Separated senator says no to divorce


Senator Francis Escudero. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines—Senator Francisco Escudero, who parted ways with his wife last year, said he is opposed to the legalization of divorce in the country.

At the Kapihan sa Senado news forum, the senator said the Family Code’s provisions on legal separation and annulment were enough options for addressing dysfunctional marriages.

“In my view, there is a serious disagreement between the government, Congress and the (Catholic) Church over the Reproductive Health bill, so this is not the right time to exacerbate this (rift),” he also said.

The Philippines is the only remaining country outside the Vatican that does not have a divorce law.

Gabriela party-list Representatives Luz Ilagan and Emmi de Jesus have filed a bill introducing divorce in the country. It is languishing at the House committee on revision of laws.

Escudero has filed a petition to annul his marriage in 1999 to Christine Elizabeth “Tintin” Flores, with whom he has fraternal twins—a boy and a girl.

Escudero took pains to explain the difference between divorce and annulment.

“Legally, the ground and basis for annulment should have existed at the time you were married,” he said. While in the divorce law in the US, for example, incompatibility is allowed as a legal ground to seek the nullity of marriage.

However, Escudero pointed to “a small window for divorce” in Article 36 of the Family Code.

“There is a catchphrase that allows a small window for divorce. In Article 36 of the Family Code, the basis for psychological incapacity as a ground for annulment must exist at the time of marriage, and this is the questionable phrase, even though it became apparent after the marriage,” he said.

“So it’s a ‘not here nor there’ (provision), which does not jibe with the legal and technical difference of divorce and annulment,” he said.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • guest1500

    I think only the rich can avail of this annulment clause of the law. The poor, patient one can only suffer in silence.

  • tadasolo

    right a way you can sense hypocrisy in the senator on one hand he is OK with complicated long drawn out process of annulment and separation(which by the way people of means and resources could used) with his wife which in all its meaning is divorce (GONE). Uncontested divorce is what the Philippines need and liberate those who are in an abusive relationships and cannot stand it anymore. However in any divorce the law the interest of children should be protected first

    • Crater Kid

      is the senator annuled?

  • staad

    clearly this guy is out of touch with reality. who cares about his dysfunctional life.
    divorce is a legal right of anyone.

  • us_sixtycents

    Is there any existing law that prohibit a man marrying his “right” or “left” hand?

    If not, that would be awesome! oh c’mon guys.. let’s do this.. we don’t need drama everytime we go out and come home… everybody does it… err…

    • CtrlSelfDelete

      Why buy the cow when you can have the milk for free? wait..

      • juan tamad

        tama.. wag na magpakasal.. para d na kailangan ang divorce… wala pang gasto sa serimonya…

  • Mildred Meldrd

    He’s clearly hypocrite, typical politician ..

  • Meinsideout Ako

    Re-electionist double face, calculated political move huh

  • ahabeek

    chiz……very visible nowadays… anyway, annulment nor divorce is only for those who can afford to pay fees but now to Juan dela Cruz.. better think of bills that will benefit the marginalize people

    • juan tamad

      you need not a single centavo/// wag ka makipagkasal… wala ka na gasto sa kasal.. makakalabas kapa kaagad sa pagsasama nyo kung live-in ka lang… pinapahirapan nyo pa mga sarili nyo… KAsAL kASAL na gusto naman pala makipaghiwalay..

  • ethicsingov

    typical . . . men think only on their benefit; while they can womanize even at the time of marriage; women are unlawful to have a relationship even after a breakdown of marriage

    • juan tamad

      pariho yun unlawful… guilty lang si babe kuno… haysus…

  • TwiggyRamirez

    …i want to have a choice. annulment is only for the rich people.

    • juan tamad

      makipag live-in ka na lang… all the choices nasa sa yo…

      • TwiggyRamirez

        …paano naman yung mga married na pero impyerno naman ang buhay nila? anong choice nilang makapag start ulit nang matinong buhay? yan ang choice na sinasabi ko.

