lawyers and inspired by the
studies and inputs of various women’s groups and the experiences of spouses
gathered by GABRIELA from its various chapters nationwide.

This bill was first filed by Gabricla Women’s Party in the Thirteenth
Congress, and refiled in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Sixteenth Congresses but
deliberations in the Committee level never pushed through.

Historically, divorce had been part of the legal system. In the beginning of
the 16% century, before the Spanish colonial rule, absolute divorce was widely
practiced among ancestral tribes such as the Tagbanwas of Palawan, the Gadangs
of Nueva Vizcaya, the Sagadas and Igorots of the cordilleras, and the Manobos,
Bllaans and Moslems of the Visayas and Mindanao islands. Divorce was also
available during the American period, starting from 1917 (under Act No. 2710
enacted by the Philippine Legislature}, and during the Japanese occupation (under
Executive Order No. 141) and after, until 1950. It was only on August 30, 1950,
when the New Civil code took effect, that divorce was disallowed under Philippine
law. Only legal separation was available. The same rule was adopted by the Family

Page | 3


code of 1988, which replaced the provisions of the New Civil code on marriage and
the family, although the Family Code introduced the concept of ‘psychological
incapacity’ as a basis for declaring the marriage void.

In recognition of the history of divorce in the Philippines, the framers of the
1987 Constitution left the wisdom of legalizing divorce to Congress. Thus, the 1987
Constitution does not prohibit the legalization of divorce.

Given the country’s history, the bill seeks to restore divorce as a rights:
based option for majority of Filipinos, an option based on the recognition that
the right to enter into a marriage contract has the corresponding spousal
right to end such contract when it has reached the point of irreparability. The
filing of this bill is anchored on a strong sense of confidence that it will be used
responsibly by Filipino couples. This confidence stems from the experiences of
Filipino families that show that separation is usually the last resort of many
Filipino couples whose marriage has failed. Cases of battered women also support
this, Battered women invariably seck separation only after so many years of trying
to make the marriage work; separation only becomes imperative for them when
they realize that it is necessary for their and their children’s survival. Divorce could
actually provide protection to battered women and their children from further
violence and abuse. With the predominance of the Catholic faith in the Philippines,
the fear that divorce will erode personal values on marriage appears unfounded.
‘The experience of Italy, where the Vatican is located, and Spain, two predominantly
Catholic countries which practice divorce supports this. Historically, those
countries have a low rate of divorce. Italy has a divorce rate of 181 per 1000
married population while the divorce rate in Spain had experienced a decline since
2007.

This bill is respectful of and sensitive to differing religious beliefs in the
Philippines. It recognizes that the plurality of religious beliefs and cultural
sensibilities in the Philippines demand that different remedies for failed marriages
should be made available. For this reason, the bill retains the existing remedies of
legal separation, declaration of nullity of the marriage, and annulment and only
adds divorce as one more remedy. Couples may choose from these remedies
depending on their situation, religious beliefs, cultural sensibilities, needs, and
emotional state. While divorce under this proposed measure severs the bond of
marriage, divorce as a remedy need not be for the purpose of remarriage; it may be
resorted to by individuals to achieve peace of mind and facilitate their pursuit of
full human development, This bill also seeks to make Philippine law consistent with
the way it treats religious beliefs with respect to termination of marriage. Philippine
law through the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines (Presidential
Decree No. 1983 [1977}) allows divorce among Filipino Muslims, in deference to the
Islamic faith which recognizes divorce. Non-Muslim Filipinos should have the same
option under Philippine law, in accordance with their religious beliefs.

‘The bill proposes five grounds for divorce, All the five grounds are premised
on the irreparable breakdown of the marriage and the total non-performance of
marital obligations.

‘Thus, the bill provides that a petition for divorce maybe filed when the
petitioner has been separated de facto (in fact) from his or her spouse for at least
five (5) years at the time of the filing of the petition and reconciliation is highly

Page | 4


improbable, or when the petitioner has been legally separated from his or her
spouse for at least two (2) years at the time of the filing of the petition and
reconciliation is highly improbable.

Not all circumstances and situations that cause the total breakdown of a
marriage could be defined in this proposed measure. Thus, the bill also provides
that divorce maybe granted when the spouses suffer from irreconcilable differences
that have caused the irreparable breakdown of the marriage. Spouses living in a
state of irreparable marital conflict or discord should be given the opportunity to
present their marital contrarieties in court and have those differences adjudged as
constituting a substantial ground to put an end to the marriage.

Another ground for divorce included in the bill is when one or both spouses
are psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations.
This provision will consequently repeal Article 36 of the Family Code. The bill seeks
to include ‘psychological incapacity’ in the grounds for divorce in the belief that the
concept is consistent with the termination of marital ties rather than with a void
marriage.

