Source: http://www.clsadb.com/document/cfa17ec8-9347-4151-a705-c95ef9eb90ef
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 18:39:39+00:00

Document:
Pope Francis, Apostolic letter motu proprio by which the canons of the Code of Canon Law pertaining to cases regarding the nullity of marriage are reformed Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus, 15 August 2015.
Through the centuries, the Church, having attained a clearer awareness of the words of Christ, came to and set forth a deeper understanding of the doctrine of the indissolubility of the sacred bond of marriage, developed a system of nullities of matrimonial consent, and put together a juridical process more fitting to the matter so that ecclesiastical discipline might conform more and more to the truth of the faith she was professing.
It is with this awareness that we decided to undertake a reform of the processes regarding the nullity of marriage, and we accordingly assembled a Committee for this purpose comprised of men renown for their knowledge of the law, their pastoral prudence, and their practical experience. This Committee, under the guidance of the Dean of the Roman Rota, drew up a plan for reform with due regard for the need to protect the principle of the indissolubility of the marital bound. Working quickly, this Committee devised within a short period of time a framework for the new procedural law that, after careful examination with the help of other experts, is now presented in this motu proprio.
All of this also reflects the wishes of the majority of our brother bishops gathered at the recent extraordinary synod who were asking for a more streamlined and readily accessible juridical process.4 Agreeing wholeheartedly with their wishes, we have decided to publish these provisions that favor not the nullity of marriages, but the speed of processes as well as the simplicity due them, lest the clouds of doubt overshadow the hearts of the faithful awaiting a decision regarding their state because of a delayed sentence.
We have done this following in the footsteps of our predecessors who wished cases of nullity to be handled in a juridical rather than an administrative way, not because the nature of the matter demands it, but rather due to the unparalleled need to safeguard the truth of the sacred bond: something ensured by the juridical order.
I. A single executive sentence in favor of nullity. First of all, it seemed that a double conforming decision in favor of the nullity of a marriage was no longer necessary to enable the parties to enter into a new canonical marriage. Rather, moral certainty on the part of the first judge in accord with the norm of law is sufficient.
II. A single judge under the responsibility of the bishop. In the first instance, the responsibility of appointing a single judge, who must be a cleric, is entrusted to the bishop, who in the pastoral exercise of his juridical powers must guard against all laxism.
III. The bishop himself as judge. In order that a teaching of the Second Vatican Council regarding a certain area of great importance finally be put into practice, it has been decided to declare openly that the bishop himself, in the church over which he has been appointed shepherd and head, is by that very fact the judge of those faithful entrusted to his care. It is thus hoped that the bishop himself, be it of a large or small diocese, stand as a sign of the conversion of ecclesiastical structures,5 and that he does not delegate completely the duty of deciding marriage cases to the offices of his curia. This is especially true in the streamlined process for handling cases of clear nullity being established in the present document.
IV. Briefer process. For indeed, in simplifying the ordinary process for handling marriage cases, a sort of briefer process was devised – besides the current documentary procedure –, to be applied in those cases where the alleged nullity of marriage is supported by particularly clear arguments.
V. Appeal to the metropolitan see. It is necessary that the appeal process be restored to the metropolitan see, especially since that duty, insofar as the metropolitan see is the head of the ecclesiastical province, stands out through time as a stable and distinctive sign of synodality in the Church.
VI. The duty proper to episcopal conferences. Conferences of bishops, which above all should be driven by apostolic zeal to reach out to the dispersed faithful, should especially feel the duty of participating in the aforementioned “conversion” and they should respect the restored and defended right of organizing judicial power in their own particular churches.
VII. Appeal to the Apostolic See. In accord with a revered and ancient right, it is still necessary to retain the appeal to the ordinary tribunal of the Holy See, namely the Roman Rota, so as to strengthen the bond between the See of Peter and the particular churches, with due care, however, to keep in check any abuse of the practice of this appeal, lest the salvation of souls should be jeopardized.
