Dear PAO,
May a woman who was previously married in the Catholic Church and whose marriage was subsequently annulled by the Marital Tribunal of the same Church, resume using her maiden name in all her official transactions, e.g., with the

GSIS, Pag-ibig, Civil Service Commission, etc, in case she is a government employee? Is such annulment recognized by our laws as valid? Please help me. Thank you.
Pam

Dear Pam,
An annulment of a marriage by the Marital Tribunal of a Church is not one of the recognized ways of dissolving a valid marriage here in the Philippines. Only the courts can annul a marriage. A party, whose marriage has not yet been dissolved by the courts, is not yet allowed by law to contract a subsequent marriage.

It should be noted that under Article 1 of the Family Code of the Philippines, it is emphasized that marriage is governed by law. It states that “[m]arriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.” In our country, it is the courts, which have the power to interpret our laws. In fact, in Section 1 of Article 8 of the Philippine Constitution, it is stated that “[j]udicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable…” Also, Section 6 of Article 2 of the Philippine Constitution clearly states that “[t]he separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.” Therefore, it is only the courts, which can dissolve a marriage because dissolving a marriage would involve the interpretation of certain laws as applied to circumstances surrounding the marriage sought to be declared a nullity or annulled. And because of the separation of the Church and the State, the court is independent from the church when it makes an interpretation of the law to resolve a legal matter brought before it. Similarly, courts do not also interfere in ecclesiastical matters. In Taruc, et al. vs. de la Cruz, et al. (G.R. No. 144801, March 10, 2005), the Supreme Court declared that “[i]n our jurisdiction, we hold the Church and the State to be separate and distinct from each other.”

Noteworthy is the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ngo Te vs. Yu-Te (G.R. No. 161793, February 13, 2009), wherein it quoted the separate opinion of Justice Flerida Ruth P. Romero in the case of Republic vs. Court of Appeals and Molina (G.R. No. 108763, February 13, 1997), wherein she said that “[s]uch so-called church “annulments” are not recognized by Civil Law as severing the marriage ties as to capacitate the parties to enter lawfully into another marriage.” The separate opinion also said: “It bears stressing that unlike in Civil Law, Canon Law recognizes only two types of marriages with respect to their validity: valid and void. Civil Law, however, recognizes an intermediate state, the voidable or annullable marriages. When the Ecclesiastical Tribunal “annuls” a marriage, it actually declares the marriage null and void, i.e., it never really existed in the first place, for a valid sacramental marriage can never be dissolved. Hence, a properly performed and consummated marriage between two living Roman Catholics can only be nullified by the formal annulment process which entails a full tribunal procedure with a Court selection and a formal hearing.”

However, it should be noted that in the Molina case, the Supreme Court said that “[i]nterpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be given great respect by our courts.” And in the 2011 case of Ochosa vs. Alano and Republic (G.R. No. 167459, January 26, 2011), the Supreme Court emphasized that in interpreting the provisions of Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines on psychological incapacity, which is one of the grounds for declaring the nullity of a marriage, “courts should interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis; guided by experience, the findings of experts and researchers in psychological disciplines, and by decisions of church tribunals.”

With the above pronouncements made by the Supreme Court, it is clear that a marriage can only be dissolved if there is a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage or a Petition for Annulment of Marriage, which is filed in court. This means that even with the annulment of your marriage by a Marital Tribunal of a Church, you cannot have your surname changed and converted back to your maiden name. In fact, in Article 372 of the Civil Code, it is stated that “[w]hen legal separation has been granted, the wife shall continue using her name and surname employed before the legal separation.” This legal provision was explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Laperal vs. Republic (G.R. No. L-18008, October 30, 1962), wherein the Court said: “Note that the language of the statute is mandatory that the wife, even after the legal separation has been decreed, shall continue using her name and surname employed before the legal separation. This is so because her married status is unaffected by the separation, there being no severance of the vinculum. It seems to be the policy of the law that the wife should continue to use the name indicative of her unchanged status for the benefit of all concerned.” In addition, you cannot contract another marriage otherwise, you will be held criminally liable for bigamy. Under the law, you are still validly married to your husband until a Decree has been issued by a competent court that your marriage is a nullity or that your marriage has been annulled.

If you have been using your husband’s surname ever since you got married, you should still use it, until such time that your marriage is dissolved by our courts, because under our laws, you are still considered as his wife. It doesn’t matter that you are a government employee. That is because our laws on marriage apply to all Filipino citizens, even those living in other countries. Thus, Article 15 of the Civil Code states that “[l]aw relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.”