Bigamy and Falsification Using a Fake CENOMAR: Criminal Remedies in the Philippines

Introduction

In the Philippine legal system, marriage is a sacred institution governed by strict civil and criminal laws to ensure its validity and integrity. Bigamy, the act of contracting a second marriage while the first remains valid and subsisting, is a serious criminal offense. Compounding this issue is the use of falsified documents, such as a fake Certificate of No Marriage (CENOMAR), to facilitate such illegal unions. A CENOMAR is an official document issued by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), certifying that an individual has no record of prior marriage. Falsifying this document not only enables bigamy but also constitutes a separate crime under Philippine penal laws.

This article explores the criminal aspects of bigamy and the falsification of a CENOMAR in the Philippine context. It delves into the relevant legal provisions, elements of the crimes, penalties, and available remedies for aggrieved parties. Understanding these offenses is crucial for legal practitioners, victims, and the public, as they highlight the intersection of family law and criminal law in protecting marital bonds.

Legal Framework for Bigamy

Bigamy is explicitly criminalized under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines, which dates back to 1930 but has been amended over time to align with modern societal norms.

Definition and Elements of Bigamy

Article 349 of the RPC defines bigamy as follows: "The penalty of prisión mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper proceedings."

To establish bigamy, the prosecution must prove four essential elements:

Existence of a Prior Valid Marriage: The accused must have been legally married before.
Subsistence of the First Marriage: The prior marriage must not have been dissolved by annulment, declaration of nullity, or death of the spouse (or presumptive death under Article 41 of the Family Code).
Contracting a Second Marriage: The accused enters into a subsequent marriage ceremony that appears valid on its face.
Validity of the Second Marriage: The second marriage must comply with all formal requisites (e.g., marriage license, solemnizing officer) except for the bigamous nature.

The crime is consummated upon the celebration of the second marriage, regardless of whether the parties cohabit or consummate the union. Notably, good faith or mistake of fact (e.g., believing the first marriage was invalid) is not a defense, as bigamy is a mala in se offense requiring criminal intent.

Role of CENOMAR in Bigamy Cases

Under Republic Act No. 10625 (Philippine Statistical Act of 2013) and related civil registry laws, a CENOMAR is a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license under Article 11 of the Family Code. It serves as proof that the applicant is free to marry. Using a fake CENOMAR circumvents this safeguard, allowing a bigamous marriage to proceed without detection by civil registrars.

In practice, bigamy often comes to light when the first spouse discovers the second marriage and files a complaint. The falsified CENOMAR becomes evidence of premeditation or deceit in committing bigamy.

Falsification of Public Documents: The Case of Fake CENOMAR

Falsification involving a CENOMAR falls under the broader category of crimes against public documents in the RPC.

Definition and Elements of Falsification

Articles 171 and 172 of the RPC address falsification by public officers and private individuals, respectively. A CENOMAR, being an official document issued by the PSA (a government agency), qualifies as a public document.

Article 171 (Falsification by Public Officer, Employee, or Notary): This applies if a public official (e.g., a PSA employee) falsifies the CENOMAR by counterfeiting, altering, or making untruthful statements in it. Elements include:
1. The offender is a public officer or employee.
2. They take advantage of their official position.
3. They commit acts such as counterfeiting a signature, altering a genuine document, or intercalating false information.
Article 172 (Falsification by Private Individual): More commonly applicable in bigamy scenarios, this punishes private persons who falsify public documents. Elements are:
1. The offender is a private individual or a public officer acting without official capacity.
2. They commit any of the acts in Article 171 (e.g., simulating a document or attributing false statements to it).
3. The falsification causes damage to a third party or is done with intent to cause damage.

For a fake CENOMAR, common modes include:

Forging the entire document using counterfeit PSA seals and signatures.
Altering a genuine CENOMAR to remove records of prior marriages.
Procuring a falsified version through illegal means, such as bribing officials or using online forgery services.

The crime is consummated upon the act of falsification, but its use in obtaining a marriage license links it directly to bigamy.

Connection Between Falsification and Bigamy

In many cases, falsification is a means to commit bigamy. Under Philippine jurisprudence, these are distinct crimes but can be prosecuted separately or in relation to each other. For instance, the falsified CENOMAR may be used as evidence in a bigamy trial to prove deceit, while the falsification itself warrants a separate charge.

Criminal Liabilities and Penalties

Penalties for Bigamy

The penalty under Article 349 is prisión mayor, ranging from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years imprisonment.
If aggravating circumstances exist (e.g., abuse of public position), the penalty may increase.
Accessories or accomplices (e.g., the second spouse knowing of the first marriage) may face reduced penalties under Articles 53-57 of the RPC.

Penalties for Falsification

For Article 171: Prisión mayor and a fine not exceeding P5,000 (adjusted for inflation in practice).
For Article 172: Prisión correccional in its medium and maximum periods (2 years, 4 months, and 1 day to 6 years) and a fine up to P5,000, if damage is caused.
If no damage results, the penalty is lowered to arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day to 6 months).

In complex crimes (e.g., falsification through bigamy), Article 48 of the RPC applies, imposing the penalty for the graver offense in its maximum period.

Prescription Periods

Bigamy prescribes in 15 years (Article 90, RPC).
Falsification prescribes in 10 years for Article 172.

Criminal Remedies for Aggrieved Parties

Victims, typically the first spouse, have several remedies under Philippine law:

Filing a Criminal Complaint

Where to File: Complaints for bigamy and falsification are filed with the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor, who conducts a preliminary investigation before endorsing to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for trial.
Evidence Required: Marriage certificates, the fake CENOMAR, witness testimonies, and PSA verifications proving the document's falsity.
Private Complainant: The offended spouse must initiate the complaint, as bigamy is a private crime under Article 344 of the RPC (requiring the spouse's affidavit of desistance for pardon).

Civil Remedies Incidental to Criminal Proceedings

Under Rule 111 of the Rules of Court, civil liability (e.g., damages for moral suffering) arises from the crime and can be claimed in the criminal case.
The first spouse may also seek annulment of the bigamous marriage under Article 35(4) of the Family Code, rendering it void ab initio.

Other Related Remedies

Administrative Sanctions: If a public official is involved, administrative complaints can be filed with the Civil Service Commission or Ombudsman.
Support and Custody: The bigamous marriage's invalidity affects child legitimacy, but children are presumed legitimate if conceived in good faith (Article 164, Family Code). The first spouse can claim support under Article 195.
Preventive Measures: Victims can request a Protection Order under Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Act) if violence or economic abuse is involved.

Jurisprudential Insights

Philippine courts have consistently upheld the criminality of bigamy and related falsifications. In People v. Nepomuceno (G.R. No. 406, 1902), the Supreme Court emphasized that the second marriage must be formally valid. More recently, in Mercado v. Tan (G.R. No. 137110, 2000), the Court ruled that a judicial declaration of nullity is required before remarriage, reinforcing anti-bigamy laws.

Cases involving fake documents, like People v. Bautista (G.R. No. 173472, 2007), illustrate how falsification aggravates bigamy charges. Courts often impose concurrent sentences for multiple offenses.

Conclusion

Bigamy and the falsification of a CENOMAR represent grave violations of Philippine laws designed to protect the family unit. These crimes not only undermine public trust in civil registry documents but also cause profound emotional and financial harm to victims. Criminal remedies provide a pathway for justice through imprisonment, fines, and civil damages, emphasizing the state's commitment to marital fidelity.

Legal advice is recommended for specific cases, as outcomes depend on evidence and circumstances. Awareness of these laws deters potential offenders and empowers individuals to safeguard their rights in the realm of marriage and family.