VIII. Provisions for Easter Churches. Finally, given the particular ecclesial and disciplinary arrangement of Eastern Churches, we have decided to publish, separately and on this very day, revised norms for updating the handling of matrimonial processes as presented in the Code of Canons of Eastern Churches.
Can. 1673 § 1. In each diocese, the judge in first instance for cases of nullity or marriage for which the law does not expressly make an exception is the diocesan bishop, who can exercise judicial power personally or through others according to the norm of law.
§ 4. The bishop moderator, if a collegial tribunal cannot be constituted in the diocese or in a nearby tribunal chosen according to the norm of § 2, is to entrust cases to a single clerical judge who, where possible, is to employ two assessors of upright life, experts in juridical or human sciences, approved by the bishop for this task; unless it is otherwise evident, the same single judge has competency for those things attributed to the college, the praeses, or the ponens.
Can. 1676 § 1. After receiving the libellus, the judicial vicar, if he considers that it has some basis, admits it and, by a decree appended to the bottom of the libellus itself, is to order that a copy be communicated to the defender of the bond and, unless the libellus was signed by both parties, to the respondent, giving them a period of fifteen days to express their views on the petition.
2° to inspect the judicial acts, even those not yet published, and to review the documents presented by the parties.
Can. 1681. If an executive sentence has been issued, one can go at anytime to a tribunal of the third level for a new proposition of the case according to the norm of can. 1644, provided new and grave proofs or arguments are brought forward within the peremptory time limit of thirty days from the proposed challenge.
Can. 1682 § 1. After the sentence declaring the nullity of the marriage has been executed, the parties whose marriage has been declared null can contract a new marriage unless a prohibition attached to the sentence itself or established by the local ordinary forbids this.
§ 2. As soon as the sentence is executed, the judicial vicar must notify the local ordinary of the place in which the marriage took place. The local ordinary must take care that the declaration of the nullity of the marriage and any possible prohibitions are noted as soon as possible in the marriage and baptismal registers.
Art. 1. The bishop, under can. 383, § 1 is obliged, with an apostolic spirit, to attend to separated or divorced spouses who perhaps, by the conditions of their lives, have abandoned religious practice. He thus shares, together with pastors (cf. can. 529, § 1), the pastoral solicitude for these faithful in difficulties.
Art. 2. The pre-judicial or pastoral investigation, which in the context of diocesan and parish structures receives those separated or divorced faithful who have doubts regarding the validity of their marriage or are convinced of its nullity, is, in the end, directed toward understanding their situation and to gathering the material useful for the eventual judicial process, be it the ordinary or the briefer one. This investigation will be developed within the unified diocesan pastoral care of marriage.
Art. 3. This same investigation is entrusted to persons deemed suitable by the local ordinary, with the appropriate expertise, though not exclusively juridical-canonical. Among them in the first place is the pastor or the one who prepared the spouses for the wedding celebration. This function of counseling can also be entrusted to other clerics, religious or lay people approved by the local ordinary.
One diocese, or several together, according to the present groupings, can form a stable structure through which to provide this service and, if appropriate, a handbook (vademecum) containing the elements essential to the most appropriate way of conducting the investigation.
Art. 15. If the libellus was presented to introduce the ordinary process, but the judicial vicar believes the case may be treated with the briefer process, he is, in the notification of the libellus according to can. 1676, § 1, to invite the respondent who has not signed the libellus to make known to the tribunal whether he or she intends to enter and take an interest in the process. As often as is necessary, he invites the party or parties who have signed the libellus to complete it as soon as possible according to the norm of can. 1684.
2 Cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 1752.
3 Cf. Paulus VI, Allocutio iis qui II Conventui Internationali Iuris Canonici interfuerunt, September 17, 1973.
5 Cf. Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, n. 27, in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis 105 (2013), p. 1031.

References: V. 
 § 1

§ 4
 § 2
 § 1
 § 1

§ 2

Art. 1
 § 1
 § 1

Art. 2

Art. 3

Art. 15
 § 1