FAYE CORDOVEZ
(Mistake of Law)
People v. Bitdu
GR No. 38230 November 21, 1933
Vickers, J.
Facts:
Mora Bitdu, appellant, 17 years old, married Moro Halid before an
Imam in Lamitan in the Province of Zamboanga, in accordance
with Mohammedan rites more than 12 years ago.
About 7 months ago, Mora Bitdu also married Moro Hajirol before
a Hadji in accordance with Mohammedan customs.
Bitdu admits that she contracted two marriages, but claims that
her second marriage took place after she divorced her first
husband in accordance with Mohammedan customs before Datu
Gavino Cuevas of Isabela de Basilan.
During the trial, two witnesses testified. The first witness stated
that divorce between Mohammedans in Mindanao may be
obtained before any person designated and agreed upon by both
parties. While the second witness adds that the spouses intending
to secure a divorce select the person whom the divorce is to take
place, and both parties are represented by persons designated by
them.
The court, however, stated that customs or religious practices
cannot be superior to or have precedence over laws relating to
public policy.
Thus the Court of First Instance ruled against Bitdu, hence this
appeal.
Attorney of appellant admits that appellant was twice married, but
contends that she was divorced from her first husband in
accordance to Mohammedan customs and that said divorce was
valid. And if it were not, then appellant cannot be charged guilty of
bigamy because she believed that she was validly divorced and
had no criminal intent when she got married the second time.
Solicitor-General agreed with appellant’s attorney that (1) divorce
was granted in accordance with Koran and Moro customs and
traditions; (2) that she could not be considered guilty of bigamy
because she had no criminal intent, which is an essential element
of the aforementioned crime and; (3) since it is the practice of the
Government not to interfere with the customs of Moros, divorces
among them granted in accordance with the Koran ought to be
recognized as a matter of public policy.
Issue:
WON the alleged divorce of Bitdu from her first husband is valid
Held:
No. Court states that it was unnecessary to determine whether or
not the divorce was granted in accordance to Mohammedan
religious practices because a valid divorce can only be granted by
courts, and reasons in Act No 2710 (law enumerating the causes
and conditions under which divorce may be secured and granted).
It was not claimed that the appellant was divorced from her first
husband in accordance with said Act.
Likewise, Sec. 25 of the Marriage Law (Act No 3613) provides that
marriages between Mohammedans may be performed in
accordance with the rites or practices of their religion, but there is
no provision of law which authorizes the granting of divorces in
accordance with the rites or practices of their religion.
The decision appealed from is affirmed, costs against appellant.