The Philippines remains one of only two sovereign states in the world (alongside Vatican City) that does not recognize absolute divorce for the majority of its citizens. Marriage under Philippine civil law is constitutionally and statutorily regarded as an inviolable social institution and a permanent union. Consequently, remarriage while a prior valid marriage subsists is categorically illegal and constitutes the felony of bigamy under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code, punishable by prisión mayor (six years and one day to twelve years imprisonment).

This article exhaustively discusses the legal framework, the absolute prohibition on remarriage without prior judicial dissolution or nullification of the previous marriage, the limited remedies available, the criminal and civil consequences, the special rules for Muslims and foreigners, and the practical realities faced by separated spouses.

1. Constitutional and Statutory Foundation of Indissolubility

Article XV, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution declares:
“The State shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the State.”

This provision has been consistently interpreted by the Supreme Court as enshrining the policy of absolute indissolubility of marriage for Filipinos governed by the Civil Code/Family Code.

Executive Order No. 209 (The Family Code of the Philippines), as amended by E.O. 227 and Republic Acts 8533 and 10354, expressly provides:

Article 1: Marriage is a special contract of permanent union…
Article 52: No decree of legal separation shall allow remarriage.
Article 41 (presumptive death) is the only instance where a present spouse may remarry without criminal liability, and only after strict compliance with the summary proceeding requirements.

There is no provision for absolute divorce in the Family Code for non-Muslim Filipinos.

2. Available Remedies to Terminate or Nullify Marriage (Non-Muslim Filipinos)

A. Declaration of Nullity of Marriage (Void ab initio marriages) – Articles 35–38, Family Code
These marriages are inexistent from the beginning. Grounds include:

Below 18 years old
No marriage license (except in articulo mortis or remote places)
Bigamous or polygamous marriages
Mistake as to identity
Incestuous marriages (Art. 37)
Marriages void by reason of public policy (Art. 38: between collateral relatives up to fourth civil degree, etc.)
Psychological incapacity (Art. 36) – the most commonly invoked ground today

A judicial declaration is still required before the innocent spouse may remarry. Without it, the marriage remains presumptively valid (Art. 40, Family Code).

B. Annulment of Voidable Marriages – Articles 45–47
Grounds:

Under 18 but above consent age at time of annulment suit barred
Unsound mind
Fraud (concealment of STD, pregnancy by another, conviction of crime, etc.)
Force, intimidation, undue influence
Physical incapacity to consummate (impotence)
Serious and incurable sexually transmissible disease

Action must be filed within strict reglementary periods. After decree, parties may remarry.

C. Legal Separation (Art. 55–67)
Allows bed-and-board separation but explicitly prohibits remarriage. Any attempt to remarry constitutes concubinage or bigamy.

D. Presumption of Death (Art. 41, Family Code)
The only instance where a spouse may remarry without a prior declaration of nullity or annulment of the previous marriage.

Requirements (as refined in Republic v. Nolasco, G.R. No. 94053, 1992 and Republic v. Granada, G.R. No. 187512, 2012):

Absent spouse has been missing for four consecutive years (two years in extraordinary circumstances: war, shipwreck, airplane crash, etc.)
Present spouse has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse is dead
Present spouse institutes a summary proceeding under Articles 238–253, Family Code
The court issues an order authorizing remarriage

If the absent spouse reappears after the present spouse has remarried in good faith, the subsequent marriage remains valid (Art. 42). However, if bad faith is proven on the part of the remarrying spouse, the subsequent marriage is void and bigamy charges may prosper.

3. Absolute Prohibition on Remarriage Without Judicial Prerequisite (Article 40, Family Code)

Article 40 is categorical:

“No marriage shall be validly contracted without a judicial declaration that the prior marriage was null or annulled. The absence of such declaration renders any subsequent marriage void for being bigamous.”

