MANILA: While the Philippines’ lower House of Congress has approved a proposed law allowing divorce in the mainly Catholic country, legislation still seems unlikely.
President Rodrigo Duterte has expressed disapproval of divorce, according to his spokesman Harry Roque. Several senators also reiterated their opposition to the measure on Tuesday and the Philippine public are likewise divided on the issue.
On Monday, the House of Representatives passed a third and final reading, House Bill 7303, also known as “An Act Instituting Absolute Divorce and Dissolution of Marriage in the Philippines,” by a vote of 134-57 with two abstentions.
Roque, however, said Duterte did not support the proposed law as he had concerns for the children of divorced couples and about spouses who would be neglected after a divorce was granted.
Aside from not having the support of the president, the bill also has no counterpart in the Senate.
On Tuesday, several senators expressed their opposition to divorce, with some expressing their preference for a bill that would provide a more affordable annulment.
Among those who rejected the divorce bill were Senators Emmanuel Pacquiao, Joel Villanueva, and Francis Escudero.
Pacquiao, a born-again Christian preacher, said that divorce was not the answer to a failed marriage.”What God has joined together, let no one separate,” he said, adding that there was already an annulment process so there was no need to pass a divorce bill.
Escudero said he favored a bill that would make annulment more accessible to Filipinos, including the poor, over a divorce law.
Sen. Villanueva said in a post on Twitter: “Not too long ago in the same HOR (House of Representatives) no one would even dare to push for a divorce bill for obvious reasons. Filipinos value family more than anything, esp. moral values. Maybe times have changed but still praying and hoping for Christ’s ambassadors to step up and be heard.”
Sen. President Aquilino Pimentel III, however, said the idea of the “dissolution of marriage” should be studied first.
Meanwhile, citizens took to social media to share their thoughts on the divorce bill — some looking forward to its legislation, others expressing strong opposition.
A government official interviewed by Arab News said that she was for annulment, which she had already experienced.
The official, Mariz R., said that in an annulment process petitioners had to give a strong reason, such as psychological incapacity, which she said was difficult to prove. She expressed concern that if divorce was legalized there would be more broken marriages in the country.
John Paolo Bencito, 23, a copywriter for a public relations firm, said he was for the divorce law proposal because it gave an option to couples who were no longer happy in a relationship.
“The divorce bill does not necessarily mean that you’re turning back from your family,” he said. “Many Filipinos, for me, are backward about family, about divorce (because of our culture)” as it is seen as a deviation from cultural norms.
Tonyo Cruz, a columnist, said: “Don’t be afraid. The divorce bill won’t affect good/great/outstanding marriages. It would affect only the bad/awful/abusive marriages which a partner or both partners wish to end. If your marriage is not bad/awful/abusive, you’re safe under the divorce bill.”
The divorce bill passed by the lower house proposes that while the state continues to protect and preserve marriage as a social institution and as the foundation of the family, it shall also give the opportunity to spouses in “irremediably failed marriages” to secure absolute divorce under limited grounds, as well as judicial procedures to end the dysfunction of a long-broken marriage.
It also seeks to save children from the pain, stress and agony caused by parents’ constant marital clashes; and grants the divorced spouses the right to marry again.
Under the bill, couples seeking divorce are ensured inexpensive and affordable court proceedings in securing an absolute divorce decree.
An absolute divorce decree shall be granted on grounds including legal separation and annulment of the marriage under the Family Code, de-facto separation for at least five years, legal separation by judicial decree for at least two years, psychological incapacity, gender reassignment surgery, irreconcilable differences and the joint petition of spouses.
Divorce law in the Philippines — still a 50-50 chance
Divorce law in the Philippines — still a 50-50 chance
Carney says Canada has no plans to pursue free trade agreement with China as Trump threatens tariffs
Carney says Canada has no plans to pursue free trade agreement with China as Trump threatens tariffs
TORONTO: Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Sunday his country has no intention of pursuing a free trade deal with China. He was responding to US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose a 100 percent tariff on goods imported from Canada if America’s northern neighbor went ahead with a trade deal with Beijing.
Carney said his recent agreement with China merely cuts tariffs on a few sectors that were recently hit with tariffs.
Trump claims otherwise, posting that “China is successfully and completely taking over the once Great Country of Canada. So sad to see it happen. I only hope they leave Ice Hockey alone! President DJT”
The prime minister said under the free trade agreement with the US and Mexico there are commitments not to pursue free trade agreements with nonmarket economies without prior notification.
“We have no intention of doing that with China or any other nonmarket economy,” Carney said. “What we have done with China is to rectify some issues that developed in the last couple of years.”
In 2024, Canada mirrored the United States by putting a 100 percent tariff on electric vehicles from Beijing and a 25 percent tariff on steel and aluminum. China had responded by imposing 100 percent import taxes on Canadian canola oil and meal and 25 percent on pork and seafood.
Breaking with the United States this month during a visit to China, Carney cut its 100 percent tariff on Chinese electric cars in return for lower tariffs on those Canadian products.
Carney has said there would be an initial annual cap of 49,000 vehicles on Chinese EV exports coming into Canada at a tariff rate of 6.1 percent, growing to about 70,000 over five years. He noted there was no cap before 2024. He also has said the initial cap on Chinese EV imports was about 3 percent of the 1.8 million vehicles sold in Canada annually and that, in exchange, China is expected to begin investing in the Canadian auto industry within three years.
Trump posted a video Sunday in which the chief executive of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association warns there will be no Canadian auto industry without US access, while noting the Canadian market alone is too small to justify large scale manufacturing from China.
“A MUST WATCH. Canada is systematically destroying itself. The China deal is a disaster for them. Will go down as one of the worst deals, of any kind, in history. All their businesses are moving to the USA. I want to see Canada SURVIVE AND THRIVE! President DJT,” Trump posted on social media.
Trump’s post on Saturday said that if Carney “thinks he is going to make Canada a ‘Drop Off Port’ for China to send goods and products into the United States, he is sorely mistaken.”
“We can’t let Canada become an opening that the Chinese pour their cheap goods into the U.S,” US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on ABC’s “This Week.”
“We have a , but based off — based on that, which is going to be renegotiated this summer, and I’m not sure what Prime Minister Carney is doing here, other than trying to virtue-signal to his globalist friends at Davos.”
Trump’s threat came amid an escalating war of words with Carney as the Republican president’s push to acquire Greenland strained the NATO alliance.
Carney has emerged as a leader of a movement for countries to find ways to link up and counter the US under Trump. Speaking in Davos before Trump, Carney said, “Middle powers must act together because if you are not at the table, you are on the menu” and he warned about coercion by great powers — without mentioning Trump’s name. The prime minister received widespread praise and attention for his remarks, upstaging Trump at the World Economic Forum.
Trump’s push to acquire Greenland has come after he has repeatedly needled Canada over its sovereignty and suggested it also be absorbed into the United States as a 51st state. He posted an altered image on social media this week showing a map of the United States that included Canada, Venezuela, Greenland and Cuba as part of its territory.
