The Supreme Court (SC) has taken a liberal stand in allowing the annulment of marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity. The court reversed itself and nullified a marriage of private individuals, saying that a strict implementation of the rules would allow diagnosed sociopaths, schizophrenics, narcissists and the like to stay married.
In a 25-page ruling, the FC's First Division through Associate Justice Lucas P. Bermasin, reversed its September 2011 ruling "after taking a second hard look" at the facts of the case. The SC said that the lower court failed to make factual findings which can serve as legal bases for concluding that one of parties is suffering from psychological incapacity.
In its recent ruling, the SC said that Article 36 of the Family Code should not be so strictly and too literally applied. This article provides "that a marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization".
In 1997, the SC set specific guidelines before a marriage can be nullified on the ground of psychological incapacity. These guidelines have turned out to be rigid, such that their application to every instance practically condemned the petition for declaration of nullity to the fate of certain rejection - so the SC in its recent ruling.
"Instead, every court should approach the issue of nullity 'not on the basis of a priori assumptions, predilections or generalization, but according to its own facts' in recognition of the verity that no case would be on "all fours" with the next one in the field of psychological incapacity as a ground of the nullity of marriage; hence, every 'every trial must take pains in examining the factual', the SC said.
In this case, the SC granted the motion for reconsideration filed by the husband against who loves to play mahjong and frequents the beauty parlor, displaying narcissistic behavior.
Aside from medical experts, the SC also gave credence to the testimony of Fr. Gerald Healy, S.J., a canon law expert and a consultant of the Family Code Revision Committee, who testified that the wife's duties to her husband and children bad become secondary to hear beauty, being a former model, her going-out, going to beauty parlor and mahjong.
The SC added that taking her children with her while playing mahjong is exposing them to a culture of gambling which was 'a very grave and serious act of subordinating their needs of parenting to the gratification of her own personal and escapist desires.
In relaxing the rules in determining psychological incapacity for nullification of marriages, the SC said that they are not 'demolishing the foundation of families but is actually protecting the sanctity of marriage, because it refuses to allow a person afflicted with a psychological disorder, who cannot comply with or assume the essential marital obligations from remaining in that scared blood'.
The SC added that the courts may be flooded by petitions for nullity of marriage but there is no reason to be worried because of ample saveguards such as intervention of the government.
"The court should rather be alarmed by the rising of cases involving marital abuse, child abuse, domestic violence and incestuous rape", the SC said.
