You are on page 1of 3

1. Marietta Zamoranos v.

People

Petitioner: Atty. Marietta D. Zamoranos


Respondent: People of the Philippines and Samson R. Pacasum, Sr.,
Ponente: Nachura, J.

Short Facts and Doctrine/s: Marietta Zamoranos and De Guzman, both


Muslims, were married in accordance with Islam laws. Their marital
relations were later on dissolved by divorce by talaq, also in
accordance with Islam laws. Zamoranos remarried a certain Pacasum,
their relations turned sour, resulting to several disputes over the
custody of their common children and property. This caused Pacasum
to institute several cases (Civil, Criminal, Administrative) against
Zamoranos. Administrative cases were dismissed. The Civil case was
also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction for the marriage is governed by
Muslim laws and therefore the Family Code does cannot apply. The
criminal case however proceeded and an information charging
Zamoranos with Bigamy was filed. Zamoramos filed a Motion to quash
such information but it was denied. This caused her to file a petition for
certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. W/N the petition for
certiorari was proper. YES.
Certiorari is an extraordinary remedy used to keep inferior court within
the bounds of its jurisdiction to prevent it from committing grave abuse
of discretion amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction. The SC found
that the RTC indeed committed GAD for they did not take into
consideration the fact that Zamoramos and her first husband are
Muslim. The charge of Bigamy cannot proceed if it is not established
that the first marriage of the accused was still valid and subsisting
while she contracted her second marriage. This determination should
necessarily be determined by Muslim law. The RTC, at the least, should
have remanded the case to the Sharia Courts.
Facts:

These are three consolidation petitions for review on certiorari under


Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

Zamoranos was a former Roman Catholic who converted to Islam


before her marriage in 1982

1982- Zamoranos married Jesus de Guzman, a Muslim convert, in


Islamic rites. The two married again in a civil court in the RTC, QC.

1983- Zamoranos and de Guzman obtained a divorce by talaq (a


muslim form or divorce). This was confirmed by the Sharia Circuit
District Court of Isabela, Basilan which issued a Decree of Divorce.

1989- Zamoranos married anew to Samson Pacasum, Sr. in accordance


to Islamic rites in Balo-I, Lanao del Norte. Pacasum was her subordinate
in the Bureau of Customs, where she worked. They were blessed with
three children.
Their relationship turned sour and they were later on separated de facto.
And this resilted into a bitter battle for the custody of their children.
Pacasum filed three separate cases against Zamoranos:
o Petition for annulment of marriage before the RTC, branch 2 of
Iligan Ciry. He alleges that his marriage to Zamoramos is void
considering that, at the time of their marriage, she was still
married to de Guzman. Therefore, her second marriage was
bigamous and being the guilty spouse she should be deprived
of custody of the children, the community property and her
inheritance from Pacasum by testate or intestate succession
o Criminal complaint for Bigamy under the RPC
o Administrative cases for Zamoranos dismissal from the Civil
Service commission and for disbarment in the IBP. (the
administrative cases were all dismissed and are irrelevant to
this case)
Pacasum, during the pendency of these cases, contracted a second
marriage with another woman.

(medjo magulo yung facts kasi nag jjump from the criminal case to the civil
case, then back to the criminal case so lets put it in order and start with the
Civil case)
CIVIL CASE

The RTC, Branch 2, Iligan City, in this case, found that Zamoranos and
De Guzman are muslims at the time of their marriage and therefore their
marital relations are governed by P.D. No. 1083 otherwise known as the
Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines.

Since their marriage was contracted in accordance with Muslim laws


and their divorce by Talaq, their marriage can be considered dissolved
in accordance with Muslim laws and therefore they may re-marry. The
marriage in the civil courts under the Family Code was merely
ceremonial and unnecessary and does not alter/change the validity of
the marriage entered into under the Code of Muslim Laws.

