Muling inaprubahan ng House of Representative sa 3rd at final reading ang panukalang batas na nagsusulong na gawing legal ang divorce sa bansa.
Nakakuha ang ng 126 affirmative votes ang House Bill (HB) No.9349, titled, “An Act reinstituting absolute divorce as an alternative mode for the dissolution of marriage” sa plenary session kagabi.
109 naman ang negative votes na malaking bilang, subalit hindi naging sapat para tanggihan ang isinusulong ng mga pro-divorce congressmen.
Nag-abstain naman ang 20 kongresista sa botohan.
Kahapon ang huling araw ng second regular session ng 19th Congress.
Ang huling inaprubahan ng kamara ang pro-divorce bill ay noong March 19, 2018, noong 17th Congress.
Ang unang pro-divorce bill ay ang HB No.7303, o ang “An Act instituting absolute divorce and dissolution of marriage in the Philippines”.
Nakakuha ito ng 134 affirmative votes laban sa 57 lamang na negative votes.
Subalit ang nasabing panukalang batas ay binalewala sa senado.
Si Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel Lagman ang pangunahing sponsor at tagapagtanggol ng panukalang batas sa dalawang buwan na debate.
Ang Pilipinas na isang itinuturing na Catholic country ay isa sa iilan na lamang na bansa sa mundo na hindi kinikilala ang divorce.
Sa kabila nito, iprinisinta ni Lagman ang panukala bilang “reinstitution” ng diborsiyo.
Layunin ng HB No.9349 na i-reinstitute ang absolute divorce bilang alternative move para sa paglusaw ng hindi na maaayos at ilalim ng limitadong batayan at well-defined judicial procedures.
Kabilang naman sa grounds o batayan para sa diborsyo ang grounds para sa legal separation salig sa Article 55 ng Family Code of the Philippines gaya ng:
-Physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner;
-Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation;
-Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution;
-Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than 6 years;
-Drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, or chronic gambling;
-Homosexuality of the respondent;
-Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage;
-Marital infidelity or perversion or having a child with another person other than one’s spouse during the marriage;
-Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner; and
-Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year
Gyundin ay kung limang taon nang hiwalay ang mag-asawa; psychological incapacity salig sa Article 36 ng Family Code; irreconcilable differences; at domestic o marital abuse salig sa Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004.
