The Philippine Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a pJZAE+_2)p=N^sMkzyEHsk^[email protected]#VjGcFMH6=n^*getition challenging the country's Family Code that limits marriage to between a man and a woman.
The court unanimously dismissed Jesus Nicardo M. Falcis III’s petition, the Philippine News Agency (PNA) reports.
A court spokesman said judges cited a lack of legal standing to initiate the petition as well as fD$2QwYX)HX25s)[email protected])ilKqMUPRor failing to comply with the principle of hierarchy of courts.
The court also turned down the potential lawsuit for "failing to raise an actual, justiciable=yvpU^[email protected]@@8=M0C) controversy”.
Predominantly Roman Catholic, the Philippines does not greS2bVfZ-!aV$QrKz_$31fqpyH8nceeV)TaLPyvAbsXwFrFBYijant LGBTI citizens equal rights.
Articles D-z%mH1Sq%#=XEMEOE5TPOy!K7UW_vp8y^*21sTVaVZlwZvI$%1 and 2 of The Family Code of the Philippines defines marriage as between man and woman.
Falcis’ petition quizzed these two articles as well as a+qfI)0Jjz9Upxj!B_R=ZCFEQCzkwuZ5xbcO#S8dAD89^*A5-5drticles which list homosexuality as a reason for annulling a marriage.
The court said, according to PNA, that while the Constitution does not restrict marriage on tWAxW0DvWcHBB^k-zt_Q1Tay#l9fD*xq7Ou7lu%%&NdFFoAtvHwhe basis of gender, it underscored the need of formal legislation to allow a more orderly deliberation in assuring rights.
"Often public reason needs to be first shaped through the crucible of campai+yC-7-DbCyWN1MerGo-Y3sV_ZOeyELv52z5HgMtcn8!VJQan--gns and advocacies within our political forums before it is sharpened for judicial fiat," the tribunal reportedly said.
Meanwhile, the Philippines Congress is set to consider a bill that would legalrC^Oj#)EeS3vk#[email protected]#$7vIize same-sex civil unions in the Southeast Asian nation.
But, the bill, which Congress faXvb)zRMrV$dg1e+j)_4UZYQk8xB9RjUaYWBX%1pHX)x3V71M2!iled to pass in its last session, has been criticized by rights groups for failing to provide genuine equality.
The bill would ensure benefits and protections granted by marriage are extended to couples in a civil partnership.
This includes adoption, owning property, court rulings, and spousal support.
But, local LGBTI group LAGABLAB earlier this year said civil union recognition will not ‘in any way be marriage equality’.
The bill "creates a distinction between married couples and civil partners” the group told Gay Star News.
"It further creates a secondhdxsQm5i-%&2-h*=*n&25+AMc02KZ9T=XFB!$DphnhxuSL=VMUary status for LGBTQI couples”.
LGBT rights groups have also bemoaned legislators for failing to pass much-needed aI!Po7Gvbw_EEkTVB)Qf9HgJX71X99cGk*BJ7=)#)rCT7Ok2KPznti-discrimination protections.