  • dead_pixel

    Isang basurang politiko na dapat sa basurahan tinatapon!

  • jr_06498

    Ang pag kaka unawa ko sa kaibahan ng divorce at annulment. Ang divorce ay hindi mo kailangan ang ano mang pag sangayon ng mag asawa, at hindi kailangan pa ang pag sang ayon ng simbahan. Kung ang nag piprisinta ng divorce si Babae, walang magagawa si lalake, at kung si lalake ang nag piprisinta wala din magagawa si babae at gayundin ang simbahan.

    Ang annulment kailangan ang pag sang ayon ni babae at ni lalake, at kina kailangan ang pag sangayon ng simbahan. Ito lamang po ang aking pag kakaalam.

  • jr_06498

    Kung sa bagay mag kaminsan nakaka awa naman ang mga kababaihan kung puro problema ang ginagawa ni lalake, Walang magawa si babae kung hindi ang mag sakripisiyo, mag tiis iyan ang turo ng simbahan mag tiis at iyan ay isang pag subok lamang ng tunay na pag ibig, kaya kahit masakit ang katawan ni babae sa ka gugulpe ni lalake kasalanan pa rin sa diyos ang hiwalayan si lalake.(PELIKULANG PILIPINO).
    Siguro mahilig manuod ng sine si Escudero.

    • Teofilo

      Tama ka. magtitiis na lang ang babae kasi sabi ng CBCP ‘in sickness and in health till death do us part” or kahit bugbog sarado kana dahil sabi ng mga bishop na may pajero from PCSO iyan ang utos ng Diyos na mahalin hangang sa dulo ng walang hangan. corny.

      • jr_06498

        Magandang umaga po mg Teofilo.

        Ang hindi ko po matanggap para sa aking isipan kung bakit patuloy pa rin tayong mga Pilipino
        sa mga makalumang paniniwala? Napakarami na po ang mga kababaihan ang nag durusa, Mga kababaihan
        na gustong talikuran ang mga pag kakamali ay gustong mag hanap ng panibagong buhay, pero sa dahilang walang divoce sa
        dito sa atin sa Pilipinas, kinakailangang may roon salapi ang mag piprisenta ng annulment. Samantalang kung may Divorce,
        walang dapat gawin kung hindi mag apply sa divorce court hindi mo kailangan ang abogado tapos ang pag hihirap ni babae.

        Alam po ba ninyo ang annulment ay nanganga ilangan ng halagang 200,000.00 peso, para lumakad ang papeles mo, at kung ayaw ni lalake
        saan kukuha ng salape ang kaawa awang si babae.

        2012/6/15 Disqus

      • juan tamad

        makabago kamo hanap mo… e d wag ka na magpakasal… BAGO naman siguro hanap mo… mas bago yun, bat ba kailangan magpakasal para magsama tapos hihingi hingi ng divorce later (sa US.. more than 50% nag didivorce),….. bat ka ba naman gusto magpakasal kung kalahati ng kinakasal ay naghihwalay… pwede naman magsama ng d kasal…. anyway.. divorce and living-in are both SIN according to catholic church… eh sin pala yung dalawa… e dun ka na sa live-in… walang pang hassle makipaghiwalay…

  • Political Jaywalker

    Some couples can’t even afford to get married living in “sin” daw and Escudero wants them to go through the long drawn expensive process of annulment, LOL…..

  • blainz

    So many things about this rankle me.

    Annulment costs so much more than divorce that it is practically available only for the rich. Alan Cayetano asked “Bakit iba ang batas para sa mahihirap at mayayaman”, perhaps one reason is that the well-off senator above could afford not to symphatize with the fate of the less well-off.

    A divorce law can carry with it a legal responsibilty on the part of the breadwinner (usually the father) to provide financial support to their children until the age of 18. A man cheating on his wife could also be forced to pay alimony. This will act as a deterrent to men having affairs and men battering their wives while maintaing the imprimatur that they are upstanding husbands because the wives are essentially forced to remain in the marriage for economic reasons.

