Matrimonial jitters

Freddie Aguilar, our 60-year old musician, has taken a  bride who is all of sixteen years.  Despite the general sentiment of disapproval that welled out when the news was first broadcasted that the twosome were in a "relationship", triggering criminal prosecution against him for the offense of Qualified Seduction, Mr. Aguilar has finally succeeded in getting his way by converting to Islam.

Freddie has now taken the name Abdul Faried.  With his new identity in hand, Abdul requested for permission from the teen's parents, and used his connections with a "long-time friend", Esmael Mangudadatu,  who happens to be the Governor of Maguindanao, to stand as guardian to the minor and faciliate his matrimonial rites with her.  That done, Abdul and teen-bride are now man and wife.

Well, well, well.  "Nonplussed" might be the best term to describe the reaction.  Is this really a case of love conquering all, including the multiple-decades age gap, societal disapproval, criminal sanctions, and even religious upbringing?  Or is this a case of convenience?

Whatever it is, this also happens to be a beautiful test case on the inter-relationship between our Civil Code and shariah law.  When is a minor not a minor?  Does it depend on the religion of the man?  Does the woman's religion count?  If a minor converts to Islam, can she do it while she's a minor under civil law?  How can she choose a religion when she can't even choose a President?  Would she have enough 'capacity' to make that decision?

That's why I hesitate to even publish her name.  If she's still a minor under civil law, and authorities have put forward the argument that she has been exploited and is the victim of a sexual crime, wouldn't the anonymity protection afforded to victims still apply to her, because her marrying under Islamic rites may not have validly pushed her into the ranks of adulthood?

I would like to hear what our authorities will do now.  Will they challenge the conversion of Freddie to Abdul?  Question his new-found religious convictions?  Seek to annul the marriage?

The immediate impact of this so-called marriage is that the criminal offense could be argued to be extinguished.  In certain instances, our criminal laws moot sexual crimes if the accused and the complainant marry.  So a motion to dismiss Freddie's criminal case might be in the offing.  If this tactic works, Aguilar will skip away happily to his marriage bed and do what husbands do to wives.  Will our authorities meekly accept this?

And what about the Governor and all the sponsors to the marriage, including the congressman of Maguindanao Zajid Mangudadatu?   Will they all be prosecuted for conspiring and facilitating the seduction of a minor?  Or will everyone just take the ceremony at face value, and offer toasts all around to the happy couple?

Reportedly, Freddie has promised to take care of all her needs.  At least, while they remain husband and wife.  Now that he is Muslim, Freddie can also avail of Islam's divorce laws, just in case that endless love peters out before his meter does.  In that scenario, if a divorce happens two, five years from now, can our authorities take that as a sign that the original marriage rites were a way to evade the criminal case, and refile the case anew?

It's not every so often we get a situation with so much potential for case law in it.  The thing is, discussing this topic has so much land mines as well.  Just the mere questioning of a religious conversion could lead to arguments about the role of a state in regulating religious beliefs.   Does the State have the ability to go beyond an individual's expressed choice of religion?  When?  Just before he gets sentenced by a judge for committing a "Christian" crime?

Perhaps, the best way to go about it might just be to focus on Freddie Aguilar, and his bona fides.  Look at what evidence there is as to his intentions, and take it from there.  After all, all evidence proferred by an accused needs to be scrutinized, and if that includes his new religious beliefs, then so be it.

I just don't know whether the new burden of proof to be carried by the prosecution will now become "Muslim, until proven Christian".   Again, more case law?