Divorce in the Philippines

Divorce is a contentious issue for the Philippines, which has a predominantly Catholic population. It is not typically legally available to Filipino citizens, and annulment is the usual legal alternative. The Muslim Personal Code, however, allows for divorce for couples who got married through the Islamic rite under specific circumstances. The Philippines is often cited as the "only country in the world" where divorce is illegal, aside from the Vatican City after Malta had divorce legalized in 2011.

Couples may also opt for legal separation, alternatively referred to as "relative divorce", although this process does not dissolve the marriage. Relative divorce is contrasted with "absolute divorce", a setup where previously married individuals are allowed to remarry.

There have been several attempts to legalize absolute divorce in the Philippine Congress.

Spanish colonial era
During the Spanish era in the Philippines, absolute divorce was unrecognized. The colony was under the jurisdiction of the Siete Partidas, which only ever granted couples "relative divorce," which is mensa et thoro or legal separation and does not legally dissolve the actual marital ties. The following are the prerequisite for a relative divorce under the Siete Partidas.


 * One spouse seeks to enter a religious order with consent from the other
 * Adultery has been committed by either spouse
 * Heresy has been demonstrated by one of the spouses, or the spouse has converted to Islam or Judaism

American colonial era
The United States would take over the Philippines after the conclusion of the Spanish–American War. During this period Act No. 2710, or the Divorce Law, became law on March 11, 1917. The legislation provided for divorce a vinculo matrimonii or absolute divorce. Divorce permissibility was fault-based, with the following prerequisite.


 * Adultery must have been committed by the wife, with criminal conviction
 * Concubinage must have been committed by the husband, with criminal conviction

Japanese occupation
When the Japanese Empire occupied the Philippines during the World War II, the Japanese-installed Philippine Executive Commission issued Executive Order No. 141 on March 25, 1943, which repealed Act No. 2710 and expanded the divorce law in the archipelago through the new decree providing eleven grounds for a valid absolute divorce. Following the end of Axis occupation of the islands and the proclamation of the revival of the Philippine Commonwealth on October 23, 1944 by General Douglas MacArthur, Act No. 2710 became, once again, the prevailing law on divorce matters in the Philippines.

Post-Commonwealth and contemporary era
Following the Philippines independence from the United States in the Philippines in 1946, Act No. 2710 remained applicable for a time. Until the enactment of the Republic Act No. 386 or the Civil Code on August 30, 1950 which only allowed for legal separation or what was before known as 'relative divorce' and does not allow for absolute divorce. The grounds were adultery/concubinage by a spouse and an attempt on one's life of one spouse over another. There was deliberation within the Code Commission to include provisions on absolute divorce which was opposed by conservatives.

The Civil Code would be updated through the Family Code in 1987 but the newer law did not allow for absolute divorce. The Civil Code allows for divorce for Muslims for a period of twenty years.

In 1977, President Ferdinand Marcos enacted the Code of Muslim Personal Laws which included absolute divorce provisions for Muslims.

Presidents Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, Benigno Aquino III,  and Rodrigo Duterte have expressed they would not support the passage of an absolute divorce bill during their presidencies, although Aquino mentioned he was open to a 'legal separation' law which would allow couples to re-marry.

Current president Bongbong Marcos has said that he was open to legalizing divorce when he was still a candidate for the 2022 presidential election provided that the option is not made "easy".

Indigenous peoples
Several indigenous peoples' cultures recognize divorce in their marriages including the Ibaloi of Benguet, Tagbanwa of Palawan, Gaddangs of Nueva Vizcaya, the Kankanaeys and Bontocs of the Cordilleras, and the Manobos and B'laans of Mindanao. However, the dissolution of marriages conducted under indigenous peoples' rites through divorce are not recognized by the government.

Muslims
The Code of Muslim Personal Laws of 1977 does allow for divorce for Filipino Muslims, many of who are part of the Moro people. Divorce is unavailable for Muslims, including converts, who got married under the Civil Code.

Transnational marriages
Where a non-Filipino is married to a Filipino citizen and a divorce is obtained abroad by the non-Filipino spouse, the Filipino spouse can remarry under Philippine law, even if the non-Filipino spouse acquired foreign citizenship after the marriage.

