By Ben Rosario

Citing rules applicable for the swift passage of legislative proposals, the House committee on population and family relations approved bills proposing the legalization of divorce, ignoring the strong opposition aired by family welfare advocates and the Catholic Church.

Acting on a motion by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, author and prime mover of the divorce bill in Congress, the House panel unanimously endorsed the passage of the measures and decided to create a technical working group to consolidate the three bills instituting absolute divorce in the country.

Lagman cited Rule 48 of the House rules in support of committee action on the measure.

Under the said rule, a legislative committee may vote on a pending measure even if only one hearing has been conducted if the said bill has been approved on third and final reading in the preceding Congress.

With Davao del Norte Rep. Pantaleon Alvarez as speaker and principal author of one of five divorce bills filed during the 17th Congress, the consolidated measure was passed on third and final reading.

However, the Senate failed to pass its own version, resulting in the non-approval of the controversial bill during the previous Congress.

Fr. Jerome Siciliano, head of the public affairs office of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), lamented the House panel’s action, saying this is the first time he was invited to present the CBCP’s stand on the issue.

“It was so hasty, it lacks deliberations,” Siciliano said. “We would have wanted to have more consultations, deliberations, discussions, and debates but we were not given the opportunity.”

The Catholic church representative noted that the divorce bill is unconstitutional.

“They claim that this is the solution to troubled marriages; how can this be the solution when they will be giving couples the chance to go on separate ways,” he said.

According to Siciliano, there are a number of legal remedies that troubled couples may resort to, pointing out that they can seek legal separation and annulment.

In a position paper, lawyer Ronaldo T. Reyes of the Advocates for Family and Life slammed the move to legalize divorce, pointing out the bills are “diametrically opposed” to Constitutional and statutory provisions.

He assailed the divorce measures as espousing “quickie marriages.”

The authors of the bill include members of the Makabayan bloc, Alvarez, and Lagman.

In the Lagman proposal, absolute divorce maybe granted by a court on the following grounds, based on the grounds for legal separation which are modified under the following circumstances:

1. 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;

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

5. Drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, or chronic gambling of the respondent;

6. Homosexuality of the respondent;

7. Contracting by the respondent of subsequent bigamous marriage whether in the Philippines or abroad;

8. Marital infidelity or perversion or having a child with another person other than one’s spouse during marriage;

9. Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner;

10. Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.