Facts:

Joey and Claire were scheduled to marry each other at Sta. Rosa Catholic Church of San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte. However, on the day of wedding, the supposed officiating priest refused to solemnize the marriage upon learning that the couple failed to secure a marriage license.

As recourse, Joey and Claire, together with their parents, sponsors and guests, proceeded to the Aglipayan Church. They requested petitioner Ronulo, an Aglipayan priest, to perform a ceremony to which the latter agreed despite having been informed by the couple that they have no marriage license.

Petitioner was eventually charged of violating Article 352 of the RPC for performing an illegal marriage ceremony. Florida, the mother of Joey, testified that she heard the couple declare during the ceremony that they take each other as husband and wife. Mary Anne, the cord sponsor in the wedding, testified that she saw the bride walk down the aisle and the couple exchange their wedding rings, kiss each other, and sign a document. 

The petitioner, while admitting that he conducted a ceremony, denied that his act of blessing the couple was tantamount to a solemnization of the marriage as contemplated by law. 


Issues:

1. Did Ronulo violated Article 352 of the RPC on solemnizing illegal marriage?
2. Does the non-filing of a criminal complaint against the couple negate criminal liability of the petitioner?
3. What is the penalty for the crime?


Held:

1. Yes. Article 352 of the RPC penalizes an authorized solemnizing officer who shall perform or authorize any illegal marriage ceremony. The elements of this crime are: 

  1. authority of the solemnizing officer; and 
  2. his performance of an illegal marriage ceremony.
The first element is present since petitioner himself admitted that he has authority to solemnize a marriage.

The second element is present since the alleged "blessing" by petitioner is tantamount to the performance of an illegal marriage ceremony.

Article 6 of the Family Code provides that "[n]o prescribed form or religious rite for the solemnization of the marriage is required. It shall be necessary, however, for the contracting parties to appear personally before the solemnizing officer and declare in the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age that they take each other as husband and wife."

As to the first requirement, the petitioner admitted that the parties appeared before him and this fact was testified to by witnesses. On the second requirement, the prosecution has proven, through the testimony of Florida, that the contracting parties personally declared that they take each other as husband and wife. It is clear that what the petitioner conducted was a marriage ceremony, as the minimum requirements set by law were complied with.

Under Article 3(3) of the Family Code, one of the essential requisites of marriage is the presence of a valid marriage certificate. In the present case, the petitioner admitted that he knew that the couple had no marriage license, yet he conducted the "blessing" of their relationship.

Undoubtedly, the petitioner conducted the marriage ceremony despite knowledge that the essential and formal requirements of marriage set by law were lacking. The marriage ceremony, therefore, was illegal. The petitioner’s knowledge of the absence of these requirements negates his defense of good faith.


2. The non-filing of a criminal complaint against the couple does not negate criminal liability of the petitioner. Article 352 of the RPC, as amended, does not make this an element of the crime.


3. The penalty for violating Article 352 of the RPC is in accordance with the provision of the Marriage Law, specifically Article 44, which states that: 
Section 44. General Penal Clause – Any violation of any provision of this Act not specifically penalized, or of the regulations to be promulgated by the proper authorities, shall be punished by a fine of not more than two hundred pesos or by imprisonment for not more than one month, or both, in the discretion of the court. (Ronulo vs. People, G.R. No. 182438, 2 July 2014)