Francis Malaki and Jacqueline Mae, petitioners, vs. Republic, respondents

 G.R. No. 221075, November 15, 2021

FACTS:

On March 26, 1988, Francis and Nerrian were married under religious rite of Islesia ni Cristo in Panabo City, Davao del Norte. In 2005, Francis left the family home for Tagum City to find a job. He later abandoned their family. Nerrian discovered that he was cohabiting with Jacqueline and that they contracted marriage on June 18, 2005, solemnized by a Municipal Trial Court judge.  

Nerrian filed a crime for bigamy against Francis and Jacqueline on the ground that her marriage with Francis is legally valid and still subsisting, it has never been dissolved. 

Francis and Jacqueline admitted that they got married while Francis' marriage to Nerrian was subsisting. However, they claimed that they could not be penalized for bigamy as they converted to Islam prior to their marriage.

On May 7, 2012, the Regional Trial Court rendered its decision Francis and Jaqueline found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of bigamy. It reasoned that the Muslim Code and Zamoranos v. People do not govern the circumstances of Nerrian, Francis, and Jaqueline considering that Nerrian is not a Muslim. The Court Appeals denied petitioner’s appealed and upheld the RTC’ decision.  

ISSUES: 

1. Whether or not petitioners Francis D. Malaki, Sr. and Jacqueline Mae A. Salanatin are guilty of bigamy? 

2. Whether or not a party to a civil marriage who converts to Islam and subsequently marries under the Muslim Code is exempted from criminal liability of bigamy?

COURT'S RULING:

1. Contracting a second marriage without the previous declaration of nullity of the first consummates the crime of bigamy.  To successfully prosecute this crime, the following elements must be proven: 

i) that the offender has been legally married;

ii) that the first marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil Code; 

iii) that he contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and 

iv) that the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for validity.

The Court of Appeals found that all elements of bigamy were present. It held that unless the first marriage was dissolved and finalized under the Civil Code, any party's subsequent marriage shall make them liable for bigamy.

Petitioners admit that Francis was legally married to Nerrian and that the marriage was not dissolved. They likewise admit that they subsequently married despite the subsistence of Francis' marriage to Nerrian. These admissions sufficiently establish all the elements of bigamy which prove petitioners' guilt beyond reasonable doubt. 

However, they claim that they both converted to Islam and were married under Muslim rites.  They contend that Muslims may subsequently marry and this exculpates them from criminal liability. 

2. The Article 162 spells out the formal requisites for the Muslim husband's subsequent marriage: 

Any Muslim husband desiring to contract a subsequent marriage shall, before so doing, file a written notice thereof with the Clerk of Court of the Shari 'a Circuit Court of the place where his family resides. Upon receipt of said notice, the Clerk shall serve a copy thereof to the wife or wives. Should any of them object, an Agama Arbitration Council shall be constituted in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (2) of the preceding article. If the Agama Arbitration Council fails to obtain the wife's consent to the proposed marriage, the Court shall, subject to Article 27, decide whether or not to sustain her objection.

Francis did not comply with the requirements provided, and even testified that he does not know that such is required, as he declared in open court that he only knew he can remarry. The failure of Francis to comply with the requisites betrays his invocation of Islamic law as an excuse for his indiscretion. 

WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is DENIED. The Court of Appeals' April 24, 2015 Decision and September 17, 2015 Resolution in CA-G.R. CR No. 00990-MIN are AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION.

_____

Principle:

The general principle underlying Muslim Code in the Philippine is the rule on Polygamy. Under Muslim Code, it allows polygamy as provided in Art. 27, said: 

“Notwithstanding the rule of Islamic law permitting a Muslim to have more than one wife but not more than four at a time, no Muslim male can have more than one wife unless he can deal with them with equal companionship and just treatment as enjoined by Islamic law and only in exceptional cases.”    

That was the conditional rule under which Muslim male were allowed to contract subsequent marriage. But, the case like Francis and Jacqueline is something beyond what laws about.  This illegal practice where they convert to Islam solely to remarry is circumvention to the law, and it hurts the religious feeling of those who abide the principle.