    This will also help in cases of complete abandonment, where children can (and are) left without means to go to school and the women are reduced to abject poverty.

    On the scenario that there is no monetary help to be had, at the very least, the aggrieved spouse can stop marital abuse and go on with their lives.

    Absent a divorce law, women are seriously economically disadvantaged. The only exceptions to this case happen in the upper classes, when the woman has means enough to sustain herself and the children independently of the man.

    Another thing that upsets me here is the oft-repeated scare tactic of “we shouldn’t upset the bishops”. Really what this means is: “I need to get reelected, so I can’t upset the bishops”. Rank self-serving hypocrisy to the max. TRAPO!

    And for those who claim that “The sanctity of marriage will be damaged by having a divorce law”, please realize: that the dignity of a marriage rests upon the conduct of the couple, and that it is up to your God of choice to add the sanctifying bit, not Congress.

    Time to stop the reign of Padre Damaso.

    • juan tamad

      asus… wag na kayo magpakasal,.,,,, live-in nalang… walang problema… kung gusto mo palitan.., hiwalayan mo at magpunta ka lang sa kanto.. pick up ka ng prosti… may bago ka ng ka sex… divorce is not needed…

  • padrefaura

    tulungan na lang ni chiz ang kaibigan nyang namamahala ng malacanang. ipapasa nya ang batas sa same sex marriage.

  • esther


    • juan tamad

      dapat d ka na nagpakasal… para d na kailangan ang divorce…

  • rock7222

    Senator Escudero,
    Unang-una, since you are from a very wealthy family all your life, Medyo ” OUT OF TOUCH” ka sa reality ng 90% of Filipinos, that’s 90 million Filipinos who YOU ARE SUPPOSE to represent as a Senator. Bakit ko nasabi ito???……
    Una, Naiintindihan mo ba Senador Escudero that 90% of Filipinos will NEVER EVER be able to AFFORD a VERY EXPENSIVE ANNULMENT process ! Sa madaling salita, mayayaman lang na katulad mo at mga upper middle class lang ang makaka-afford ng Annulment.
    But for the rest of the 90% of Pinoys na hindi mayaman, they will NEVER be able to MOVE on from a Bad marriage or have a new beginning EVER dahil sa sobrang mahal ng annulment. In other words Senador- YOU ARE SPEAKING for yourself and for wealthy Filipinos only. Pero sa batas na para sa mahirap- You are either INSENSITIVE , OBLIVIOUS to it, OR simply Wala kang pakialam dahil may pera ka naman.
    So why should voters, especially masa & middle class voters continue to support a Senator who does NOT represent their interests!
    Secondly, this is EXACTLY like the RH bil pending na hinaharang ng ibang lawmaker at Senador. Ang bottom line Senador is… 95% of mga Mamayaman & Upper Middle class Filipinos have been using all sorts of birth control in their marriage. Most educated, upper middle class & wealthy Women have ALWAYS used birth control pills. Some have had tubal ligation. But for the 90% of Filipino families- They will NEVER be able to afford the high cost of pills or tubal ligation surgery ! Yet, some of the conservative wealthy families who are active in the catholic church are strongly opposed to the RH bill, yet, many of them & their adult married daughters have used Birth control pills for many years ! They are HYPOCRITES!
    In other words, DALAWANG BATAS nanaman. Batas para sa edukado at mayaman vs. batas for the rest of the 90% of all filipinos.
    Senador, in 2 years puwede na kayo mag-asawa ni Heart Evangelista. But for many millions of Filipino men & women, they will be STUCK in their situation & will never be able to fully move on.
    Mag-isip ka Chiz ! Huwag mo ibase ang desisyon mo based on your “personal” experience DAHIL you come from Very Wealthy haciendero Family. Not to mention, your father was a Marcos loyalist who also benefitted tremendously from Marcos!

    • juan tamad

      wag ka na kasing magpakasal.. ng di mo na kailangan ang divorce.. tapos problema.. wala ka pang gasto sa kasal..

