News / Sep. 03, 2019
The Philippine Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a peeD1K*%Vm#IP6ft=Vm9DGzRei3O7getN8QKex!l8Vws7lLn2v9Ytition 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 petndX70b$TzCjtpLuDvdZ&1UN%OJkBeFlu7aJ0VZCy8Plzuw-Hw^ition as well as for failing to comply with the principle of hierarchy of courts.
The court also turned down the potential lawsuit for "failing to raise an actual, justiciable cont-NFr!-)kS^NXRz=E)$LK!okoxgqUMGey%1m1XrENABq!f@qly0roversy”.
Predominantly Roman Catholic, the Philippines does not grant LGBTI citizens equaqr$4pMk6RAz)#WYRA5^glDZ@Ga^wZWrjAfgfWAUU_XV6w=d-TXl rights.
Articles 1 and 2 of The Family Code of the Philippines defines marriage as betweeItvEqip^pV)Fus9HxwY@a)KFUDvOHKMqy_T=IFLqvo!I5)%V6Bn man and woman.
Falcis’ petition quizzed these two articles as well as articles whi^tA6-=sEM6Hybx(R^P7-1xOs&$G%%a59jNErZIu+TxYBU^WP(qch list homosexuality as a reason for annulling a marriage.
The court said, according to PNA, that while the Constitution does not restrict marriage on the bo*%tBmDbl)3!un8GV52hyDE+mQgp#X6V)*7V#TFTNTjHw-EonTasis 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 campaigns and advocacies within our political forums befoUULU^rz&U$Sv(ZIzxLgFAktqfq2VCb8&h=(MzhB_MyS1nL+jMrre it is sharpened for judicial fiat," the tribunal reportedly said.
Civil Unions
Meanwhile, thetf&kA9O9V=7-ab3)$Q1M^NseF=F&MjxDb9Az1)TXIj)b6JTo(7 Philippines Congress is set to consider a bill that would legalize same-sex civil unions in the Southeast Asian nation.
But, the bill, which Congress failed to pass in its last session, has been critizGx+%dOB-lY@=*hHZGmlI7Ox%Z+^M2NsG()s%*&$3TJ0VEsJ-pcized by rights groups for failing to provide genuine equality.
The bill would ensure benefits and protections granted by marriage are extended to couples in a civil partnership.
This includes adoption, owning property, court rulings, and spousal support.
But, local LGBTI group LAGABLAB earlier this year said civil union recognition will not ‘in any way be marriage equality’.
The bill "creates a distinction between married couples and civil partners” the group told Gay Star News.
"It further create2ndl2tq%6gnnzUE49z6ze1ipZ4vd@ZQw&2U6fWAbx^sTa!rXKps a secondary status for LGBTQI couples”.
LGBT rights groups have also bemoaned legislators for failing to pass much-needed anti-discrimination prXja9a&SX*)ytI7SW*w0$O5&)s=EL_FbjYPT7#HT6V4sMHIYbYuotections.
