The Supreme Court (SC), known as the court of last resort, has promulgated landmark rulings in the last years, which the public had either praised or criticized.
These decisions included the definition of red-tagging, the finalization of Sulu’s exit from the Bangsamoro region, and the affirmation of the highly contested anti-terror law.
But the SC’s notable rulings also touched on personal issues, like family, relationships, and even marriage.
Here are some of the High Court’s important rulings that touch on love — or the things in between or after, like marriage, separation, and violence.
Same-sex marriage
In 2015, openly gay lawyer Jesus Falcis filed a historic petition to legalize same-sex union in a predominantly Catholic country that is the Philippines. Three years later, his petition was scheduled for oral arguments, which is part of the standard process for petitions filed with the SC.
Only a year after the oral arguments, the High Court junked Falcis’ petition due to technicalities, or for not following proper procedures in SC cases. His petition was junked due to lack of legal standing, for violating the hierarchy of courts, and for failing to raise an actual and justiciable controversy.
Petitions may be dismissed if they did not follow the required rules, as exemplified in the Falcis case.
But even though it denied the petition, the SC noted that the 1987 Constitution, the country’s supreme law, does not ban same-sex marriage.
“From its plain text, the Constitution does not define, or restrict, marriage on the basis of sex, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression,” the SC said in its decision. “The Court, through the ponente, recognized the protracted history of discrimination and marginalization faced by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and other gender and sexual minorities (LGBTQI+) community, along with their still ongoing struggle for equality.”
Then-acting chief justice Antonio Carpio said during the SC interpellations that same-sex civil union is constitutional. He explained that this union is protected under a person’s constitutional right to freedom of association.
Meanwhile, Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, who penned the decision, said the issue of same-sex union may be a matter that needs to be discussed in Congress, the government branch created to craft and pass laws.
During a lecture at the University of the Philippines’ (UP) College of Law in February 2024, Leonen also talked about love, which touched on same-sex marriage.
“The capacity to love is a human capacity. You are not less human just because you find love in the same biological sex. You are not less human if you want a relationship that is different from marriage. You are not less human if your premise with another is that there is no forever but you can work to be with each other for as long as you both can. Make love real for all our people,” the senior magistrate said.
Separation
Divorce is not yet legal in the Philippines, but a union may be cut through legal separation, annulment, or declaration of nullity of marriage.
Annulment is different from declaration of nullity because in this case, the marriage between a man and a woman is considered valid until declared void. Meanwhile, nullity is a case where the marriage is void from the beginning because of conditions present even before the marriage was solemnized, or because some requirements for marriage were not present during the union.
In a landmark ruling in 2021, the SC unanimously decided that psychological incapacity as a ground to nullify a marriage can be based on the totality of evidence. This meant that the determination of this ground may not be a clinical diagnosis, but rather be based on the evidence that will be assessed by the judge.
“This Court now categorically abandons the second Molina guideline. Psychological incapacity is neither a mental incapacity nor a personality disorder that must be proven through expert opinion,” said the ruling penned by Leonen.
“Ordinary witnesses who have been present in the life of the spouses before the latter contracted marriage may testify on behaviors that they have consistently observed from the supposedly incapacitated spouse. From there, the judge will decide if these behaviors are indicative of a true and serious incapacity to assume the essential marital obligations,” it added.
Meanwhile, there are efforts for divorce to be finally recognized in the Philippines, but a law has yet to be passed to legalize this process. Nevertheless, the SC has already made it clear that although divorce is not yet legal locally, our laws recognize divorce obtained abroad with a foreigner.
In 2024, the High Court ruled that the Philippines recognizes this type of divorce — whether through legal or administrative process or by mutual agreement.
“The Court held that the type of divorce, whether administrative or judicial, did not matter. As long as the divorce is valid under the foreign spouse’s national law, it will be recognized in the Philippines for the Filipino spouse,” the SC said, quoting the decision penned by Associate Justice Japar Dimaampao.
Leonen also had this to say about maintaining relationships in his UP law forum: “Those who establish and maintain relationships and love differently from the ideals of the conservative Catholic majority are not less human, they are no less Filipinos. To be different is not to be abnormal. To be different from the hegemonic definition of what humans should be is not illegitimate.”
Violence
Unfortunately, violence, instead of love, is at the center of some relationships.
Republic Act No. 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children (VAWC) law is among the most common legal protection for wives and their children in abusive relationships. In recent rulings, the SC clarified that violence could be mental or psychological, and not just physical.
In a March 2023 ruling penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, the SC said that physical violence is the most visible form of abuse, but there are also other forms of violence such as sexual, psychological, and economic abuse. The same ruling noted that marital infidelity is considered a violation of the VAWC law because it falls under psychological violence.
Another VAWC-related ruling penned by Associate Justice Mario Lopez noted in 2023 that the law may be filed against mothers too. It explained that the law covers instances where mothers allegedly commit violent and abusive acts against their own children.
The court explained that the definition of violence against women and children covers acts “committed by any person” — which means mothers are not excluded. The law also used the gender-neutral word “person” to pertain to the offender. Although men are not covered by the law, husbands can file VAWC cases on behalf of their children against abusive mothers, as also stated by the ruling.
For relationships involving two women, the SC also reiterated in a 2023 ruling by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul Inting that the anti-VAWC law also covers lesbian relationships.
“VAWC may likewise be committed ‘against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship.’ Clearly, the use of the gender-neutral word ‘person’ who has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the woman encompasses even lesbian relationships,” the ruling said.
The most recent case that invoked this ruling was the filing of a VAWC complaint by socialite and internet personality Tessa Prieto against her ex-girlfriend, Angel Chua. – Rappler.com