Friday, November 22, 2024

Solon Wants Cohabiting ‘Gender-Fluid’ Couples Inclusion In Family Code

27

Solon Wants Cohabiting ‘Gender-Fluid’ Couples Inclusion In Family Code

27

How do you feel about this story?

Like
Love
Haha
Wow
Sad
Angry

House of Representatives Assistant Majority Leader and Atleta (PBA) Party-list Rep. Margarita “Migs” Nograles has filed a bill pushing for the inclusion of cohabiting “gender-fluid” couples, regardless of their sexes, in the administration of property under the Family Code.

Under House Bill 9502 she filed on Nov. 8 and released to the media on Thursday, Nograles wanted to amend Article 148 of the Family Code of the Philippines to set the parameters for property ownership of unmarried but cohabiting couples.

Nograles, also a lawyer, noted that existing jurisprudence has inadvertently excluded gender-fluid couples from the protection provided by this provision (Article 148), a gap that her bill aims to bridge.

Under the proposed amendment, all couples covered by the sought provision, regardless of gender, will be granted limited co-ownership over their shared properties, addressing a crucial gap in the current legal landscape.

The bill also provides that only properties acquired through the joint contributions of money, property, or industry by both partners during cohabitation will be owned in common, reflecting their respective contributions.

“In the absence of proof to the contrary, their contributions and corresponding shares are presumed to be equal. The same rule and presumption shall apply to joint deposits of money and evidence of credit,” the bill reads.

“While it may take more time for the Philippines to fully accept unions of all couples regardless of gender, this bill is a crucial step in ensuring that vulnerable individuals are protected from economic exploitations within their relationships.”

In instances where one party is validly married to another, their share in the co-ownership will be absorbed by the absolute community or conjugal partnership of the existing marriage.

If the party who acted in bad faith is not validly married to another, his or her share shall be forfeited.

Forfeiture likewise applies if both parties acted in bad faith.

Nograles said the importance of this legislation in recognizing the evolving dynamics of relationships in contemporary society should not be ignored.

“The passage of House Bill No. 9502 is an earnest endeavor to provide equal legal protection to all couples, contributing to the fulfillment of the State’s mandate to safeguard the dignity and human rights of every individual,” she said. (PNA)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed on this website, including all written content, articles, and posts, are solely those of the individual authors, whether they are employees, contributors, or guest writers. These views and opinions do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the website's management, officers, partners, employees, affiliates, or any other associated entities. The content provided and the information contained therein are sourced independently by the respective writers and are not influenced, endorsed, or verified by the management or any other parties associated with the website. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and seek appropriate guidance before making any decisions based on the content of this site.

President In Action

Metro Manila