Resistance

The controversial divorce bill, tabled for decades, finally passed the House of Representatives. It will likely meet resistance from Catholic groups as deliberation on the measure continues in the Senate.

The House vote itself could be the subject of contestation. The plenary session was adjourned shortly after the vote was taken. The tally stood at 126 voting yes, 109 voting no and 20 legislators abstaining. After adjournment, however, the House secretariat altered the voting numbers, adding five more votes to the yes column.

How the five additional votes were found after adjournment needs serious explanation. In parliamentary procedure, no further voting could happen after the session closes. This is just one other item added to the controversial nature of this measure.

The Vatican and the Philippines are the only two remaining jurisdictions without a legal mechanism for divorce. Catholic groups will likely mount a strong campaign to block a divorce law. Several clergymen and lay groups such as the Couples for Christ have denounced the divorce bill, indicating this will be a factor shaping future elections.

It is likely the Senate will defer action on this measure until after the midterm elections. Since senators are elected nationally, they tend to avoid divisive issues.

Last week, former deputy speaker and three-term Buhay party-list congressman Lito Atienza lent his voice to the Catholic opposition to the measure. As legislator, he provided a strong conservative voice opposing divorce, abortion and same-sex marriage.

Consistent with his legislative record, Atienza warned the senators not to “join the stampede created by the divorce bill because that is artificial, it is not what Filipinos see as the solution to their marital problems.”

Passing the divorce bill, Atienza adds, “would violate the basic law of the land.” He specifically cites Article II, Section 12 where the state is commanded to safeguard the sanctity of family life and protect and strengthen the family.

In addition, he quotes Article XV Sections 1 and 2 that recognize the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation and that enshrines marriage as an inviolable social institution.

Atienza signals that the anti-divorce groups will bring a constitutional case before the Supreme Court in the event the divorce bill progresses any further. This could take many years to resolve.

“Divorce,” Atienza maintains, “violates the law of God and our country.” He says we should draw pride from the fact that the Philippines is the only country, apart from the Vatican, standing staunchly against divorce. The former Manila mayor and legislator proudly has been happily married for 58 years.

Many of the reasons advanced by divorce advocates, Atienza adds, have been addressed by legislation. Among these is the law penalizing violence against women and children. Domestic violence has been the most often cited reason for having a divorce law.

As a response to the divorce bill passing the House, Atienza appears to be considering vying for a seat in Congress as a representative for party-list group Buhay. This will restore a strong conservative voice in Congress.

Audacity

Napoleon Bonaparte famously advised his generals to demonstrate audacity at every moment during a battle.

Clearly inspired by Napoleon, Emmanuel Macron audaciously dissolved the National Assembly and called for snap elections moments after the right-wing coalition led by Marine Le Pen trashed the French president’s centrist party in last month’s elections for the European Parliament. So audacious was this move, it caught the prime minister, Macron’s protege, by surprise.

This audacious move appears to be based on Macron’s calculation that the higher voter turnout attending national elections compared to European Parliament elections will serve to blunt the political momentum of the hard Right and help the ideological center hold. The first round of voting happened last Sunday.

A second round of voting, designed to ensure the winning candidates a 50 percent plus one majority, is scheduled a week from now.

As expected, last Sunday’s elections had a much higher turnout of voters. But, contrary to Macron’s audacious calculation, the right-wing register continued their momentum. Le Pen’s candidates were leading in most of the districts, swamping both the left-wing coalition and Macron’s centrist party.

Ahead of the second round of voting, most analysts now concede that Macron will have to spend the last three years of his presidential term cohabiting with a National Assembly controlled by the hard Right. This will result in a policy stalemate.

The leftists were not expected to perform well – and they did not. Unless the leftist parties decide to throw their support to help save the centrist coalition, a National Assembly dominated by the hard Right becomes an actuality.

Macron cannot expect to win support from the leftist parties. In the face of electoral defeat, the leftist parties’ first instinct is to march in the streets to protest the outcome of what is, by every measure, a democratic vote. No amount of protesting in the streets will alter the ideological coloration of the National Assembly.

The European right-wing parties propose stronger anti-immigration policies and borders less open to free trade. The rise of the European Right reflects the anxiousness of citizens, specially over the flood of immigrants swamping their societies.

Both the hard Right and hard Left parties propose economic policies that are inimical to the European single market project. Concern over immigration could eventually help erode the sane economic policies in place.