      • Wildshark

        Mr juan tamad. Tama ka sa nasabi mo. Kaya nga marami ang nag live-in nalang dahil takot makulog sa isang pagkakamali. That is why we need the Divorce law. To provide a way out for those who might make mistakes. We are not perfect people. However, I still believe that we are people who are capable of loving and staying faithful to our spouses. As I say it before, for me, Divorce law is for those couple who needs it. Who in his or her right mind would divorce his or her spouse whom he/she loves most simply because there’s a divorce law available? Don’t get me wrong. I am pro matrimony. Divorce law as I see it is not ANTI-MARRIAGE. Why can’t we see it this way. With Divorce law available, people who are afraid of getting imprisoned (in marriage)of bad marriages would actually give Marriage a chance. And who knows after giving marriage a chance, they would end up having a blessed marriage as compared to not getting marriage at all due to fears of marriage imprisonment.

    • virgoyap


    • kartuthero

      mag-aral ka kasi para magkatrabaho ka naman at hindi ka palamunin lang jan sa bahay nyo ka para hindi ka dakdak ng dakdak na 90% ng pinoys ay mahirap! gung-gong!

  • Htee

    Sa dami ng presscon ng senador, di na nya alam ang dapat nyang sabihin. Hehee

    Dapat sabihin nya, pinagaaralan pa sa senado para iwas pusoy…diba gayan ang magaling na politiko?????

  • superpilipinas

    Divorce is an abused tool by grossly irresponsible people.
    Do you know the difference between the Philippines and the US?
    In the Philippines you have fffffing stray cats and dogs. Good thing is cats and dogs don’t need divorce.
    In the US, you have ffffing carefree men and women. Good thing….there’s none. Divorce makes them more carefree. Now even a lot of them 12 and 13 year olds learn to ffffck around.

    • juan tamad

      correct… mga kabataan dun halos mga gamit na… at an early age nagtatalik na… ganun ba na society gusto natin… SEX na lang ng SEX… asawa ng asawa nalang, KASAL dito KASAL dun… hahaha… kung pakikipagtalik nalang palagi nasa isip nyo… LIVE-IN nalang kayo.. lingo lingo.. magpalit kayo ng kakatlik…. kahit araw arawin nyo pa hanggang masugatan kayo at d na magamit mga ari nyo… mga ganid sa ASAWA… gusto makarami…

  • jose guev

    another form of hypocrisy from our political “leaders!” we don’t have divorce but the vast majority of married men commit adultery at least once in their married lifetimes!!! filipno men are really chauvinist pigs in general!

    • juan tamad

      NOOOO its not only PINOYS.. its true all over the world… Filipinos are pigs?? haha.. kasalanan yan ng mga babae (d lahat)… bat binababa nyo kaagad mga palda nyo… kung ayaw nyo naman d naman kayo magagalaw ng mga lalaki… nangyayari yan kasi gusto nyo din naman yun…. and precisely yung divorce ay para dun… para madali tayo lahat makapag palit ng makakasiping sa kama… SEX ang ISANG rason dyan bakit gusto ng mga tao ang divorce…

      para sa akin kung ganun na din lang… wag ka na makipag asawa.. no need of marriage.. live-in ka na lang.. pag nagsawa ka na sa ARI ng asawa mo… hiwalayan mo na.. at maghanap ka na ulit ng ibang ari… tapos problema…

      • Ross18

        All your reply are non-sense and of no value to this discussion. Do the right and stop and let the concern people have a meaningful discussion.

  • Felimon Soria

    Speak for yourself Mr. Escudero. A bad marriage is detrimental to all concerned and need to give a space for those who wants to end their promise in the altar.

    • juan tamad

      then end it… d na kailangan ang divorce…. makikipag divorce ka para lang maghanap ka ng ibang asawa?? at hihiwalayan mo din ulit…. mas maganda wag ka na lang mag asawa, makipag live in ka na lang… para kahit buwan buwan mayron ka ibang katalik…. yun naman karamihan ang rason… di makuntinto sa isang ari… gusto ipakain sa iba ang pagmamay-ari ng iba….

