Pre-Marriage Orientation Requirements Under Article 34 of the Family Code in the Philippines

Introduction

In the Philippines, the institution of marriage is governed primarily by the Family Code (Executive Order No. 209, as amended), which outlines the essential and formal requisites for a valid marriage. Among its provisions, Article 34 provides a unique exemption from the requirement of obtaining a marriage license for couples who have been living together as husband and wife for a specified period. This exemption recognizes long-term cohabitation as a de facto marital relationship, streamlining the process for formalizing such unions. However, questions often arise regarding ancillary requirements, such as pre-marriage orientation or counseling, which are typically mandated for standard marriage license applications. This article explores the intricacies of Article 34, with a particular focus on whether pre-marriage orientation is required, the rationale behind the provision, its implementation, and related legal considerations within the Philippine context.

Legal Basis and Historical Context

The Family Code of the Philippines, enacted in 1987, replaced the marriage provisions of the Civil Code of 1950. Article 34 specifically addresses marriages exempt from the license requirement, reflecting a policy of acknowledging existing cohabitation arrangements to promote family stability and reduce bureaucratic hurdles for qualifying couples. The provision states:

"No license shall be necessary for the marriage of a man and a woman who have lived together as husband and wife for at least five years and without any legal impediment to marry each other. The contracting parties shall state the foregoing facts in an affidavit before any person authorized by law to administer oaths. The solemnizing officer shall also state under oath that he ascertained the qualifications of the contracting parties and found no legal impediment to the marriage."

This article is rooted in the recognition that prolonged cohabitation without legal impediments essentially fulfills the societal and legal purposes of marriage, such as mutual support and family formation. It aligns with the constitutional mandate under Article XV, Section 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which declares that "marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the State."

Historically, this exemption addresses practical issues in a country where common-law relationships are common, particularly in rural or low-income communities where formal marriage processes may be inaccessible. It also prevents the invalidation of unions due to mere procedural oversights, emphasizing substance over form in marital relations.

Essential Requisites for Marriage Under Article 34

For a marriage to be valid under Philippine law, it must satisfy the essential requisites outlined in Article 2 of the Family Code: (1) legal capacity of the contracting parties, who must be a male and a female; and (2) consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer. Article 3 adds formal requisites: (1) authority of the solemnizing officer; (2) a valid marriage license, except in cases provided for in Chapter 2 of Title I (which includes Article 34); and (3) a marriage ceremony where the parties declare their intent before the solemnizing officer and at least two witnesses.

Under Article 34, the exemption from the marriage license is conditional upon meeting specific criteria:

Cohabitation Period: The couple must have lived together as husband and wife for at least five years immediately preceding the marriage. This cohabitation must be continuous, exclusive, and public, akin to a marital relationship. Mere occasional cohabitation or secret relationships do not qualify.
Absence of Legal Impediment: There must be no legal barrier to marriage during the entire cohabitation period. Impediments include existing marriages (bigamy), age restrictions (below 18 years without emancipation), or relationships within prohibited degrees of consanguinity or affinity (Articles 37-38).
Affidavit of Cohabitation: The contracting parties must execute a joint affidavit attesting to the facts of their cohabitation and lack of impediments. This affidavit must be sworn before a notary public or any person authorized to administer oaths, such as a judge or barangay captain.
Solemnizing Officer's Affidavit: The officer performing the marriage (e.g., a judge, priest, imam, or mayor as per Article 7) must execute an affidavit confirming that they verified the couple's qualifications and found no impediments. This serves as a safeguard against fraudulent claims.

Once these are fulfilled, the marriage can proceed without a license, but it must still be solemnized in accordance with Article 3(3) and registered with the local civil registrar under Article 23 to ensure its civil effects.

Pre-Marriage Orientation: General Requirements in Philippine Marriages

Pre-marriage orientation, also known as pre-marriage counseling or seminar, is a standard requirement in the Philippines for couples seeking a marriage license. This is implemented through the collaboration of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), local government units (LGUs), and accredited non-governmental organizations. The program aims to educate prospective spouses on family planning, responsible parenthood, gender sensitivity, and marital responsibilities, as supported by Republic Act No. 10354 (Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012) and DSWD Administrative Order No. 12, series of 2008.

