Live-in relations legal if allowed by partners' religion

The Supreme Court, voting 9-5, has ruled that live-in relationships are legal if the religious convictions of the persons involved allow it. In a landmark 63-page decision penned by Associate Justice Reynato Puno, the high court cleared of any administrative liability Soledad Escritor, a court interpreter and member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society. Court records showed that on July 27, 2000, Alejandro Estrada filed before a Las Piñas Court charges for “disgraceful and immoral act" against Escritor for living in with Luciano Quilapio, Jr., and bearing a child without marriage. Estrada alleged that Escritor and Quilapio’s union constitutes “immoral act that tarnished the image of the court." In her defense, Escritor said that her conjugal arrangement with Quilapio is in conformity with their religious beliefs and that their live-in relationship had the approval of her congregration. She claimed that after 10 years in such a conjugal union, she and Quilapio executed on July 28, 1991 a declaration of pledging faithfulness, which allows members of the congregation who have been abandoned by their spouses to enter into marital relations. The union, according to Escritor, was approved by the elders of the congregation, after confirming that her original husband left her. “In her religion’s eyes, there is nothing immoral about the conjugal arrangement between Escritor and Quilapio and they remain members in good standing in the congregation" the high court said. “Thus, we find that in this particular case and under these district circumstances, respondent Escritor’s conjugal arrangement cannot be penalized as she has made out a case for exemption from the law based on her fundamental right to freedom of religion" the high court added. The Supreme Court ruling said the court recognizes that state interest must be upheld in order that freedoms, including religious freedom, may be enjoyed. MINORITY OPINION On the other hand, the five dissenting justices led by Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban said that the ruling could open the floodgates for people to use religion as an excuse to enter into illegal and immoral conjugal union. In a separate minority opinion, Associate Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago said Escritor should be suspended for six months for her disgraceful conduct in court. “The exacting standards of ethics and morality imposed upon court judges and court employees are required to maintain the people’s faith in the court as a dispenser of justice and whose image is mirrored by their actuations" Santiago said. For his part, Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said the majority opinion of the Court will make every religion a separate republic. “The majority opinion will make every religion a separate republic, making religion a haven for criminal conduct that otherwise would be punishable under the laws of the land. Today concubinage, tomorrow bigamy, will enjoy protection from criminal sanction under the new doctrine foisted by the majority opinion," Carpio said.-GMANews.TV