TITLE: SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN THE PHILIPPINES

I. Overview

According to the 2013 research of the Public Radio International, an American public

radio organization, the Philippines ranked as number 10 in the 20 most gay-friendly countries

in the world and the highest Asian country. In this list, the United States of America is not

included where 37 out of its 50 states allow same-sex marriage. This fact is noteworthy

considering that some of our laws such as the Civil Code was based from the laws in the United

States and several American jurisprudence were also used by the Supreme Court in their

rulings.

US-based Pew Research Center noted that there is a growing number of governments

which consider granting legal recognition to same-sex marriage in the world. As of 2018,

same-sex marriage is already performed and recognized by law (nationwide or in some

jurisdictions) in countries such as Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia,

Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the

Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United

Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay. Most of these countries are from Europe, North

America and South America.

In Asia, Israel and Armenia recognize same-sex marriages validly performed abroad.

Israel recognizes unregistered cohabitation for same-sex couples. Several cities in Japan,

Taiwan and Cambodia provide same-sex couples with some limited rights and benefits,

including hospital visitation rights. In Hong Kong, the same-sex partners of residents can

receive spousal visas. The most recent development is in Taiwan, becoming the very first
nation in Asia to legalize same sex marriage, following a Constitutional Court

ruling, legalizing same-sex marriage by May 24, 2019 according to the Los Angeles Times.

This is a sad reality in one of the most LGBT-friendly country in the world where

neither same-sex marriage nor civil union for same-sex couples are not recognized by law.

II. Introduction

The observance of basic human rights is more than just a mandate from international

human rights advocates. It is considered a recognized right protected by none other than the

Constitution itself. This is outlined in Article III, otherwise known as the Bill of Rights which

provides:

Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of

law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Article 13 of the Constitution also mandates Congress to give priority to the enactment

of legislations to promote and protect human rights and dignity as well as the creation of the

Commission on Human Rights, an independent constitutional commission which enjoys fiscal

autonomy from the three branches of the government.

It is also notable that the Philippines is a signatory of many international human rights

conventions such as the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of

Discrimination Against Women.

Laws in the Philippines put emphasis on the sanctity of marriage as the foundation of

the family, the basic unit of society as can be found in the 1987 Philippine Constitution which
describes marriage as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and

shall be protected by the State.

This constitutional definition is further expounded by Article 52a of the Civil Code,

which defines marriage as not a mere contract but an inviolable social institution. Its

nature, consequences and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation,

except that the marriage settlements may to a certain extent fix the property relations

during the marriage.

However, when the Family Code of the Philippines took effect in August 3, 1988, it

repealed the Civil Code’s definition of marriage, repealing it with a definition in Article 1,

which provides that 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 subject to stipulation,

except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage

within the limits provided by this Code. As one of the essential requisites of marriage in the

Family Code, it is explicitly provided that marriage can only be performed with a man and a

woman as its contracting parties.

Although there is no law which prohibits the legalization of same-sex marriage in the

Philippines, there is still a need for the legislature to enact a law redefining, and changing the

parties who may contract marriage. This has been the clamor of the members of the Lesbian,

Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) community, who have been fighting for equality of

rights. Our legislators’ support for same-sex marriage can be traced almost two decades ago

when former House Representative Etta Rosales from the Akbayan party-list filed a House
Bill for the legalization of same-sex marriage during the 12th Session of Congress which was

subsequently re-filed in the succeeding session. Representative Rosales filed it again for the

third time as House Bill 634 in May 10, 2005. The senate version of this bill was filed by

Senators Bong Revilla and Miriam Defensor-Santiago in 2004 but later ended up in limbo. In

2016, a counterpart measure was sponsored by Senator Risa Hontiveros but it only also

reached as far as first reading.

III. Statement of the Problem

Given the statutory limitation imposed by the Family Code for parties contracting

marriage, same-sex couples are not recognized and given the same rights and privileges as

same sex couples. This prompted the researcher to delve into the legality and Constitutionality

aspect of same-sex marriage by examining applicable provisions and jurisprudence. At the

end of the study, the following question shall be answered:

Should same-sex marriage be legalized in the Philippines?

IV. Objective or Significance of the Study

Provide a body of knowledge that would contribute to the limited studies or

researches on LGBTQI+ rights

Protection of LGBTQI+ civil rights

V. Scope and Limitations of the Study

 This term paper is limited to the discussion of same-sex marriage in the

Philippines.

VI. Conceptual Framework

A. Arguments in favor of same-sex marriage

As a response to the international acceptance of same-sex marriage

Rights and benefits afforded in same-sex marriage

Reduction of social exclusion of same-sex couples

B. Arguments against same-sex marriage

Same-sex marriage as unconstitutional

Same sex marriage seen as contrary to morals

Confusion of rights for children

VII. Conclusion or Recommendation

Same-sex marriage should be legalized in the Philippines.

VIII. Sources

 Books

 Online

 Journals
https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-06-26/20-most-and-least-gay-friendly-countries-world

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/same-sex-marriage-civil-unions-doma-laws-by-

state.html

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-taiwan-same-sex-marriage-20170524-story.html

http://www.chanrobles.com/civilcodeofthephilippinesfulltext.html

http://www.chanrobles.com/executiveorderno209.htm#.W_thPugzbIV

http://www.accralaw.com/publications/same-sex-marriage-and-its-legal-hindrance-

philippines-0

https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/07/02/1829775/comprehensive-anti-discrimination-

law-pushed

https://www.philstar.com/lifestyle/arts-and-culture/2005/05/16/277938/congress-oks-lesbian-

and-gay-rights-bill

Numerous anti-discrimination proposals have been made but none of them was

successful. The most recent was on July 1, 2018, when Senator Sonny Angara initiated the

passage of the Comprehensive Anti-Discrimination bill, otherwise known as Senate Bill 948,

which seeks to minimize all forms of discrimination. This bill seeks to penalize discriminatory

practices based on age, racial or ethnic origin, religious belief or activity, political inclination
or conviction, social class, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expressions,

marital or relationship status, disability, HIV status, health status or medical history, language,

physical features, or other status.