The bill seeks to eliminate ‘condonation of the act’ and ‘consent to the act’ as
grounds for denying a petition for legal separation and, by extension, a petition for
divoree, Many spouses especially women ignore the offense because of the social
and economic conditions they are in, Many women in the marginalized sectors tend
to condone the offense because they are economically dependent on their spouses
or because of the women-centered stigma attached to failed marriages. Some
women who are perceived to be condoning the acts of their husbands actually
suffer from the cycle of spousal abuse such that they have become so
disempowered to address their situation,

Under the proposed measure, a decree of divorce dissolves the absolute
community or conjugal partnership of gains. The assets shall be equally divided
between the spouses, However, this bill also proposes that in addition to his or her
equal share in the assets, the spouse who is not gainfully employed shall be
entitled to support until he or she finds adequate employment but the right shall
only be effective for not more than one year. This provision is meant to address the
economic deprivation or poverty that many women experience as a result as a
result of marital break-up.

The bill also proposes that the custody of any minor child shall be decided
by the court in accordance with the best interests of the child and their support
provided in accordance with the Family Court provisions on support. Actual, moral
and exemplary damages shall be awarded to the aggrieved spouse when proper in
accordance with the4 provisions of the Civil Code on damages. The proposed
measure also provides that parties shall be disqualified from inheriting from each
other by intestate succession. Moreover, provisions in favor of one spouse made in
the will of the other spouse shalll be revoked by operation of law.

Page [5


‘The Philippines is the only remaining country in the world without a divorce
law. This bill is being introduced based on indications that Philippine society is
ready for the legalization of divorce.

‘The sanctity of marriage is not based on the number of marriages existing
but on the quality of marital relationships. When marriage is no longer viable,
divorce should be an option.

‘Thus, the passage of the bill is urgently requested.

Lorn has
EMMI A, DE JESUS ). BROSAS:

Ny
Gabriela Women’s Party Gabriel Women’s Party

Page | 6


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Batasan Complex, Quezon City

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

2380

House Bill No.

Introduced by:
Gabriela Women’s Party Reps. Emmi A, De Jesus and Arlene D. Brosas

AN ACT
INTRODUCING DIVORCE IN THE PHILIPPINES, AMENDING FOR THE
PURPOSE
ARTICLES 26, 55 TO 66 AND REPEALING ARTICLE 36 UNDER TITLE II OF
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 209, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

SECTION 1, Title II of Executive Order No, 209, as amended, otherwise known as
‘The Family Code of the Philippines, is hereby amended to read as follows:

‘TITLE I
LEGAL SEPARATION AND DIVORCE’

SECTION 2. Articles 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65 and 66 of Executive
Order No. 209, as amended, otherwise known as the Family Code of the
Philippines, are also hereby amended as follows:

“art, 55 (A). A Petition for legal separation may be filed on any of the following
grounds:

(1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the
petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner;

(2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change
religious or political affiliation;

(3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child,
or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such
corruption or inducement;

Page | 7


(4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six
(6) years, even if pardoned;

(6) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;

(6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;

(7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether
in the Philippines or abroad;

(8) Sexual infidelity or perversion OR HAVING A CHILD FROM ANOTHER
PERSON OTHER THAN THE SPOUSE DURING THE MARRIAGE;

(9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner AND/OR
AGAINST THE LIFE OF THE CHILD OF THE PETITIONER; or

(10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more
than one (1) year,

For purposes of this Article, the term ‘child’ shall include a child by nature or by
adoption.

(B) A PETITION FOR DIVORCE MAY BE FILED ON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING
GROUNDS:

(1) THE PETITIONER HAS BEEN SEPARATED DE FACTO FROM HIS OR HER
SPOUSE FOR AT LEAST FIVE (5) YEARS AT THE TIME OF THE FILING OF
‘THE PETITION AND RECONCILIATION IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE;

(2) THE PETITIONER HAS BEEN LEGALLY SEPARATED FROM HIS OR HER
SPOUSE FOR AT LEAST TWO (2) YEARS AT THE TIME OF THE FILING OF
‘THE PETITION AND RECONCILIATION IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE;

(3) WHEN ANY OF THE GROUNDS FOR LEGAL SEPARATION UNDER
PARAGRAPH (A) OF THIS ARTICLE HAS CAUSED THE IRREPARABLE,
BREAKDOWN OF THE MARRIAGE;

(4) WHEN ONE OR BOTH SPOUSES ARE PSYCHOLOGICALLY INCAPACITATED
‘TO COMPLY WITH THE ESSENTIAL MARITAL OBLIGATIONS;

