goes to human rights protection page
links to human rights promotion page
link to human rights linkages development programs
link to special programs page
 
links to home page
links to about CHRP page
links to about human rights page
links to programs and services page
links to news and reports page
goes to links page
links to contact us page
links to site map
      
               
goes back to HR position papers 15-17 page
links to HR position papers 20-23 page

 

ON
SENATE BILL NOS. 39, 509
and
HOUSE BILL NO. 88

"An Act to Prevent Graft and Corruption and Improve Government Services to the People by Cutting Government Bureaucratic Red Tape"Introduced by Senators Flavier and Revilla and Congressman Cuenco)

=========================

           The proposed bill seeks to curtail corruption of public officers or employees by eliminating bureaucratic red tape in the government.

          Red tape has been one of the major causes of delay in the delivery of basic services to the people. Very often, a person interested in a certain transaction with the government without enough time or patience to wait for a favorable consideration are tempted to bribe the public officer or employee whom they are dealing with and resort to what we call as "lagay system." This system opened the gate of opportunity for fixers who mediate in a government transaction for the sole purpose of gaining money. As a result, this form of corruption has become a part of our government process.

          These practices are against the policy of the state as expressed in the Constitution that, public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must discharge their functions for the benefit of the people for whom it is held by them in trust and not for their personal purposes.

          The Commission on Human Rights condemns these practices in the government and for this reason, it strongly recommends the immediate passage of these bills.

          Quezon City , 19 May 1999

ON
HOUSE BILL NO. 6993

entitled
"An Act Legalizing Divorce in the Philippines "

=========================

          There are two kinds of divorce, namely: absolute divorce (a vinculo matrimony ), where there is dissolution of the matrimonial bond and the spouses are free to remarry; and, the relative divorce (a mensa et thoro ), which is a bed and board separation but the matrimonial bond is preserved.

          House Bill No. 6993 proposes absolute divorce on the same grounds for legal separation under Article 55 of the Family Code. The bill adds another ground for divorce, namely, upon "a showing that there is an irremediable breakdown of the marriage relationship due to irreconcilable marital differences. Said petition must specifically allege the grounds which destroy the legitimate ends of the marriage relationship and prevent any reasonable expectation of reconciliation." (Amending Article 55 of the Family Code).

          Under the proposed bill, absolute divorce can be secured on the following grounds:

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

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

5)  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;

9)  Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner; or

10)  Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year. (Article 55, Family Code of the Philippines )

          In addition, a petition for divorce may be filed upon a showing that there is an irremediable breakdown of the marriage relationship due to irreconcilable marital differences. Said petition must specifically allege the grounds which destroys the legitimate ends of the marriage relationship and prevent any reasonable expectation of reconciliation."

          There are various issues involved in the proposed law, including religious and moral principles. The Commission on Human Rights (CHR), however, limits its comments on the basis of human rights and constitutional principles.

          Divorce as Destructive to Family

          Any legislation legalizing absolute divorce will tend to destroy the family as a social institution. The protection and preservation of the family is provided in several international instruments on human rights. Article 23(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states:

"The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of a society and is entitled to protection by society and the State."

          Likewise, Article 10(1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights reads:

"The State parties to the present Covenant recognize that"

          1)  The evident double protection and assistance should be accorded to the family, which is the natural and fundamental group unit of society particularly, for its establishment and while it is responsible for the care and education of dependent children.

          The aforesaid human rights principles have been reiterated in the Philippine Constitution which reads:

"The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the government." (Article II, Section 12)

 "The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total development." (Article XV, Section 1).

          The Family Code, which into effect on 1987, defines "Marriage" as a permanent union. Article 1 of the said Code reads:

"Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subjected to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code." (Underscoring Supplied)

           Article 220 of the Civil Code reads:

"In case of doubt, all presumptions favor the solidarity of the family. Thus, every intendment of law or facts leans toward the validity of marriage, the indissolubility of the marriage bonds, the legitimacy of children, the community of children, and the validity of defense for any member of the family in case unlawful aggression."

          Since marriage is a permanent union, any law that allows absolute divorce is contrary to the aforesaid provisions and destroys the very concept of family as an inviolable social institution. The contention of the proponent of House Bill No. 6993 that divorce will give an opportunity to separate with an intolerable spouse is not a conclusive assurance that by entering another marriage will be a good and successful. The experience in countries where divorce is easily obtained such as in the United States is that, persons who were divorced have experienced more divorces. One divorce begets another divorce. Once an individual gets a divorce to get rid of an undesirable spouse, he or she is likely to secure more divorces until he or she finds a spouse satisfactory to him or her. The latest decision on this matter is Fe D. Quita vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124862, December 22, 1998 , involving a woman who divorced twice and remarried three times. This obviously destroys the family as a social institution which the State should protect.

          One basic reason why the proposed bill will tend to destroy the institution of marriage is that the grounds thereof can be intentionally created by one spouse with the intention of cutting the matrimonial bonds. This is the basic difference with the Declaration of Nullity of the Marriage where the grounds of annulment of the marriage exist at the time of the marriage such as psychological incapacity of one or both spouses under Article 36 of the Family Code.

          Divorce as a Violation of the Human Rights of a Child

          The divorce of parents will have adverse effects on the children's rights. Any dispute of parents which will result in an absolute divorce will not only destroy the foundation of the family as an inviolable social institution but will adversely affect the rights of children who are entitled to special protection of a family environment (Article 20, Convention on the Rights of Children).

          Article 63 of the bill provides that the custody of children will be given to the innocent spouse. Thus, the guilty spouse leaves the conjugal home and is relieved of his obligation to give due care that the children are entitled to. The guilty spouse may be ordered by the Court to provide support for the wife and children, but this situation is impractical in the Philippines where almost one-half of Filipino families are living below the decent standard of living. Most people are unemployed or underemployed hence, they do not have the capacity to provide for the regular monthly subsistence to their family. Under this situation, there is no assurance that an innocent spouse, who is left with the custody children can be sufficiently supported.

          IN VIEW THEREOF, the Commission on Human Rights respectfully OPPOSES the enactment of House Bill No. 6993.

          Let copies of this position paper be sent to the Honorable Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Manuel Villar and the sponsor of the bill, Hon. Manuel C. Ortega.


          Quezon City , 27 May 1999