The decision was in favor of Zamoranos, dismissing the petition of


Pacasum for lack of jurisdiction. This judgement became final and
executory.
CRIMINAL CASE

After a series of Motions for Reconsideration, dismissal of the petition


and Petition for Reviews, the Criminal Case for bigamy was filed and
Zamoranos filed a motion to quash the information arguing that RTC
branch 6, Iligan City had no jurisdiction over her person and over the
offense charged. She asserted the decision in the Civil Case which
should properly result in the mootness of the Criminal Case.
This Motion to Quash was denied. This led Zamoranos to file a petition
for certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of court.
The CA denied the petition for certiorari claiming that such petition is an
extraordinary remedy and should be confined to extraordinary cases
wherein the action of the inferior court is wholly void. The aim of
certiorari is to keep the inferior court within the parameters of its
jurisdiction and it is limited to resolving only errors of jurisdiction. In the
case of Zamoramos, the CA found that the RTC did not commit a grave
abuse of discretion and upheld the ruling of the lower court.
Interestingly, both Zamoramos and Pacasum appealed the decision of
the CA [Pacasum appealed because although he agrees with the
dismissal of Zampranos petition, he denies that Zamoramos is a
Muslim, who was previously married and divorced under Islamic rites,
and who entered into a second marriage with him, likewise under
Islamic rites.

Issues:
W/N the CA correctly dismissed Zamoranos petition for certiorari; and
Ruling:
No.
Ratio:
There was abuse of discretion on the part of the lower court

Certiorari serves to keep an inferior court within the bounds of its


jurisdiction to prevent it from committing grave abuse of discretion
amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction. And although, as a rule,
it is not a remedy for the denial of interlocutory orders. There are
certain situations where it may be an appropriate remedy to assail a
denial of a motion to quash such as (a) when the court issued the
order without or in excess of jurisdiction or with GAD, (b) when the
interlocutory order is patently erroneous, (c) in interest of
substantial justice, (d) to promote public welfare and public policy.
The above exceptions occur in this case.

RTC branch 6, Iligan City, which heard the case for Bigamy, should
have taken cognizance of the ruling in RTC, Branch 2, Iligan City,
that Zamoramos is a Muslim and that her first marriage was valid in
accordance with Muslim law.

From the evidence presented by Zamoramos [affidavits of the


solemnizing officer of the marriage, certification of the divorce
issued by a judge and an affidavit of the clerk of court] it is evident
that she is a Muslim who married under Islamic rites.
It is true that Sharia Courts are not vested with jurisdiction over
offenses penalized under the RPC however it is essential in
criminal cases that the trial court must have jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the offense.
The charge of Bigamy against Zamoramos asserts that the latter is
not a Muslim and her marriage is governed by civil laws.
Since the elements of bigamy are 1) the accused contracted a
second marriage, 2) while the prior one still validly exists.
At the very least, the RTC, Branch 6 should have suspended the
proceedings until the determination of the validity of the marriage
and divorce of Zamaramos and De Guzman.
Zamoramos was therefore, correct in filing the petition for certiorari
before the CA when her liberty was already in jeopardy with the
continuation of the criminal proceedings against her.
In a pluralist society such as that which exits in the Philippines, the
Code of Muslim Personal Laws, was enacted to promote the
advancement and effective participation of the National Cultural
Communities xxx [and] the State shall consider their customs,
traditions, beliefs and interests in the formulation and
implementation of its policies. Trying Zamoramos for Bigamy simply
because the regular criminal courts have jurisdiction over the
offense defeats the purpose for the enactment of the Code of
Muslim Personal Laws and the equal recognition bestowed by the
State on Muslim Filipinos.
The SC also referred to commentaries and Jurspridence on the
Muslim Code of the Philippines.

If both parties are Muslims and the Muslim Code is


complied with in contracting marriage, and later or
simultaneously, in addition to such marriage, they
solemnize their marriage in accordance with the Civil
Code, the first marriage is the validating rite and the
second is merely ceremonial.

Also, one of the effects of the irrevocable talaq, as well as


other kinds of divorce, refers to the severance of
matrimonial bond, entitling one to remarry.

Disposition: WHEREFORE, the petition in G.R. No. 193902 is


GRANTED. The petition in G.R. No. 194075 is DENIED. The Decision of
the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP no. 03525-MIN is REVERSED and

SET ASIDE. Accordingly, the Motion to Quash the Information in


Criminal Case No. 06-12305 for Bigamy is GRANTED. SO ORDERED.

You might also like