Batas at Komunidad Kasama si Atty. Patrick Angara

Batas at Komunidad Kasama si Atty. Patrick Angara Programang naglalayon na makapagbigay alam at intindi sa mga umiiral na Batas at mga Isyu ng Bayan.

08/11/2025
04/11/2025

Mga kababayan natin sa Baler, magkita-kita po tayo ngayong Linggo, November 9, 2025, sa Sitio Ilaya, Brgy. Zabali! 🤝

Muli po tayong maghahatid ng libreng serbisyo-legal bilang bahagi ng Baler People’s Day— isang araw ng muli nating paglapit ng mga serbisyo para sa ating mga kababayan sa pangunguna ng LGU Baler.

Makilahok at magpaabot lamang po ng inyong mga legal na katanungan o pangangailangan, at sama-sama nating isulong ang kaalaman, karapatan, at hustisya para sa lahat.

Kitakits po!


18/09/2025

| The Supreme Court (SC) ruled that being irresponsible in doing household chores and taking care of children may be considered evidence of psychological incapacity to comply with marital obligations, a ground for nullification of marriage.

In a 13-page decision authored by Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan, the SC's Third Division has declared void from the beginning the marriage between Arnold Alfonso and Michelle Pamintuan-Alfonso on the ground of the latter's psychological incapacity as provided under Article 36 of the Family Code.

Arnold and Michelle were high school classmates. In 1997, or eight years after their graduation, they unexpectedly met. Since then, they have become close and regularly exchanged phone calls.

Despite being in a relationship with another man, Michelle often visited Arnold's apartment. Later on Michelle and Arnold spent the night at the latter's apartment, where the two engaged in unprotected sexual in*******se that resulted in Michelle's unexpected and unwanted pregnancy.

At first, Michelle was contemplating aborting the child, but Arnold convinced her otherwise and offered marriage. After the wedding, Michelle and Arnold resided at the parental house. They were blessed with three children.

A year later their relationship turned sour. Arnold noticed the changes in Michelle's behavior. Michelle would be verbally aggressive towards him, crying loudly to gain sympathy from their neighbors. She also refused to do household chores or care for their children, instead relying on her mother to fulfill her domestic responsibilities.

Arnold also observed that Michelle has a luxurious lifestyle, which caused her to obtain looming debts from various people. It reached the extent that Arnold's father paid Michelle's debt to save her from being sued.

Over time, Arnold felt Michelle's growing coldness towards him. Michelle disavowed fulfilling his sexual needs by making excuses that she is tired and not in the mood.

Sometime in 2010, Michelle informed Arnold that she had secured a job that required deployment to Bicol for one month. However, to his surprise, Arnold later learned that Michelle was having an affair with another man. Since then, Michelle has refused to communicate with him and their children.

This paved the way for Arnold to file a petition for nullification of their marriage on the ground of Michelle's psychological incapacity to fulfill her marital obligations.

Initially, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted the petition and nullified their marriage, but it was later reversed by the Court of Appeals. This prompted Arnold to elevate the case before the Supreme Court.

In granting Arnold's petition, the high court held that he was able to illustrate that the incapacity of Michelle was so grave or serious that it already impaired her from carrying out the required ordinary marital duties. It gave credence to the psychological report, which diagnosed Michelle with histrionic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder.

The SC also emphasized that the incapacity of Michelle was incurable, as the pattern of persistent failure to assume her essential marital obligations was proven. It also took into account the instance where Michelle entered into an illicit affair with another man.

“In every marriage lies the vinculum juris—the juridical bond that unites the spouses in a legally and morally binding union governed by law. This vinculum juris imposes upon each spouse the essential marital obligations of mutual love, respect, fidelity, and support,” the Supreme Court said.

“Thus, in the present case, we hold that Michelle's psychological incapacity existed prior to and during the celebration of the marriage; the vinculum juris is deemed never to have validly arisen,” it added.

25/07/2025
21/07/2025

This is the TRUTH that needs to be repeated over and over again: LAHAT ng batang nagkasala sa batas, ano man ang edad, ay may PANANAGUTAN sa Juvenile Justice Law.