Typically, the seminar lasts one to two days and results in the issuance of a Certificate of Marriage Counseling (CMC), which must be submitted to the local civil registrar along with other documents for the marriage license application. Failure to complete this can delay the license issuance. This requirement applies universally to license applicants, regardless of age or status, though it is particularly emphasized for younger couples or those requiring parental consent under Article 14 (for ages 18-21) or Article 15 (for ages 21-25 needing parental advice).

Application of Pre-Marriage Orientation to Article 34 Marriages

A key question is whether pre-marriage orientation is mandatory for marriages under Article 34. The Family Code does not explicitly mandate pre-marriage orientation as an essential or formal requisite for any marriage; it is a procedural step tied to the issuance of the marriage license under the implementing rules of local civil registrars and DSWD guidelines.

Since Article 34 expressly exempts qualifying couples from the marriage license requirement, the pre-marriage orientation—being a prerequisite for license issuance—is logically not applicable. The rationale is that couples who have cohabited for at least five years are presumed to have practical experience in marital-like responsibilities, rendering the educational orientation redundant. This exemption aligns with the provision's intent to simplify the process for long-term partners.

However, in practice, the application can vary:

Strict Legal Interpretation: Based solely on the Family Code, no pre-marriage orientation is required. The affidavits suffice as substitutes for the license, and the marriage can proceed directly to solemnization.
LGU and Administrative Practices: Some local civil registrars or solemnizing officers may still recommend or require attendance at a pre-marriage seminar as a best practice, especially if the couple has children or complex family dynamics. This is not legally binding but may be encouraged to ensure informed consent and family welfare. For instance, if the marriage is to be registered post-ceremony, the registrar might inquire about counseling, though refusal cannot invalidate the marriage.
Special Cases: If one or both parties are below 25 years old, elements of Article 16 (requiring counseling for those needing parental advice) might intersect, potentially necessitating a certificate from an accredited counselor. However, the five-year cohabitation requirement under Article 34 implies the parties are typically older, making this rare.

Non-compliance with orientation, where not required, does not affect the marriage's validity, as per Article 4, which states that the absence of formal requisites (except in specified cases) renders the marriage voidable or void, but procedural steps like orientation are not formal requisites.

Related Provisions and Implications

Children and Property: Marriages under Article 34 retroactively legitimize children born during cohabitation (Article 178), provided no impediments existed. Property relations default to absolute community of property unless otherwise agreed (Article 75).
Potential Abuses and Safeguards: To prevent misuse (e.g., evading bigamy charges), the affidavits must be truthful; false statements can lead to perjury charges under the Revised Penal Code. Solemnizing officers are liable for negligence if they fail to verify qualifications.
Comparison with Other Exemptions: Article 34 is distinct from other license exemptions, such as marriages in articulo mortis (Article 27), remote places (Article 28), or mixed marriages (Article 26). None of these explicitly require orientation, reinforcing the non-mandatory nature under Article 34.
Statistical and Social Context: Data from the Philippine Statistics Authority indicates that a small percentage of marriages invoke Article 34, often in regions with high cohabitation rates. This provision supports social equity by formalizing unions without undue burden.

Challenges and Recommendations

Challenges in implementing Article 34 include verifying the cohabitation period, which relies on affidavits and witness statements, potentially leading to disputes in annulment or inheritance cases. Couples are advised to gather supporting evidence, such as joint utility bills or barangay certifications.

For those considering marriage under this article, consulting a lawyer or the local civil registrar is recommended to ensure compliance. While pre-marriage orientation is not required, voluntarily attending can provide valuable insights into legal rights and family planning.

Conclusion

Article 34 of the Family Code offers a pragmatic exemption for long-cohabiting couples, emphasizing the recognition of established relationships over procedural formalities. Pre-marriage orientation, while beneficial and mandatory for licensed marriages, is not a legal requirement under this provision, allowing for a streamlined path to formal union. This balance reflects the Philippine legal system's commitment to protecting family as the basic unit of society while adapting to real-life circumstances. Couples should nonetheless approach the process with due diligence to safeguard their rights and the validity of their marriage.