  • jose guev

    maybe we should start having people’s initiatives at this point. this is provided for by the constitution. i think it’s high time the people override the reluctance of our lawmakers to pass laws that are TRULY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PEOPLE.

    • juan tamad

      benefit of the people?? yung pagiging mahilig sa sex?? para madaming maging asawa??? para madali ang paghihiwalay??? simpli lang solusyon dyan.. WAG KA MAGpAkASAL.. makipag LIVE-IN ka lang.. di na kailangan ang divorce…

      • ethicsingov

        Divorce or no divorce, children and unhappy couples will experience grief. Divorce does not mean the parties could marry many times. Divorce will facilitate the dissolution of marriage that did not work well for many reasons. For the of the interest of child/ren and/or the aggrieved party, right for support and/or separation of assets are decided in a much quicker time without accusing one or the other with menta/pyschological health issues and/or awful character and behaviour. Actually, knowing the costly consequences of divorce will make couples think many times before plunging into costly weddings and/or saving the marriage through counselling. Also, there should be an accompanying law that will protect the parties in common-law relationships.

  • nathan o

    Ayaw ng mga Law makers ng Divorce kasi they be the first to get hit with the spousal, child support and separation of assets..hahaha!
    BoBo ang law natin, gusto nila “Annulment” lima lima ang mga anak tapos sabihin nila the marriage never meant to be…UTOT nyo kasing baho ng mga UTAk…..hahahaha !

  • pangitbudhiko

    chiz escudero is a nut case. in one news article he said choosing a chief justice need not have expirience. You are a talking baboon. When you apply for a job the first thing that you future employer would ask you, what is your experience on the job you are applying,
    How did this guy won as a senator.

  • juan tamad

    para sa katoliko divorce is a sin… eh kung sin ang mag divorce.. wag nalang kayo magpakasal… para pag di nyo na gusto ang isat-sa.. hiwalay na kaagad… total parihas naman “SIN” yung pagsasama ng d kasal at divorce… wag na gawan ng batas yung divorce..d na kailangan yan….

    • blainz

      It appears you’ve responded to a scattershot of posts below, including mine.

      You and the rest of your ilk should know that our government is NOT Catholic, Born-Again, Iglesia, Muslim, or whatever popular current cult you’d care to join. The government is there for ALL Filipinos, regardless of faith, and it is not there to determine what sin is, or to protect you from imagined offenses from people whose marriages, functioning or not, have nothing to do wth your own.

      As for your incessant concern about lust: Stop projecting, you’re making yourself too transparent.

    • blainz

      It appears you’ve responded to a scattershot of posts below, including mine.
      You and the rest of your ilk should know that our government is NOT Catholic, Born-Again, Iglesia, Muslim, or whatever popular current cult you’d care to join. The government is there for ALL Filipinos, regardless of faith, and it is not there to determine what sin is, or to protect you from imagined offenses from people whose marriages, functioning or not, have nothing to do wth your own.
      As for your incessant concern about lust: Stop projecting, you’re making yourself too transparent.

  • rsunga

    Kung ang mag-asawa ay desidido nang maghiwalay, bakit mo pa pahihirapan ang mag-asawa sa proseso sa paghihiwalay at laki ng gastos through annulment. Mas maayos ang paghihiwalay sa divorce kaysa sa annulment at karapatan ng tao yan at hindi ng gobyerno natin o simbahan. Wala namang alam ang simbahan, gobyerno at si Escudero sa takbo ng buhay ng mga mag-asawang gustong maghiwalay. Sariling interest at opinion lang nila ang kanilang pinagbabasihan na walang kinalaman sa buhay ng mag-asawa.

  • lptee

    sen chiz is simply afraid of the bishops’ denouncement. let a divorce procedure emancipate abused men and women from dishonest relationships.

  • mad_as_Hamlet

    I think this Senator is a selfish and immoral person. He does not like divorce for others but he wants to get divorced himself. A selfish and immoral person is a person who wants other people’s cakes and bake them too.

