Photo from Unsplash | Sandy Millar
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
The Marital Disqualification Rule and Marital Privilege Rule are legal principles under the Rules of Court designed to protect the confidentiality of communications and testimony between the spouses during marriage.
Both rules aim to protect the sanctity of marriage and domestic harmony. The Marital Privilege Rule emphasizes the protection of confidential communications during and even after marriage, while the Marital Disqualification Rule restricts testimony during marriage primarily to prevent perjury and preserve marital harmony. In both rules, the exceptions, civil cases between spouses and criminal cases where one spouse harms the other or their direct descendants/ascendant, ensure that legal accountability is maintained without undermining the institution of marriage.
The Marital Disqualification Rule and Marital Privilege Rule are legal principles under the Rules of Court designed to protect the confidentiality of communications and testimony between the spouses during marriage. Both the rules reflect the law’s recognition of the sanctity of marriage as an inviolable social institution in line with Section 2 of Article XV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which provides that marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the State.
The Supreme Court also said In the Matter of Petition for Writ of Amparo of Vivian A. Sanchez, G.R. No. 242257, October 15, 2019, Marriage is an inviolable social institution and the foundation of the family which, in turn, is the foundation of the nation.
Marital Disqualification Rule
Section 22 of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court states that during their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
Simply:
General Rule: During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse.
Exception: In a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
In the case of Maximo Alvarez v. Susan Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439, October 14, 2005, the Supreme Court explained the reasons behind the Marital Disqualification Rule:
- There is identity of interests between husband and wife;
- If one were to testify for or against the other, there is consequent danger of perjury;
- The policy of the law is to guard the security and confidences of private life, even at the risk of an occasional failure of justice, and to prevent domestic disunion and unhappiness; and
- Where there is want of domestic tranquility there is danger of punishing one spouse through the hostile testimony of the other.
Additionally, the Supreme Court emphasized that like all other general rules, the Marital Disqualification Rule has its own exceptions, both in civil actions between the spouses and in criminal cases for offenses committed by one against the other. Like the rule itself, the exceptions are backed by sound reasons which, in the excepted cases, outweigh those in support of the general rule. (Maximo Alvarez v. Susan Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439, October 14, 2005)
For instance, where the marital and domestic relations are so strained that there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquility which may be disturbed, the reason based upon such harmony and tranquility fails. In such a case, identity of interests disappears and the consequent danger of perjury based on that identity is non-existent. Likewise, in such a situation, the security and confidences of private life, which the law aims at protecting, will be nothing but ideals, which through their absence, merely leave a void in the unhappy home. (Maximo Alvarez v. Susan Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439, October 14, 2005)
Marital Privilege Rule
On the other hand, the Marital Privilege Rule is provided under Section 24(a) of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, which enumerates the different kinds of disqualification by reason of privileged communication. This provision states that the husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
Simply:
General Rule: The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage.
Exception: In a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
The Supreme Court, In the Matter of Petition for Writ of Amparo of Vivian A. Sanchez, G.R. No. 242257, October 15, 2019, reaffirmed that in recognition of the significance of marriage to Philippine society, testimonial privilege and communication privilege have been granted to spouses. This is to preserve their harmonious relationship and to prevent any party, including a spouse, to take advantage of the free communication between the spouses or of information learned within the union.
Notably, the exceptions for the Marital Privilege Rule are the same as for the Marital Disqualification Rule, ensuring that justice can be served when one spouse commits an offense against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants, or in civil actions between spouses.
Conclusion
Both rules aim to protect the sanctity of marriage and domestic harmony. The Marital Privilege Rule emphasizes the protection of confidential communications during and even after marriage, while the Marital Disqualification Rule restricts testimony during marriage primarily to prevent perjury and preserve marital harmony. In both rules, the exceptions, civil cases between spouses and criminal cases where one spouse harms the other or their direct descendants/ascendant, ensure that legal accountability is maintained without undermining the institution of marriage.
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 09175772207/ 09778050020.
All rights reserved.