MOLINA DOCTRINE (7) Interpretations given by the National Appellate

Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the

(1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be
belongs to the plaintiff. Any doubt should be resolved in given great respect by our courts. It is clear that Article
favor of the existence and continuation of the marriage 36 was taken by the Family Code Revision Committee
and against its dissolution and nullity. This is rooted in the from Canon 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law, which
fact that both our Constitution and our laws cherish the became effective in 1983 and which provides:
validity of marriage and unity of the family. Thus, our (8) The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or
Constitution devotes an entire Article on the fiscal and the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for
Family, 11 recognizing it "as the foundation of the nation." the state. No decision shall he handed down unless the
It decrees marriage as legally "inviolable," thereby Solicitor General issues a certification, which will be
protecting it from dissolution at the whim of the parties. quoted in the decision, briefly staring therein his reasons
Both the family and marriage are to be "protected" by for his agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to
the state. the petition. The Solicitor General, along with the
(2) The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be prosecuting attorney, shall submit to the court such
(a) medically or clinically identified, (b) alleged in the certification within fifteen (15) days from the date the
complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by experts and (d) case is deemed submitted for resolution of the court. The
clearly explained in the decision. Article 36 of the Family Solicitor General shall discharge the equivalent function
Code requires that the incapacity must be of the defensor vinculi contemplated under Canon 1095.
psychological — not physical. although its manifestations
and/or symptoms may be physical. The evidence must SANTOS V CA
convince the court that the parties, or one of them, was "PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY" should refer to no less
mentally or physically ill to such an extent that the person than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a party to be
could not have known the obligations he was assuming, truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that concomitantly
or knowing them, could not have given valid assumption must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage
thereof. Although no example of such incapacity need which, as so expressed by Article 68 of the Family Code, include
be given here so as not to limit the application of the their mutual obligations to live together, observe love, respect and
provision under the principle of ejusdem fidelity and render help and support.
generis, 13 nevertheless such root cause must be There is hardly any doubt that the intendment of the law
identified as a psychological illness and its has been to confine the meaning of "psychological incapacity" to
incapacitating nature explained. Expert evidence may the most serious cases of personality disorders clearly
be given qualified psychiatrist and clinical psychologists. demonstrative of an utter intensitivity or inability to give meaning
(3) The incapacity must be proven to be existing at "the time and significance to the marriage.
of the celebration" of the marriage. The evidence must This pschologic condition must exist at the time the
show that the illness was existing when the parties marriage is celebrated. The law does not evidently envision, upon
exchanged their "I do's." The manifestation of the illness the other hand, an inability of the spouse to have sexual relations
need not be perceivable at such time, but the illness with the other. This conclusion is implicit under Article 54 of the
itself must have attached at such moment, or prior Family Code which considers children conceived prior to the
thereto. judicial declaration of nullity of the void marriage to be
(4) Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or "legitimate."
clinically permanent or incurable. Such incurability may
be absolute or even relative only in regard to the other
spouse, not necessarily absolutely against everyone of MOLINA DOCTRINE
the same sex. Furthermore, such incapacity must be
relevant to the assumption of marriage obligations, not 1. The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage
necessarily to those not related to marriage, like the belongs to the plaintiff.
exercise of a profession or employment in a job. Hence, 2. The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be
a pediatrician may be effective in diagnosing illnesses of (a) medically or clinically identified, (b) alleged in the
children and prescribing medicine to cure them but may complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by experts and (d)
not be psychologically capacitated to procreate, bear clearly explained in the decision.
and raise his/her own children as an essential obligation 3. The incapacity must be proven to be existing at "the time
of marriage. of the celebration" of the marriage.
(5) Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the 4. Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or
disability of the party to assume the essential obligations clinically permanent or incurable.
of marriage. Thus, "mild characteriological peculiarities, 5. Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the
mood changes, occasional emotional outbursts" cannot disability of the party to assume the essential obligations
be accepted as root causes. The illness must be shown of marriage.
as downright incapacity or inability, nor a refusal, 6. The essential marital obligations must be those
neglect or difficulty, much less ill will. In other words, there embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family Code as
is a natal or supervening disabling factor in the person, regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221
an adverse integral element in the personality structure and 225 of the same Code in regard to parents and their
that effectively incapacitates the person from really children.
accepting and thereby complying with the obligations 7. Interpretations given by the National Appellate
essential to marriage. Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the
(6) The essential marital obligations must be those Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be
embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family Code as given great respect by our courts.
regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221 8. The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or
and 225 of the same Code in regard to parents and their fiscal and the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for
children. Such non-complied marital obligation(s) must the state.
also be stated in the petition, proven by evidence and
included in the text of the decision.