"Even the law cannot save Chavit. He has to be accountable for what he did!" declared Dr. Rosalinda P. Ofreneo, faculty member of the Department of Women and Development Studies, University of the Philippines, Diliman, about the case against deputy National Security Adviser Chavit Singson (in photo), who had already admitted that he beat up ex-live-in partner Che Tiongson.

Noel Orsal

Rating

• 
• 
• 
• Share

Governor Chavit Singson confirms release of Ronald from Hong Kong prison tomorrow; reveals Lovi Poe still communicates with his son January 13, 2012 06:01 PM
Gov. Chavit Singson slams son Ronald's "fair-weather friends" March 14, 2011 02:28 PM
Ronald Singson decided to resign even before he was sentenced, says Gov. Chavit Singson March 8, 2011 02:31 PM
Gov. Chavit Singson denies being the true owner of Manny Pacquiao's rumored private jet January 11, 2011 11:22 PM
Chavit Singson cries "setup" in son's Hong Kong drug bust August 22, 2010 02:13 PM
Gov. Chavit Singson on son Ronald: "I hope na nagdusa na siya nang husto at hindi na mauulit ito." July 25, 2010 02:40 PM
Cogie Domingo airs side on Tiongson-Singson issue September 12, 2009 11:42 PM
PEP EXCLUSIVE. PART II. Chavit Singson threatens to reveal more about Che Tiongson in court September 5, 2009 11:14 PM
PEP EXCLUSIVE. PART I. Chavit Singson says this is not the first time he caught Che Tiongson with another man September 5, 2009 10:53 PM
F IRST READ ON PEP. PART III. Che speaks about life without Chavit September 5, 2009 09:48 AM

...already backed up as it is.

Since you are so concerned about the poor, I think we can both agree that the poor would be better served by using our resources to forego the creation of divorce laws in favor of legislation that directly impacts on their everyday lives.

cont'n

Btw, di nadadaan sa pera ang annulment eg. Dolphy's Zsa2-Karylle's dad, Regine V's Ogie-Michelle.

Pt 4. Divorce as a Solution. I think you totally missed the point on this one. Many people want divorce because it allows for 'irreconcilable differences' as an excuse. It's not because it's affordable or it's faster to get. It just seems easier because mas maluwag ang excuse.

Pero kung iisipin mo, ano yon? Dahil di lang magkasundo sa anumang bagay, hiwalay na? Dapat di nagpadalos-dalos sa pagpapakasal.

And the point you missed out completely is the redundancy of divorce laws vis-a-vis existing laws. If you still can't get this because you refuse to read the family code, at least I've given it a try.

Ultimately, the reason I oppose your proposal for divorce is the opportunity cost of passing it into law is way too high for our taxpayers to bear. Not to mention that divorce cases will just clog up our judicial system, which is alread

liwayway, Actually, you made several points such as chastising the Catholic Church? Pero sige, I'll let you off the hook on that...

Pt 1: Permanent Union. I did not say this. It is the family code that says so. But logic dictates that anyone wanting to get married should think of marriage as permanent. May magpapakasal bang nagplanong mahiwalay?

Pt 2: Expense of Annulment. Marriage is expensive. But couples are willing to pay the price. Getting out of a marriage should be just as expensive. People would think twice before getting into one.

Pt 3: Suffering in a Marriage. As I have said before, our family code provides for remedies to get out of a marriage. It's obvious that you haven't read it. I'm saddened by that kasi I figured that if I can just get women to read the code, they would be made aware of their rights. Para hindi na kailangan pang mag-suffer. Remember, the family code was passed under the Cory admin. Makatarungan sa mga babae ang mga batas natin.

anonylurker, iba ang sinagot mo sa mga sinabi ko. i was responding to your statement that the great expense for an annulment is warranted because marriage is a permanent union.

mahal ang annulment, therefore only the rich can afford it. sila lang ang may second chance. unfair and unjust.

you said marriage is a permanent union. so... any miserable union should just endure ad infinitum? this makes no sense.

the answer is divorce, simple and affordable, that is accessible to all. i have said my piece, and have no intention of escalating anything. that is all for me, peace out.

liwayway

Before our discussion escalates further, please try browsing the Family Code before passing judgement on its fairness. I think that would be the fair and right thing to do.

liwayway

Have you read the family code? 'Yung sinasabi mong situation where there is physical abuse, no. 1 ground for legal separation; sexual infidelity is no. 8... why would I attack them when I think they are fair.

Please try reading Art. 45 and 55 of the Family Code. Ito yung grounds for annulment and legal separation respectively bago ka mag-comment. I happen to think they are reasonable provisions of the law.

Also, why should I chastise the catholic church again? Batas po ang naglalaman ng grounds for annulment. Suportado po ng simbahang katoliko ang Family Code natin dahil makatuwiran sya.

Also, I did not say that only the rich can have a 'new life'. We are all governed by the same laws. The legal remedies are available to everyone regardless of economic status.

Also, marriage is defined as a contract of permanent union by our family law. That's Art. 1.

I happen to think our laws are fair and right.

liwayway

Have you read the family code? 'Yung sinasabi mong situation where there is physical abuse, no. 1 ground for legal separation; sexual infidelity is no. 8... why would I attack them when I think they are fair.

Please try reading Art. 45 and 55 of the Family Code. Ito yung grounds for annulment and legal separation respectively bago ka mag-comment. I happen to think they are reasonable provisions of the law.

Also, why should I chastise the catholic church again? Batas po ang naglalaman ng grounds for annulment. Suportado po ng simbahang katoliko ang Family Code natin dahil makatuwiran sya.

Also, I did not say that only the rich can have a 'new life'. We are all governed by the same laws. The legal remedies are available to everyone regardless of economic status.