  • mad_as_Hamlet

    I think this Senator is a selfish and immoral person. He does not like
    divorce for others but he wants to get divorced himself. A selfish and
    immoral person is a person who wants to bake other people’s cakes and eat them

  • Luthmar

    Oh well, C. Escudero just doesn’t want to pay alimony. Shame on you.

  • quphal

    ang reasoning ng simbahan ay hindi daw acceptable ang divorce pero tino-tolerate nila ang annulment which is easy to get kung may pera ka. sa madaling-salita ang pilosopiya ng simbahan ay para dun sa mga nakaka-angat sa buhay.
    palibhasa hindi naranasan ng mga obispong ito ang pang-araw-araw na buhay ng relasyong walang patutunguhan. ang mapatali sa isang sitwasyon na talo ang lahat lalo na ang mga anak.
    kelangan natin ng batas na saklaw ang lahat, may kaya o wala.

  • FClive

    The senator will just f u c k around without detachment from marriage? Iba din ito, takot labanan ang walang kwentang simbahan.

  • jjtan470

    The main reason many Politicians are “anti-divorce” kuno and against the Reproductive Health Bill is this: they are afraid of the Catholic Church hierarchy who may campaign against them. If more people will speak more their opinions on divorce and family planning, many politicians will change their stance.
    Politicians should start realizing again: they represent the people, not necessarily any religion (Catholicism, Iglesia ni Manalo, etc.)

  • Ommm

    Why does this country elect “dark ages” thinking politicians in the first place?

    Sometimes they forget who they are working for….

    • Jose

      Because the average Filipino voter is stuck in the dark ages.

  • rosamistika16

    “Legally, the ground and basis for annulment should have existed at the time you were married,” he said.
    = in your case sen. chiz, how come you still marred elizabeth when at the first instance you knew that there was a ground for annulment already existed at the time of your marriage, thus your reason for annulment today?
    was your ground for annulment due to YOUR PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY and you knew that it existed even before the time of your marriage? we should not vote you then as senator!!!

  • divictes

    Still no escape for the poor battered husbands.

  • dequis

    ibig sabihin noong faternal twins dalawa ang tatay, di pa matiyak ni escudero kung isa man lamang sa kambal ay kanya, kaya maghihiwalay iyong dalawa.

  • pepito gwaps

    I don’t even understand where our country get the concept of no to divorce. Will it be due to our pride or is it a kind of blind belief? Spain who influenced us on Christianity has divorce. In the bible we can sense that we have vivid example on marriage conflicts, like on the case of Mary Magdalene. Here Jesus never condemned her on her sin of adultery instead on his own interference she was saved from stoning from mad people. He just say, ” Go and sin no more.” In the same sense, Divorce will give a chance to incompatible couple to renew themselves and sin no more.

  • BatangSingapore

    minsan may ka hunghangan itong si Escudero at sadya yatang may sayad ang Senador na yan.

  • Johnny Batumbakal

    Hahaha…ayaw nya ng divorce kc mas gusto nya ang KABIT-system na lang.
    Ewan q ba baket naboto yang kumag na yan eh wala naman ding utak.
    Bastos pa sa pananamit. 4sure pag kaharap nya ang US president eh nakaKamiseta lang yan. PaPapel epal lang kunot sa mga mahihirap ni Erap.

  • pidalcopter2

    This Escudero is the same guy who says his good relationship to his constituents INCLUDING his critics will always be the same despite his sour relationship with his wife. This guy is lying to his teeth and always be not just for anybody but also to himself. How can this be so if he himself cannot mend his relationship with his own family? Sometimes your “yabang” cannot just irk anybody.. it really sucks! Hypocrisy is the word for such.

  • Bato’ng Bantilis

    You are right, senator. Gabriela becomes a pro-western if not pro American culture organization. The devil’s advocate in congress.

  • 189COWARDS

    So I guess there is only the ONE country right in the World… like the Cowards that still want to keep their assets secret!!!

