IN THE Philippines, annulment works as an expensive and exclusionary loophole that only few can afford.

Women, more likely to be financially dependent on their spouses than men, may lack resources to navigate lengthy and costly legal processes and fees. Moreover, the strict requirements for annulment often force women to endure harmful marriages, reinforcing gender inequality within the family law framework.

Annulment process

The Family Code defines annulment as a legal procedure that voids a marriage. Petitions must be based on specific grounds such as lack of parental consent, unsound mind, fraud, coercion, incapacity to consummate, or psychological incapacitation. Once a ground is identified, the petition is filed before the Family Courts with supporting documents, followed by a trial, where evidence and witnesses are evaluated.

While the process appears straightforward, access to annulment is shaped by the restrictive nature of legal grounds themselves.

According to Ateneo de Manila University School of Law Professor Amparita Sta. Maria, JD, many women want to get out of marriage “usually because of abuse, abandonment, and/or infidelity.” However, these circumstances do not automatically qualify as independent grounds for annulment, compelling petitioners to rely on psychological incapacity as the most viable basis. Under Article 36 of the Family Code, this refers to a condition that renders a spouse unable to fulfill the essential obligation of marriage, even if it manifests after the solemnization.

Reliance on psychological incapacity imposes demanding evidentiary requirements that complicate annulment proceedings. Courts still need clear and convincing proof that the incapacity existed at the time of marriage, though it is neither a matter of physical nor psychological examination. Petitioners must therefore present extensive documentation linking present marital problems to pre-marital conditions.

Taking all these processes and procedural requirements together, they create substantial barriers to relief from abusive marriages. When marital misconduct must be reframed as proof of a pre-existing psychological condition, annulment ceases to function as a practical remedy. 

Separation costs

Without other legal options allowing the absolute termination of marriage, annulment remains the only course for women to seek dissolution. Yet, the question is whether the majority can meet its demanding financial obligations.

Considering the lawyer’s legal experience and the complexity of the case, usual annulment fees amount from Php 130,000 to over Php 500,000. As severing ties to spouses comes with costly expenditures and complicated processes, some women resort to suspiciously “affordable” legal services that promise immediate marital dissolution, only for these to end in deception. Aside from causing financial loss, these schemes bar women from building a new life by themselves or with their new partners.

Additionally, traditional gender roles still influence women’s capability to explore career options and financial freedom. This is evidenced by the lower percentage of women in the labor force compared to men, as married women are more likely to cite housework as a reason for unemployment. Thus, women’s economic dependence on their husbands deters them from financially heftyannulment cases.

Besides restrictive Philippine laws on annulment, women are hindered by conventional gender expectations that make self-sustenance more challenging in the Philippines.

Finding an alternative

These disadvantageous conditions are not only exclusive to legal and patriarchal systems, but also apparent in the stark wealth difference between those who have the means to pursue annulment and those who do not. In reality, the majority of Filipino women do not have the capacity to enter a legal gamble—let alone risk the security of their children, if they have any.

In a position paper by the Women’s Legal and Human Rights Bureau, Executive Director Jelen C. Paclarin stated, “Present laws […] are inadequate to respond to the myriad causes of failed marriages.” The paper emphasized that current measures, such as annulment, fail to cover the problems that occur during marriage, while legal separation does not end the marriage at all.

Thus, the proposed Absolute Divorce Bill (House Bill 9349) aims to address affordability and accessibility issues. It aims to set a legal cap of Php 50,000 and mandate that all petitions be resolved within a year of filing, in contrast to the prolonged annulment process.

“The absence of divorce law will not keep together couples in failed marriages. Yet, the absence of divorce creates more problems than necessary for many couples, as well as their family members,” the document reads. Should a fault-based divorce—where a spouse has to prove a fault on the part of the other spouse—be legislated, it would better accommodate abandonment, violence, and non-fulfillment of marital obligations as grounds for termination—reasons normally excluded from annulment. 

Ultimately, having annulment as the primary remedy for women in irreparable and abusive marriages prevents them from leaving with dignity and financial relief. With systems continuously incapacitating women from freeing themselves from precarious situations, the escape remains a test of privilege.