(5) WHEN THE SPOUSES SUFFER FROM IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES
THAT HAVE CAUSED THE IRREPARABLE BREAKDOWN OF THE
MARRIAGE;

“article 56. The petition for legal separation OR DIVORCE shall be denied on any of
the following grounds:

{4} When-the-aggrieved-party-has-condoned-the offense-or-act-complained-of,
(2}Where the aggrieved _party-has-consented-to-the-commission-of the offense-or-act
{(3}} (1) Where there is connivance between the parties in the commission of the
offense or act constituting the ground for legal separation OR DIVORCE;
{{4)-Where-both-parties-have-given-ground-for legal-separation;)

{(5)} (2) Where there is collusion between the parties to obtain the decree of legal
separation OR DIVORCE; {er

{6}-the action -is-barred-by-preseription-}

Page | 8


“Article 87. f i legal-separation-shall_be fled-with: from-th
time-of-the-oceurrence-of the-cause} AN ACTION FOR LEGAL SEPARATION OR
DIVORCE MAY BE FILED AT ANYTIME.”

“article 58. An action for legal separation shall in no case be tried before six (6)
months shall have elapsed since the filing of the petition. THE SAME RULE SHALL
APPLY TO AN ACTION FOR DIVORCE BASED ON ARTICLES 55 (B), NUMBERS 3
AND 5 OF THIS CODE, THIS RULE SHALL NOT APPLY WHERE THE ACTION FOR
LEGAL SEPARATION OR DIVORCE INVOLVES ACTS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST
WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9262. IN SUCH A
CASE, SECTION 19 OF REPUBLIC ACT 9262 SHALL APPLY”,

“Article 59, No legal separation OR DIVORCE may be decreed unless the Court has
taken steps towards the reconciliation of the spouses and is fully satisfied, despite
such efforts, that reconciliation is highly improbable.”

“article 60. No decree of legal separation OR DIVORCE shall be based upon a
stipulation of facts or a confession of judgment.

In any case, the Court shall order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal assigned
to it to take steps to prevent collusion between the parties and to take care that the
evidence is not fabricated or suppressed.”

“Article 61, After the filing of the petition for legal separation OR DIVORCE, the
spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other.

‘The Court, in the absence of a written agreement between the spouses, shall
designate either of them or a third person to administer the absolute community or
conjugal partnership property. The administrator appointed by the Court shall have
the same powers and duties as those of a guardian under the Rules of Court.”

“Article 62, During the pendency of the action for legal separation OR DIVORCE,
the provisions of Article 49 shall likewise apply to the support of the spouses and
the custody and support of their common children.”

“Article 63. (A). The decree of legal separation shall have the following effects:

(1) The spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other, but the
marriage bonds shall not be severed;

(2) The absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be dissolved and
liquidated AND THE ASSETS SHALL BE EQUALLY DIVIDED BETWEEN THE
SPOUSES but the offending spouse shall [have-no-right-to-any-shate-of the
aet-prol d-by-the-abeolute-oonmant partnership,
silon eal be forfeited th “ancsedancenethe'p f-Article-43-(2}]
PAY THE INNOCENT SPOUSE ACTUAL, MORAL AND EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ‘THE CIVIL CODE
ON DAMAGES;

Page |9


(3) The custody of the minor children shall be awarded to the innocent spouse,
subject to the provisions of Article 213 of this code;-fand]

(4) THE INNOCENT SPOUSE AND THE CHILDREN SHALL BE ENTITLED TO
SUPPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE;

(5) THE CHILDREN SHALL BE ENTITLED TO THEIR PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME
WHICH SHALL BE COMPUTED AS OF THE DATE OF THE FINAL
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT; AND

{(4}} (6) The offending spouse shall be disqualified from inheriting from the

innocent spouse by intestate succession. Moreover, provisions in favor of the

offending spouse made in the will of the innocent spouse shall be revoked by
operation of law.