  • Jose

    He doesn’t actually say no to divorce. He says no to divorce RIGHT NOW, which is fair enough. With the Church already mad about progress in the form of the RH Bill, the timing just isn’t right, especially as both reforms will galvanize all the angry Christian fanatics. Do it a year or so from now and the furor from the RH Bill will have died down and there’ll be less fuss.

    The Philippines will have a divorce law in the books soon, IMO. It’s going to happen eventually, because it simply has to. Everyone has to keep up with progress.

  • Hfxwst

    If two adults wish to divorce, it should be of no interest to either the government and especially to the Catholic Church – it is a personal decision. To think otherwise is to be a Catholic extremist, to seek to impose Catholic values on those who rightfully choose not to accept them, and/or who may not even be Catholic. This Catholic arrogance must be of particular annoyance to Muslims in the Philippines.

    Shame on us for allowing this injustice to continue, shame of the Government for supporting religious extremism, and shame on the Catholic Church for intruding into the people’s government.

    Senator Escudaro is a coward! Political excuse making.

  • Wildshark

    well said rock7222

  • Wildshark

    Mr. Senator Escudero, the point is, there’s a growing need for the divorce bill to settle bad marriages and to give people (ex. like you) a chance to have a new beginning. Mr. Senator, I think you are smart and smart enough to know that not all Filipinos are Catholics and you represent all Filipinos (from different denomination). Why so afraid of the Bishops (there are but a handful of them and they do not really represent the voice of their flocks) Mr. Senator? I believe that modern Filipinos are intelligent enough to know which Senators really represent the people’s interest. These people Mr. Senator will be the very people who will re-elect you and not the Bishops alone. Let’s be fare and let’s face it. Annulment is only possible for the rich and influential. If annulment is within reach for all people irregardless of their economic status in life, then I am in agreement with you. But truth of the matter is, IT IS NOT.

    I therefore urge you Mr. Senator to reconsider your position and pass the divorce bill for the sake of the people (who need this divorce law) who you are truly representing. It’s not really about you Mr. Senator nor the un-married Bishops. But IT’S ABOUT THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE YOU’RE REPRESENTING.

    Thank you.

  • Wildshark

    On a different note Mr. Senator, a lot of people are settling for live-in due to the fear of making matrimonial mistakes.That’s why, all the more we need the
    Divorce law. To allow people who fall into bad marriages (like yours) a way out and to have a fresh start. We are not perfect and we sometime make bad choices. Nonetheless, I believe that people (like you) are capable of loving again and establish a rightfull marriage the 2nd time around. Mr. Senator, the Divorce law is for couples who needs it. I believe most will agree with me if I state that who in
    his or her right mind would divorce his or her spouse whom he/she loves
    most simply because there’s a divorce law available? Don’t get me wrong.
    I am pro matrimony. Divorce law as I see it is not ANTI-MARRIAGE. Mr. Senator, Why
    can’t we see it this way. With Divorce law available, people who are
    afraid of getting WEDLOCKED due to bad marriages would
    actually give Marriage a chance. And who knows after giving marriage a
    chance, they might end up having a BLESSED marriage vis a vis NOT
    getting MARRIED at all

  • vir_a

    Okay, deny his marriage annulment, in fairness to those who cannot afford an annulment proceedings

  • adrianaraneta

    There will be legal debates weather annulment or divorce – both has to spend money to get it done, though annulment for now shows more costly.

    But I think, there are more better laws/bills/regulations that needs priority by our lawmakers. One of them in my opinion is the enabling of National ID System – which I know for sure will benefit every Filipinos, hence must be done since then.

  • zoom_lens

    The stand of CBCP as per RH Bill and divorce might be right or wrong, depending on where one is coming from. In any case, non-passage of these bills is resulting to more and more young people opting to just cohabit (live-in) with their partners while producing a lot of illegitimate children. The CBCP is getting the exact opposite of their desired result.

  • $25214711

    That;s your opinion Sir. What about the rest of us who wanted to change our lives? pro-choice, Divorce, Civil union.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos