Dear PAO,

I was previously married. Nonetheless, my spouse (a foreign national) and I were able to obtain a divorce decree abroad through our joint petition after failing to settle our irreconcilable issues. When I inquired about whether this divorce would be recognized here in the Philippines, I encountered a potential issue regarding its enforcement. I was told that I cannot have it enforced since I was a joint petitioner with my foreign spouse, and our laws in the Philippines allegedly prohibit recognition of a divorce obtained abroad upon the instance or concurrence of the Filipino spouse. Is this contention correct?

Wilbert

Dear Wilbert,

To answer your question, allow me to lead your attention to our pertinent laws and jurisprudence. In this regard, Article 26 paragraph 2 of Executive Order 209, otherwise known as the Family Code of the Philippines, finds application, viz.:

“Article. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), 3637 and 38. (17a)

“Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law. (As amended by Executive Order 227).” (Emphasis and Underscoring Supplied)

Explaining the aforementioned provision of law, the Supreme Court, in the landmark case of Republic vs. Manalo (GR 221029, 24 April 2018) penned by the Honorable Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta, says:

“Paragraph 2 of Article 26 speaks of ‘a divorce x x x validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry.’ Based on a clear and plain reading of the provision, it only requires that there be a divorce validly obtained abroad. The letter of the law does not demand that the alien spouse should be the one who initiated the proceeding wherein the divorce decree was granted. It does not distinguish whether the Filipino spouse is the petitioner or the respondent in the foreign divorce proceeding. x x x

“To reiterate, the purpose of Paragraph 2 of Article 26 is to avoid the absurd situation where the Filipino spouse remains married to the alien spouse who, after a foreign divorce decree that is effective in the country where it was rendered, is no longer married to the Filipino spouse. The provision is a corrective measure to address an anomaly where the Filipino spouse is tied to the marriage while the foreign spouse is free to marry under the laws of his or her country. Whether the Filipino spouse initiated the foreign divorce proceeding or not, a favorable decree dissolving the marriage bond and capacitating his or her alien spouse to remarry will have the same result: the Filipino spouse will effectively be without a husband or wife. A Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce proceeding is in the same place and in like circumstances as a Filipino who is at the receiving end of an alien initiated proceeding. Therefore, the subject provision should not make a distinction.” (Emphasis and Underscoring Supplied)

In a much recent case, the Supreme Court referred to the ruling in Manalo that it is immaterial if the foreign or Filipino spouse initiated the divorce proceeding. In Abel vs. Rule (GR 234457, May 12, 2021) penned by the Honorable Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, the High Court emphasized that pursuant to the majority ruling in Manalo, Article 26(2) of the Family Code applies to mixed marriages where the divorce decree is: (i) obtained by the foreign spouse; (ii) obtained jointly by the Filipino and foreign spouse; and (iii) obtained solely by the Filipino spouse, thus:

“This is not a novel issue.

“In Republic v. Manalo and succeeding cases, we have consistently held that it is irrelevant if the foreign or Filipino spouse initiated the foreign divorce proceeding. Thus, the question that should be raised before the courts ‘is not who among the spouses initiated the proceedings but rather if the divorce obtained… was valid.’ x x x

“Here, petitioner and private respondent jointly filed for the summary dissolution of their marriage and their petition was granted by the Superior Court of California.

“Public respondent avers that the divorce decree cannot be recognized in our jurisdiction because it was not obtained solely by petitioner, who was then the foreign spouse, as required by Article 26(2) of the Family Code. Public respondent is mistaken.

“xxx

“A clear and plain reading of the provision shows that what is only required is that the divorce must have been validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse. It does not impose an additional requirement for the alien spouse to solely obtain the divorce.” (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

Applying the foregoing, a divorce decree obtained jointly by a Filipino spouse with his or her foreign spouse may be recognized if it is proven and established that such divorce decree was validly obtained abroad. To reiterate, it is immaterial that such divorce decree was obtained upon the instance of the Filipino spouse, the foreigner spouse, or even upon their joint instance as in your query.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. Please be reminded that this advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated on.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]