Bigamy in the Philippines: Penalty and Defenses

In Pulido v. People, the Supreme Court listed what the prosecution must prove:

1. The accused was legally married.
2. The first marriage was not legally dissolved or, if the spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead.
3. The accused contracted a second or later marriage.
4. The second marriage has all the essential requisites for validity.

If any one of these is missing, there is no bigamy.

Prision mayor. Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code sets its duration at six years and one day to twelve years, and Article 25 lists it among the afflictive penalties. Article 349 sets no fine. The exact sentence depends on the court and the circumstances of the case.

The second marriage is also void under the Family Code. Article 35(4) lists bigamous or polygamous marriages not covered by Article 41 as void from the beginning.

Not necessarily. Before 2021, the courts followed Mercado v. Tan (2000) and similar cases: a person who remarried without first getting a court declaration that the first marriage was void was guilty of bigamy.

Pulido changed this. The full Court held that "a void ab initio marriage is a valid defense in the prosecution for bigamy even without a judicial declaration of absolute nullity." The reason: if the first marriage was void from the start, one element of bigamy, a valid first marriage, is missing. The accused may prove this in the bigamy case itself, with testimonial or documentary evidence.

In Pulido, the civil registrar had no record of the date and number of the marriage license for the first marriage. With no valid license, there was reasonable doubt that a valid first marriage existed. A court had also declared that first marriage void. The accused was acquitted. For more on this ground, see Is a marriage without a license valid?

Yes. Pulido is about the criminal case. For remarriage, Article 40 of the Family Code still applies:

The Court in Pulido said that Article 40 is "merely for purposes of remarriage". It does not take away the accused's right to attack a void marriage in a bigamy case, but it is still the rule for anyone who wants to marry again. Without that final judgment, the civil registry still shows the first marriage, and a person who was married before must give the court decree with the application for a new marriage license (Article 13). See Can I remarry after an annulment?

Pulido also set limits:

• A voidable first marriage. If the first marriage was only voidable (for example, one that could be annulled under Article 45), it is treated as valid until annulled. The Court said the accused "cannot interpose an annulment decree as a defense" in that case.
• A second marriage that is void only because it is bigamous. In Pulido, the second marriage had been declared void because it was bigamous. The Court said this cannot be used as a defense, because that marriage did not lack any essential requisite.
• Believing the missing spouse is dead, without a court judgment. Article 349 covers a second marriage made "before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment". See Can I remarry if my spouse is missing?

Prision mayor is an afflictive penalty, so a bigamy case prescribes in 15 years. The 15 years start on the day the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents, and they stop running while the offender is outside the Philippines (Article 91).

These are made-up examples to show how the rules work. They are not advice for any real case.

Ramon married Liza in 2010. In 2018, still married to Liza and with no court case, he marries Grace. That is bigamy under Article 349, and the marriage to Grace is void (Article 35(4)).

Carlo married in 2005, but the civil registrar certifies that no marriage license was issued for that wedding. In 2015 he marries again without going to court first. If he is charged with bigamy, he may try to prove that his first marriage was void and use that as a defense (Pulido). For civil purposes, though, he married again without the court judgment Article 40 requires.

Nestor married Ana when he was 19, without his parents' consent, so the marriage could be annulled (Article 45(1)). Before any annulment, he married Bea. The first marriage was voidable, not void, so it counted as valid and subsisting when he married Bea. A later annulment decree is not a defense to the bigamy charge (Pulido).

Bigamy is a crime with a long prison term. If you are accused, or if you want to file a complaint, talk to a lawyer right away. A lawyer can check the civil registry records of both marriages, the marriage licenses, and any court decisions, and can explain which defenses may apply. If you plan to remarry and an earlier marriage was never settled in court, talk to a lawyer before you apply for a marriage license.

If you cannot afford a lawyer, see Free legal help in the Philippines for the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) and other options.