Zamoranos v. People

Marietta Zamoranos converted to Islam in April 1982. On May 3, 1982 she married Jesus de Guzman, a Muslim convert, in Islamic rites, and in July 1982 they married again in civil rites. On December 18, 1983 they were divorced by talaq, exercised by the wife under authority given by the husband. In 1992 the Shari'a Circuit Court in Isabela, Basilan issued a decree confirming the divorce. In 1989 Zamoranos married Samson Pacasum, Sr. in Islamic rites, and they renewed their vows in a civil ceremony in 1992. After they separated, Pacasum sought to have their marriage declared void as bigamous and filed a bigamy complaint. RTC Branch 2 of Iligan City dismissed the nullity petition for lack of jurisdiction. It found that the parties were Muslims whose marriages were governed by P.D. No. 1083, that the talaq had dissolved the first marriage, and that the Shari'a Circuit Court had exclusive jurisdiction; that dismissal became final. On Pacasum's motion, RTC Branch 6 reinstated the bigamy case. It then denied Zamoranos's motion to quash the Information. The CA dismissed her petition for certiorari, holding that any error was one of judgment. Both Zamoranos and Pacasum appealed to the Supreme Court.

1. 1Whether certiorari lies against the denial of Zamoranos's motion to quash.
2. 2Whether Zamoranos is a Muslim whose first marriage, governed by P.D. No. 1083, was validly dissolved by talaq, so that she cannot be tried for bigamy.

Certiorari was proper. The denial of a motion to quash is interlocutory, but recognized exceptions applied, and the RTC committed an error of jurisdiction, not merely of judgment. Branch 2's dismissal was not res judicata, because it was not a judgment on the merits. Branch 6 nonetheless should have taken cognizance of Branch 2's findings that Zamoranos was a Muslim, that her first marriage was valid under Islamic law, and that the divorce severed it. With the Shari'a court's records lost in a 1993 fire, these findings were supported by statements from the ustadz who solemnized the marriage, from Judge Jainul, who confirmed the divorce, and from the then clerk of court. The marriage was therefore governed by P.D. No. 1083. The RTC, not the Shari'a courts, has jurisdiction over bigamy. But bigamy requires a prior valid marriage that still subsists. At the very least, the RTC should have suspended the case until Pacasum proved before the Shari'a Circuit Court that the first marriage had not been dissolved. Under Art. 3 of P.D. No. 1083, the Code prevails over laws of general application. Arts. 45–46 provide for divorce by talaq, and under Art. 54 an irrevocable talaq severs the marriage bond so that the spouses "may contract another marriage." Quoting Rasul and Ghazali, the Court noted that for Muslim spouses a second, civil rite is merely ceremonial. It held that Zamoranos's divorce was valid and entitled her to remarry in 1989, so the RTC was "without jurisdiction to try [her] for the crime of Bigamy." G.R. No. 193902 was granted, G.R. No. 194075 was denied, the CA decision was reversed, and the motion to quash was granted.