Philippine Supreme Court strikes down same-sex marriage bid

The Philippine Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a (KPAfKxb9J0yI5)H(xyIR5&g3J6nayffrMa%vu+=NzY2rHfmfHpetition challenging the country's Family Code that limits marriage to between a man and a woman.

The court unanimously dismissed Jesus Nicardo M. Falcis III’s petition, the Philippine News Agency (PNA) reports.

A court spokesman said judges cited a lack of legal standing to initiate the petition as well as for 8X^O(l80P3wbY2XJ6pOFvC_l4IyMv*ILbG4GbKI#EsJ5ETvu$bfailing to comply with the principle of hierarchy of courts.

The court also turned down the potential lawsuit for "failinb8gY(gZ1Ysrf1s%6kVbXoumBCV)r+1nMXNy+npLZeZm)fWmK@dg to raise an actual, justiciable controversy”.

PredWmFQntQL!deiU1kqHl)9^p7eD41keuEJ%GmPt(&aH@7K6+tko@ominantly Roman Catholic, the Philippines does not grant LGBTI citizens equal rights.

Articles 1 and 2 of The FamiFm3H9#!$*nGa$dVdeFf86d%DNkxUUXnRb%HnzfpbjQCJNvE-1gly Code of the Philippines defines marriage as between man and woman.

Falcis’ petition quizzed these two articles as well as articles which list homosexuality oqagHJ17^(+$dlpTIE0e!UMy&$b03bUDgP3ptRMYck*HD+gLQdas a reason for annulling a marriage.

The court said, according to PNAu1wX#=tsdvIo(lq(B)hX*@vl#KK_0z@pxmNNRS0h^RC@_sk-Jg, that while the Constitution does not restrict marriage on the basis of gender, it underscored the need of formal legislation to allow a more orderly deliberation in assuring rights.

"Often public reason needs to be first shaped through theppsJD4SXp_-9erdz!TP3t+zR#j-z)n7%0MRYlNS+=I(%)aHhSp crucible of campaigns and advocacies within our political forums before it is sharpened for judicial fiat," the tribunal reportedly said.

Civil Unions

Meanwhile, the Philippines Congress is set to consider a bill that would legalize same-sex civB&1ysAMx#%d!+NB#@p*DQ+AcKSSQ-rX-#zT#N(s@7(rEbSZuupil unions in the Southeast Asian nation.

But, the bill, which Congress failed to pass in its last session, has been criticized by rights groups for failing to provide ge=-+i07d!%I7OBdAWV4nBjto^!foyjXT(dvB$!__82gx7Gz3Hfenuine equality.

The bill would ensure benefits and protections granted by marriage are extended to couples in a civil partnership.
This includes adoption, owning property, court rulings, and spousal support.

But, local LGBTI group LAGABLAB earlier this year  said civil union recognition will not ‘in any way be marriage equality’.
The bill "creates a distinction between married couples and civil partners” the group told Gay Star News.

"It further crH(DB1S+pRN47qJQ8Qbv&ct7!pr%1OzlF14i6CT@!=o-ot@QgUEeates a secondary status for LGBTQI couples”.

LGBT rights groups have also bemoaned legislators mgl)92HG6xVsi(fzJl9oe)DN))Am%0dT&!p%(FGYk9e@XEUMk1for failing to pass much-needed anti-discrimination protections.