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 let’s 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.