Wala na tayo dapat sa debate ng edad. Ang totoong problema natin ay kung paano ipatutupad nang maayos ang batas at kung paano susuportahan ang mga programa nito gaya ng community-based intervention (para sa minor offenses) at rehabilitasyon sa Bahay Pag-Asa (para sa mga seryosong krimen at paulit-ulit na minor offenses).

Senator Robin Padilla: the age is NOT the problem, lowering the MACR (minimum age of criminal responsibility) is NOT the solution, and the law was already amended in 2013 -- an amendment that already addresses your concerns about cases where children commit serious crimes.

Children are NOT little adults. To make children as young as 10 CRIMINALLY liable means tagging them as criminals -- which they will imbibe as their identity -- and exposing them to an already broken ADULT criminal justice system, which studies have shown to make children graduate to more serious crimes instead of being reformed or rehabilitated.

Senator Padilla, the VERY ESSENCE of having a Juvenile Justice Law is to have a SEPARATE justice system for children. Because they are children.

We invite you to sit down with our social workers, child rights workers — in fact, we even have an entire Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council that monitors the implementation of the law — to learn firsthand that what we need are more social workers, more funding, and more programs, not lowering the MACR.

Senator Padilla, you of all people should know the value of redemption. You were once given one yourself as a former person deprived of liberty.

It's the same second chance that every child in conflict with the law deserves, and one that can only happen if we maintain a separate justice system for them, where the child, the victim, and the community are healed, and focus on the real solution: full and effective implementation.

Be a champion of second chances for children, not a lawmaker who will further condemn them to a negative life path.


06/06/2025
05/06/2025

Nagpasya ang na kapag ang isang Pilipino ay humiling sa korte sa Pilipinas na kilalanin ang diborsyo na ipinagkaloob sa ibang bansa, kailangan lang patunayan ang batas ng bansa kung saan nakuha ang diborsyo at hindi ang batas ng nasyonalidad ng kanyang dayuhang asawa.

Sa Desisyon na isinulat ni Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, ibinalik ng Third Division ng Korte ang kaso sa Court of Appeals (CA) para bigyan ng pagkakataon ang isang Pilipina na patunayan nang maayos ang mga batas sa diborsyo ng Kentucky, United States of America (U.S.A.).

Nagpakasal ang Pilipina sa isang Peruvian sa New Jersey, U.S.A. Ang mag-asawang doktor ay tumira sa Kentucky pero kalaunan ay naghiwalay din at nakakuha ng divorce decree sa isang korte sa Kentucky.

Sa Pilipinas, nagsampa ng petisyon ang Pilipina sa Regional Trial Court (RTC) para kilalanin ang diborsyo. Bukod sa kopya ng divorce decree, nagsumite rin siya ng mga printout ng mga batas ukol sa kasal sa Kentucky at Peru.

Pinagbigyan ng RTC ang kanyang petisyon pero binaliktad ito ng CA dahil nabigo umano siyang patunayan na ang diborsyo ay sumunod sa batas ng Kentucky at pinapayagan ng batas ng Peru ang kanyang asawa na magdiborsiyo at muling magpakasal.

Pero nilinaw ng Korte Suprema na sa pagkilala ng foreign divorce, ang mahalaga ay ang batas ng bansa na nag-isyu ng divorce decree. Dahil ang divorce ay ipinagkaloob sa Kentucky, tanging ang batas sa Kentucky lang ang kailangang patunayan.

Sa ilalim ng Article 26 (2) ng Family Code, maaaring mag-asawa muli ang Pilipino kung ang banyagang asawa ay nakakuha ng divorce sa ibang bansa na nagpapahintulot sa kanya na magpakasal muli. Kailangang tiyakin ng mga korte sa Pilipinas na ang divorce ay may bisa sa ilalim ng batas ng ibang bansa.

Para patunayan ang batas sa Kentucky, kailangang magsumite ang Pilipina ng opisyal ng paglathala o di kaya’y certified copy ng batas nito.

Basahin ang buong teksto ng press release sa https://tinyurl.com/4jhyh8vv.

Basahin ang buong teksto ng Desisyon sa https://tinyurl.com/ympmypuz.


Address

Sitio Gabgab, Brgy. Buhangin
Baler
3200

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Batas at Komunidad Kasama si Atty. Patrick Angara posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Share

Category