Law versus culture

This is another case of bigamy involving a married person who converted to Islam and married again. The issue raised here is whether he and his second wife are liable for the crime of bigamy. This is the case Fred and Naty.

Fred and Naty got married about 34 years ago under the religious rites of Iglesia ni Cristo in a city located in a province down south. After about 17 years of marriage and with two children, Fred left the family home and went to another city to find a job. Later on, he abandoned his family. Then Naty discovered that Fred was cohabiting with Lina and that they contracted marriage before a Municipal Trial Court judge about four months after abandoning his family.

So Naty charged Fred and Lina with the crime of bigamy. On arraignment by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Fred and Lina pleaded not guilty to the charge, but they admitted that they got married while Fred’s marriage to Naty was subsisting. However, they claimed that they could not be penalized for bigamy because they converted to Islam prior to their marriage.

The RTC, however, found Fred and Lina guilty beyond reasonable doubt of bigamy and sentenced them to imprisonment of six months and one day minimum to six years and one day maximum. The RTC reasoned that the Muslim Code is not applicable to their case because Naty, who is one of the parties involved and the offended party, is not a Muslim. This ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA) which found that all the elements of bigamy were present. It held that unless the first was dissolved and finalized under the Civil Code, any party’s subsequent marriage shall make them liable for bigamy. Were the RTC and the CA correct?

Yes, said the Supreme Court (SC). A party to a civil marriage who converts to Islam and contracts another marriage, despite the subsistence of the first marriage, is guilty of bigamy. Likewise guilty is the spouse of the subsequent marriage. Conversion to Islam does not operate to exculpate them from criminal liability. The nature, consequence and incidents of Fred’s prior marriage to Naty remain well within the ambit of the Civil Code. Even the Muslim Code (Article 13 [2])explicitly spell out that the Civil Code governs where either party to a marriage is non-Muslim and the marriage was not solemnized in Muslim rites.

Whether Fred converted to Islam before or after his marriage to Lina, the subsequent marriage consummated the crime of bigamy. He cannot successfully invoke the exculpatory clause in Article 180 of the Muslim Code, considering that said Code is not applicable in his subsisting marriage to Naty. Courts should not condone practices which circumvent laws in the guise of preserving culture.

So, Fred and Lina are really guilty of bigamy and are each sentenced to suffer imprisonment of two years four months minimum to eight years and one day maximum (Malaki and Salamatin-Malaki versus People of the Philippines, G.R. 221075, Nov. 15, 2021)

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]