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled (Santos v. CA, 1995; Domingo v. CA, 1996; Atienza v. Brillantes, 1995; Mercado v. Tan, 2000; Carlos v. Sandoval, 2009; Ablaza v. Republic, 2010) that Article 40 applies even to marriages that are void ab initio. There is no such thing as “automatic dissolution” of a void marriage; a petition for declaration of nullity must still be filed.

4. Criminal Liability: Bigamy (Art. 349, Revised Penal Code)

Elements:

Offender is legally married
The marriage has not been legally dissolved or declared void/annulled
Offender contracts a second or subsequent marriage
The second marriage has all the essential requisites for validity (i.e., it would have been valid were it not for the subsistence of the first)

Penalty: prisión mayor (6 years 1 day – 12 years).
Good faith is not a defense; the crime is malum prohibitum.

Notable rulings:

People v. Rodeo (2003): Even if the second marriage was celebrated abroad, Philippine law applies if the offender is Filipino.
Tenebro v. CA (2004): Consummation of the second marriage is not required; mere celebration suffices.
Capili v. People (2017): A church annulment or desistance by the complainant does not extinguish criminal liability.

5. Civil Consequences of Bigamous Marriages

The second marriage is void ab initio (Art. 35(4)).
Children of the second union are illegitimate (except if the ground was psychological incapacity or Art. 36, where children remain legitimate – Art. 54).
Property regime: complete separation of property; no conjugal partnership or CPG arises.
The innocent spouse in the second marriage may file for damages under Articles 19–21, Civil Code, and even psychological violence under RA 9262.

6. Special Cases and Exceptions

A. Foreign Divorces (Article 26, Family Code, as amended by Fujiki v. Marinay, G.R. No. 196049, 2013 and Republic v. Manalo, G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018)

If a Filipino spouse obtains a valid foreign divorce and the foreign spouse remarries, the Filipino may also remarry after judicial recognition of the foreign divorce decree.
Since the landmark Manalo decision (2018), even when both spouses are Filipinos but one obtains a foreign divorce capacity to remarry is restored to the Filipino spouse upon proper judicial recognition via Rule on Recognition of Foreign Judgment (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC).

Without such recognition, remarriage remains bigamous (Galapon v. Republic, 2020).

B. Muslim Filipinos – Code of Muslim Personal Laws (P.D. 1083)

Muslims may avail of talaq, faskh (judicial divorce), or khul’a. After a valid Muslim divorce, remarriage is lawful even without civil court declaration, provided the divorce is registered with the Shari’a Circuit Court and the Civil Registrar.

C. Indigenous Peoples – RA 8371 (IPRA) recognizes customary divorce in some tribes, but the Supreme Court has not definitively ruled on its effect on civil law marriages.

7. Pending Divorce Bills and the Current Legislative Climate (as of December 2025)

Despite repeated attempts since the 14th Congress, no absolute divorce law has been enacted. The House of Representatives passed the Absolute Divorce Bill on third reading in the 19th Congress (2022–2025), but it has consistently died in the Senate due to strong opposition from the Catholic Church and conservative blocs. As of December 2025, the proposed “Dissolution of Marriage Act” remains pending in committee in the 20th Congress, with no realistic prospect of passage in the near term.

Conclusion

Under current Philippine law, remarriage without a prior judicial declaration of absolute nullity, annulment, or (in very limited cases) presumptive death is illegal, void from the beginning, and criminally punishable as bigamy. Legal separation, church annulment, foreign divorce without recognition, or mere physical separation do not dissolve the marital bond.

The only lawful ways for a non-Muslim Filipino to remarry are:

Obtain a judicial declaration of nullity (most commonly on ground of psychological incapacity)
Obtain an annulment of a voidable marriage
Comply strictly with Article 41 presumptive death procedure
Obtain judicial recognition of a foreign divorce decree under Article 26 (Manalo rule)

Until Congress enacts an absolute divorce law — which remains politically improbable — the Philippines will continue to treat marriage as indissoluble for the vast majority of its citizens, leaving thousands of separated spouses in legal limbo.