Current proposals
The following are the current proposal to legalize divorce in the current 19th Congress of the Philippines.


 * Instituting absolute divorce and dissolution of marriage in the Philippines / House Bill No.4998 – by Davao del Norte 1st district representative Pantaleon Alvarez;
 * Dissolution of Marriage Act (2022) – by Senator Risa Hontiveros; no-fault divorce; parties are not prove criminal offense or 'psychological incapacity' of one party.
 * Unnumbered consolidated bill – absence of no-fault provision, excluded chronic unhappiness as grounds.


 * Senate Bill 2443 - On September 20, 2023, the Philippine Senate Committee on Women, Children, Family Relations and Gender Equality Panel's Committee Report 124 recommended the approval of Senate Bill 2443 It is a substitution of consolidated Senate Bills 147, 213, 237, 554, 555, 1198 and 2047 on the "Dissolution of Marriage Act" sponsored by committee chair Sen. Risa Hontiveros. The bill defines absolute divorce as the “legal termination of a marriage by a court in a legal proceeding.”

Absolute Divorce Act
On May 15, 2024, the House of Representatives in a plenary session presided by Aurelio Gonzales Jr. via voice vote approved on "Second Reading" "Edcel Lagman" House Bill 9349, the proposed "Absolute Divorce Act". As the spouses' fourth way to separate, the bill enumerated limited grounds of the petition as defined by Loreto B. Acharon: Article 45 of the Family Code on annulment of marriage, spouses' de facto 5 years separation, gender-affirming surgery by a spouse or gender transition, psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code, irreconcilable differences, domestic, marital abuse or physical violence under Republic Act 9262, the Violence against women and Their Children Act of 2004 and moral pressure to change religious or political affiliation. The legal separation grounds under the Article 97 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines (2) and Article 55 of the Family Code of the Philippines (10) are also, for now, absolute divorce grounds. The bill also provides validity recognition of a foreign divorce decree by either the alien or Filipino spouse with proper authentication by the Philippine Consul.

Opposition
The legalization of divorce has been opposed on religious grounds. Among those groups who oppose it are the Roman Catholic Church.

Opponents of legalization of divorce has also argued that the state sanctioning such process is unconstitutional on the basis of the provision which mandates the state to uphold the "sanctity of marriage and its being the foundation of the family".

Catholic Church
The Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines through the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) has historically lobbied against any legislation to legalize absolute divorce in the country viewing the sanction of the state of such process as "anti-marriage" and "anti-family". It already maintains that the process of legal separation and annulment for aggrieved married couples are already sufficient.

Bishop Socrates Villegas as CBCP President in 2015, in a published position argued that legalizing divorce is contrary to human rights especially of the children of divorce couples. He says that allowing divorce would deter couples from working on their relationship first. He says that children whose married parents already availed legal separation are already traumatized and that divorce would allow "a total stranger" to enter their lives in a form of a new legal spouse which would make their situation worse.

In May 2024, the CBCP's Fr. Jerome Secillano told the Philippine Daily Inquirer that it strongly opposes the bill's approval for being "anti-family, anti-marriage and anti-children and a betrayal of their constitutional mandate to uphold marriage and the family.”

The Couples for Christ strongly opposed any divorce law in the Philippines. In June 2024, it published a manifesto stating "Marriages formed in love and mutual understanding can be happy, enduring, and fulfilling." It stressed that single parent children become victims of parental breakup resulting in permanent emotional, psychological, financial or even physical social stigma.

Other Christian groups
The Iglesia ni Cristo prohibits its members from availing divorce, and maintains that couples in a troubled marriages should work on their differences.

Bishop Modesto Villasanta of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) meanwhile expressed that his group is open to discuss the issue of divorce. Villasanta states that it is "up to the Church on how they will teach their people the importance of marriage and not on barring its (a divorce bill's) approval".

Alternatives to divorce
While divorce is largely not recognized by the state, marriages can be ended in the Philippines through annulment or declaring it null and void. Couples can also avail of legal separation.