Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 71 views

    ZAMORANOS vs. People - Shari'a Court

    Uploaded by

    Fenina Reyes
    1) The Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over criminal cases involving violations of the Revised Penal Code, not the Sharia courts. However, in this case of alleged bigamy, the subject matter involved determining the validity of the defendant's prior marriage under Muslim law. 2) The Regional Trial Court should have suspended the criminal proceedings until the Sharia Circuit Court determined the validity of the defendant's prior divorce under Muslim law before trying her for bigamy. 3) Under Muslim law and the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, the defendant's divorce was valid, so she was entitled to remarry and the Regional Trial Court did not have jurisdiction over the bigamy charge. The Supreme Court granted the petition and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    ZAMORANOS vs. People - Shari'a Court

    Uploaded by

    Fenina Reyes
    71 views2 pages
    1) The Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over criminal cases involving violations of the Revised Penal Code, not the Sharia courts. However, in this case of alleged bigamy, the subject matter involved determining the validity of the defendant's prior marriage under Muslim law. 2) The Regional Trial Court should have suspended the criminal proceedings until the Sharia Circuit Court determined the validity of the defendant's prior divorce under Muslim law before trying her for bigamy. 3) Under Muslim law and the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, the defendant's divorce was valid, so she was entitled to remarry and the Regional Trial Court did not have jurisdiction over the bigamy charge. The Supreme Court granted the petition and

    Original Description:

    Jurisdiction

    Original Title

    ZAMORANOS vs. People_Shari'a Court

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over criminal cases involving violations of the Revised Penal Code, not the Sharia courts. However, in this case of alleged bigamy, the subject matter involved determining the validity of the defendant's prior marriage under Muslim law. 2) The Regional Trial Court should have suspended the criminal proceedings until the Sharia Circuit Court determined the validity of the defendant's prior divorce under Muslim law before trying her for bigamy. 3) Under Muslim law and the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, the defendant's divorce was valid, so she was entitled to remarry and the Regional Trial Court did not have jurisdiction over the bigamy charge. The Supreme Court granted the petition and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    71 views2 pages

    ZAMORANOS vs. People - Shari'a Court

    Uploaded by

    Fenina Reyes
    1) The Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over criminal cases involving violations of the Revised Penal Code, not the Sharia courts. However, in this case of alleged bigamy, the subject matter involved determining the validity of the defendant's prior marriage under Muslim law. 2) The Regional Trial Court should have suspended the criminal proceedings until the Sharia Circuit Court determined the validity of the defendant's prior divorce under Muslim law before trying her for bigamy. 3) Under Muslim law and the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, the defendant's divorce was valid, so she was entitled to remarry and the Regional Trial Court did not have jurisdiction over the bigamy charge. The Supreme Court granted the petition and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    ZAMORANOS vs.

    PEOPLE, PACASUM, June 1, 2011

    True, the Shari’a Circuit Court is not vested with jurisdiction over offenses penalized
    under the RPC. Certainly, the RTC, Branch 6, Iligan City, is correct when it declared
    that:

    The Regional Trial Courts are vested the exclusive and original jurisdiction in all criminal
    cases not within the exclusive original jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, or body. [Sec.
    20 (b), BP Blg. 129] The Code of Muslim Personal Laws (PD 1083) created the Sharia
    District Courts and Sharia Circuit Courts with limited jurisdiction. Neither court was
    vested jurisdiction over criminal prosecution of violations of the Revised Penal Code.
    There is nothing in PD 1083 that divested the Regional Trial Courts of its jurisdiction to
    try and decide cases of bigamy. Hence, this Court has jurisdiction over this case.30

    Nonetheless, it must be pointed out that even in criminal cases, the trial court must
    have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the offense. In this case, the charge of
    Bigamy hinges on Pacasum’s claim that Zamoranos is not a Muslim, and her marriage
    to De Guzman was governed by civil law. This is obviously far from the truth, and the
    fact of Zamoranos’ Muslim status should have been apparent to both lower courts, the
    RTC, Branch 6, Iligan City, and the CA.

    The subject matter of the offense of Bigamy dwells on the accused contracting a second
    marriage while a prior valid one still subsists and has yet to be dissolved. At the very
    least, the RTC, Branch 6, Iligan City, should have suspended the proceedings until
    Pacasum had litigated the validity of

    Zamoranos and De Guzman’s marriage before the Shari’a Circuit Court and had
    successfully shown that it had not been dissolved despite the divorce by talaq entered
    into by Zamoranos and De Guzman.

    Zamoranos was 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 exists in the Philippines, P.D. No. 1083, or the
    Code of Muslim Personal Laws, was enacted to "promote the advancement and effective
    participation of the National Cultural Communities x x x, [and] the State shall consider
    their customs, traditions, beliefs and interests in the formulation and implementation of
    its policies."

    Trying Zamoranos 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.

    Article 3, Title II, Book One of P.D. No. 1083 provides:

    XXX
    For our edification, we refer once again to Justice Rasul and Dr. Ghazali’s Commentaries
    and Jurisprudence on the Muslim Code of the Philippines:

    If both parties are Muslims, there is a presumption that the Muslim Code or Muslim law
    is complied with. If together with it or in addition to it, the marriage is likewise
    solemnized in accordance with the Civil Code of the Philippines, in a so-called combined
    Muslim-Civil marriage rites whichever comes first is the validating rite and the second
    rite is merely ceremonial one. But, in this case, as long as both parties are Muslims,
    this Muslim Code will apply. In effect, two situations will arise, in the application of this
    Muslim Code or Muslim law, that is, when both parties are Muslims and when the male
    party is a Muslim and the marriage is solemnized in accordance with Muslim Code or
    Muslim law. A third situation occur[s] when the Civil Code of the Philippines will govern
    the marriage and divorce of the parties, if the male party is a Muslim and the marriage
    is solemnized in accordance with the Civil Code.32

    Moreover, the two experts, in the same book, unequivocally state that one of the
    effects of irrevocable talaq, as well as other kinds of divorce, refers to severance of
    matrimonial bond, entitling one to remarry.33 1avvphi1

    It stands to reason therefore that Zamoranos’ divorce from De Guzman, as confirmed


    by an Ustadz and Judge Jainul of the Shari’a Circuit Court, and attested to by Judge
    Usman, was valid, and, thus, entitled her to remarry Pacasum in 1989. Consequently,
    the RTC, Branch 6, Iligan City, is without jurisdiction to try Zamoranos for the crime of
    Bigamy.

    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.

    You might also like