(8) THE DECREE OF DIVORCE SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING EFFECTS:

(1) THE MARRIAGE BONDS SHALL BE SEVERED;

(2) THE ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY OR THE CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP OF
GAINS SHALL BE DISSOLVED AND LIQUIDATED AND THE ASSETS SHALL,
BE EQUALLY DIVIDED BETWEENT HE SPOUSES. IN THE PARTITION OF
THE ASSETS, THE PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME OF THE COMMON
CHILDREN, COMPUTED AS OF THE DATE OF THE FINAL JUDGMENT OF
THE COURT, SHALL BE DELIVERED TO THEM. THE PARTITION AND
DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROPERTIES OF THE SPOUSES AND THE
DELIVERY OF THE CHILDREN’S PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME SHALL BE
RECORDED IN THE APPROPRIATE CIVIL REGISTRY AND REGISTRIES OF
PROPERTY, OTHERWISE THE SAME SHALL NOT AFFECT THIRD
PERSONS;

(3) IN ADDITION TO HIS OR HER EQUAL SHARE IN THE ASSETS OF THE
ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY OR THE CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP, THE SPOUSE
WHO IS NOT GAINFULLY EMPLOYED SHALL BE ENTITLED TO SUPPORT
FROM THE OTHER SPOUSE UNTIL HE OR SHE FINDS ADEQUATE
EMPLOYMENT, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE SUPPORT SHALL ONLY
BE FOR ONE YEAR FROM THE FINALITY OF THE DECREE OF DIVORCE,
AND PROVIDED FURTHER THAT THE RIGHT TO SUPPORT SHALL BE
SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 201 OF THIS CODE;

(4) ACTUAL, MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES SHALL BE AWARDED TO
THE AGGREVED SPOUSE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF
THE CIVIL CODE ON DAMAGES;

(5) THE CUSTODY OF NAY MINOR CHILDREN SHALL BE DECIDED BY THE
COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN,
SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 213 OF THIS CODE;

(6) THE CHILDREN SHALL BE ENTITLED TO SUPPORT IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE;

(7) CHILDREN CONCEIVED OR BORN BEFORE THE DECREE OF DIVORCE
HAS BECOME FINAL AND EXECUTORY SHALL BE CONSIDERED
LEGITIMATE; AND

(8) THE PARTIES SHALL BE DISQUALIFIED FROM INGHERITING FROM EACH
OTHER BY INTESTATE SUCCESSION. MOREOVER, PROVISIONS IN FAVOR

Page | 10


OF ONE SPOUSE MADE IN THE WILL OF THEOTHER SPOUSE SHALL BE
REVOKED BY OPERATION OF LAW.

‘Article 64, After the finality of the decree of legal separation OR DIVORCE, the
innocent spouse IN THE CASE OF LEGAL SEPARATION OR IN THE CASE OF
DIVORCE UNDER ARTICLE 55 (B) NUMBERS 3 AND 5 may revoke the donations
made by him or by her in favor of the offending spouse, as well as the designation
of the of the latter as beneficiary in any insurance policy, even if such designation
be stipulated as irrevocable, The revocation of donations shall be recorded in the
registers of property in the places where the properties are located. Alienations,
liens and encumbrances registered in good faith before the recording of the
complaint for revocation in the registries of property shall be respected. The
revocation of or change in the designation of the insurance beneficiary shall take
effect upon written notification thereof to the finewred} INSURER.

‘The action to revoke the donation under this Article must be brought within five (5)
years from the time the decree of legal separation OR DIVORCE has become final.”

‘Article 65. If the spouses WHO HAVE BEEN LEGALLY SEPARATED should
reconcile, a corresponding joint manifestation under oath duly signed by them shall
be filed with the court in the same proceeding for legal separation.’

‘Article 66. The reconciliation referred to in the preceding Article shall have the
following consequences:

(1) The legal separation proceedings, if still pending, shall thereby be terminated at
whatever stage; and

(2) The final decree of legal separation shall be set aside, but the separation of
property [and any forfeiture of the share of the guilty spouse already effected]
shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to revive their former property regime.

‘The court’s order containing the foregoing shall be recorded in the proper ci
registries’,

SECTION 3. Article 26 of the Family Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

‘Article 26, All marriages solemnized outside of the Philippines, in accordance with
the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as
such, shall also be valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35,
(1), (4), (5) and (6), {36}, 37 and 38.

Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated
and a divorce is thereafter obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or
her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have the capacity to remarry
under Philippine law. A DECREE OF DIVORCE VALIDLY OBTAINED BY A
FILIPINO CITIZEN ABROAD SHALL BE VALID IN THIS COUNTRY ONLY AFTER A
DETERMINATION BY A PHILIPPINE COURT THAT THE SAME IS BASED ON A
GROUND FALLING UNDER ARTICLE 55 (B) OF THIS CODE.’

Page | 11


SECTION 4. Article 36 of the Family Code is hereby repealed.

SECTION 8. Repealing Clause. - The provisions of any law, executive order,
presidential decree or any other issuance inconsistent with this Act are hereby
repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 6. Separability Clause, ~ If any part or provision of this Act is declared
invalid, all other provisions not affected thereby shall remain valid,

SECTION 7. Effectivity Clause, - ‘This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Page | 12