Defending Against Bigamy Charges: Void Marriages and Judicial Declarations

The Supreme Court has clarified an important defense available to persons charged with bigamy: a marriage that is void ab initio (void from the beginning) may be raised as a defense in a criminal prosecution for bigamy, even without a prior judicial declaration of its nullity. In Pulido v. People (G.R. No. 220149, July 27, 2021), the Court explained when a judicial declaration is required and when it is not, offering significant guidance for anyone facing this type of criminal charge.

The Case of Luisito Pulido

Luisito Pulido married Nora Arcon in 1983, when he was only 16 years old. More than a decade later, in 1995, he married Rowena Baleda while still married to Arcon. When Arcon discovered the second marriage, she filed bigamy charges against Pulido and Baleda.

Pulido's defense was that both marriages were void: his first marriage allegedly lacked a valid marriage license, and his second marriage allegedly lacked a proper ceremony. During the proceedings, courts declared both marriages void—the second for being bigamous, and later, the first for lack of a valid marriage license.

Despite these declarations, both the trial court and the Court of Appeals convicted Pulido of bigamy. The appellate courts held that because Pulido had not obtained a judicial declaration of nullity of his first marriage before contracting the second marriage, he could still be held criminally liable.

The Elements of Bigamy

Under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code, bigamy is committed when a person contracts a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead.

To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove four elements: (1) the offender has been legally married; (2) the first marriage has not been legally dissolved; (3) the offender contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and (4) the second marriage has all the essential requisites for validity—meaning it would be valid were it not for the subsistence of the first marriage.

When Is a Judicial Declaration Required?

The key legal question in Pulido involved Article 40 of the Family Code, which states that the absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage only on the basis of a final judgment declaring that marriage void.

The Supreme Court clarified the scope of this requirement. Article 40 applies to marriages contracted before the Family Code took effect in 1988, but only for purposes of remarriage. This means that if a person wants to marry again, they must first obtain a judicial declaration that their previous marriage is void—they cannot simply decide for themselves that the marriage is invalid.

However, the Court made an important distinction: in a criminal prosecution for bigamy, a person may still raise the defense that their prior marriage was void ab initio, even without a judicial declaration of nullity, if that first marriage was celebrated before the Family Code took effect. This is because procedural rules like Article 40 should not be applied retroactively in a way that prejudices or impairs vested rights.

Subsequent Declarations as a Valid Defense

The Court went further and abandoned its earlier rulings that required a judicial declaration obtained before the second marriage as a condition for using nullity as a defense. It now holds that a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of either the first or second marriage, obtained by the accused, is a valid defense in a bigamy prosecution.

This represents a significant shift toward a more liberal view favoring the accused. The Court reasoned that if the second marriage is void because the first marriage was void, then the essential element of a "subsisting" first marriage may be negated by the subsequent judicial declaration.

Practical Takeaways

• A void marriage can be raised as a defense in a bigamy case even without a prior judicial declaration of nullity, particularly if the first marriage was contracted before the Family Code took effect in 1988.
• For purposes of remarriage, however, a final judicial declaration of nullity is still required under Article 40 of the Family Code. One cannot simply assume a prior marriage is void and remarry.
• A judicial declaration of nullity obtained after the second marriage—whether of the first or second marriage—may now serve as a valid defense in a bigamy prosecution.
• If facing bigamy charges, securing a judicial declaration of nullity of the prior marriage should be considered as part of the defense strategy, even if the marriage appears obviously void.
• The prosecution must still prove all elements of bigamy, including that the first marriage was legally subsisting at the time of the second marriage.

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