Bigamy Conviction Affirmed: Judicial Declaration of Nullity Required Before Remarriage

The Supreme Court has affirmed the bigamy conviction of a man who remarried without first obtaining a judicial declaration that his first marriage was void. The ruling underscores a fundamental rule in Philippine family law: no person may unilaterally declare a marriage void, and a final court judgment is indispensable before contracting a second marriage.

In De Guzman v. People (G.R. No. 224742, August 7, 2019), the Court denied the petition of Prudencio De Guzman, who had been convicted of bigamy under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code for marrying another woman while his first marriage was still subsisting.

Facts of the Case

Prudencio and Arlene were married on April 8, 1994 before a Regional Trial Court judge in Quezon City. In 2007, Prudencio abandoned his wife and children. In December 2009, Arlene learned that Prudencio had contracted a second marriage with Jean Basan at a church in Las Piñas City. She confirmed this and obtained a copy of the marriage contract from the City Civil Registrar's Office.

Arlene filed a complaint for bigamy. During trial, Prudencio argued that his first marriage was void because the copy of the marriage contract secured from the National Statistics Office did not bear the solemnizing officer's signature. He also claimed that a Certificate of No Marriage Record issued by the NSO made him believe there was no legal impediment to remarry.

The trial court convicted Prudencio, and the Court of Appeals affirmed with modification of the penalty. Prudencio appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Issue

The central question was whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Prudencio's guilt for bigamy, given his claims that his first marriage was void and that he acted in good faith.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction. The Court reiterated that under Article 40 of the Family Code, the absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage only on the basis of a final judgment declaring that previous marriage void. A person cannot simply assume a marriage is void without a court declaration.

The Court rejected Prudencio's defense on several grounds. First, the Certificate of No Marriage Record was insufficient to justify his belief that there was no legal impediment, especially since his marriage certificate and wedding photos established that he had been married in 1994. Second, the prosecution's failure to present the marriage license was not fatal, as a certified true copy of the marriage certificate sufficiently establishes the existence of a marriage. Third, the absence of the solemnizing officer's signature in the NSO copy was merely inadvertent, as the copy on file with the Local Civil Registrar bore the signature.

The Court also held that Arlene's Affidavit of Desistance, executed after conviction, had no effect. Courts view such desistance with caution, especially when executed as an afterthought, and it cannot negate the elements of bigamy that had already been proven.

Practical Takeaways

• A judicial declaration of nullity is mandatory before a person can remarry, even if the first marriage is allegedly void.
• A Certificate of No Marriage Record is not a substitute for a court judgment declaring a previous marriage void.
• The absence of a solemnizing officer's signature in one copy of a marriage certificate does not automatically invalidate a marriage, especially when other copies bear the signature.
• An affidavit of desistance from the private complainant does not automatically dismiss a bigamy case, particularly when executed after conviction.
• Bigamy carries the penalty of prision mayor, and the indeterminate sentence may range from four years and two months to eight years and one day.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.