Also, marriage is defined as a contract of permanent union by our family law. That's Art. 1.

I happen to think our laws are fair and right.

starqueen

Hehe. You may very well be right. Just the same, I thought I'd give my two cents worth and try to straighten out their 'domestic problem' argument and the 'pro-women' image they seem to be projecting. Maybe somehow it will still add to her troubles. But just as you said, I also doubt that it will ever have any impact on them.

Sorry pala for the multiple redundant posts. Nagka-error lang kasi sa window ko. I thought previous messages weren't posted kaya submit pa rin ako ng submit. Di naman po ako ganon ka-kulit. Heheh. Peace!

158 Tama ka medyo tagilid si Richard kung siya ay magpapakita. Kung tunay siyang lalake patutunayan niya kung siya ay nahuling sa akto ni Chavit, unless na pati pagkalalake niya ay pinutol na rin ni Chavit noong oras na yon. On Kaye, it will take years or even a lifetime for her to recover especially na nalaman sa buong mundo ang pambababae ni Richard. Sana mabigyan ang hustisya ang kasong eto. Hwag tangkilikin ang pelikula tungkol sa buhay ni Chavit.

anonylurker, permanent union kamo? then why aren't you attacking legal separation? and annulment? permanent is permanent. chastise the gov't and catholic church, bakit sila may annulment!

you should be out there telling everyone trying to escape from an unhappy and miserable, possibly abusive marriage that---too bad, you're stuck, and stuck forever; you made a gargantuan mistake, so suffer until you die!

if you are fortunate enough to be blessed with a happy union, then by all means, have your own permanent union. but it is beyond the pale to say that unions should be permanent when so much could go wrong and so many are in pain.

anonylurker, by stating that you're ok about annulment's prohibitive sky-high expense, you are, in effect, saying it's fine that only the rich and powerful elite are entitled to a new life. are you?

you are probably untouched by a situation where divorce is a necessary solution. ako man, untouched. but i am passionate about everyone getting the same privileges.

it's only fair. and right.

starqueen

Hehe. You may very well be right. Just the same, I thought I'd give my two cents worth and try to straighten out their 'domestic problem' argument and the 'pro-women' image they seem to be projecting. Maybe somehow it will still add to her troubles. But just as you said, I also doubt that it will ever have any impact on them.

Sorry pala for the multiple redundant posts. Nagka-error lang kasi sa window ko. I thought previous messages weren't posted kaya submit pa rin ako ng submit. Di naman po ako ganon ka-kulit. Heheh. Peace!

dulcinea

Actually, I believed that Che has a legal claim over Chavit's property, which includes his assets. The operative word here is 'believed'. However, since I am not sure about certain details of their case, I am not so sure if I should still believe this.

Please refer to my discussion with brad_peet under comments 174-175 for the details.

liwayway

All that I'm saying is that our family laws already provide legal remedies equivalent to divorce. Why would we need to waste more resources to create another set of laws on divorce? It will just be redundant.

As for the issue that annulment is expensive, it may very well be the case. And I believe that it should be so. Why? To uphold the very definition of marriage, which is a special contract of PERMANENT union....

To be honest, I'm not as passionate about this issue as I am about wasteful government spending. Yung punto ko talaga was that there is no REAL NEED for the amendments of our family laws, or the creation of divorce laws. It will just be a waste of resources to do so.

cont'n

I do not really care about the specifics of Chavit/Che's married life as this has no bearing in mine. I only wish to be enlighted on these laws. If my interpretation is still wrong, please correct me. Thanks.

brad_peet

Thanks for the correction.

Now that I have re-read the relevant articles, I understand why you would interpret it the way you do.

However, it is my understanding that you have missed out the last part of the condition for Art. 147, which states 'or under a void marriage'. Bigamy or polygamy falls under void marriages.

I am not not privy to the details of Chavits relations with Che and his other wife/wives. I commented under the assumption that Chavit and Che 'got married' in a civil ceremony and as such are in a void marriage. And following this assumption, having been in a void marriage, Che is still qualified for co-ownership of community property under Art. 147.

However, taking into account the possibility that no such ceremony took place, it may very well be a union of co-habitation and shall fall under Art. 148.

Please correct me again if my interpretation is wrong... I do not really care about the specifi

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

walanghiya ano hayop latigo parang alipin nya yung babae pag siya gagawa ng kalokohan ok lang tapos brainwas pa mga anak kakaawa yung babae wala magawa

sana isipin din ng Gabriela na aside from Che Singson, may isa pang babaeng agrabyado. yung asawa ng BF ni Che. dahil nawasak ang pamilya nya. trauma pa sa mga anak nila. sana hindi media mileage lang ang habol ng Gabriela pag high profile ang mga kaso.. sana...

the mere fact that nanbugbog ka ng babae, eh dapat maparusahan ka.

kung nag one on one si Chavit at Pacquiao, eh that is another story. Pareng Chavit, find somebody your own size and age. Wag yung uupakan mo e yung walang laban.

if you'll read the 9262 act, e it is obvious na wala nang takas si Chavit. but, if you have money and power, you can get away with everything. i know in my heart that he will get away with this but I assure you that the things he did in the past, did now, and will do in the future will catch up with him and it will be an ugly sight. and when that happens, ill grab myself a glass of lemonade and observe the fun.

if you'll read the 9262 act, e it is obvious na wala nang takas si Chavit. but, if you have money and power, you can get away with everything. i know in my heart that he will get away with this but I assure you that the things he did in the past, did now, and will do in the future will catch up with him and it will be an ugly sight. and when that happens, ill grab myself a glass of lemonade and observe the fun.

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

kagaya lang ito sa sinabi nu'ng isang pepster na hindi raw dapat apektado ang pagiging doctor ni hayden kho kasi yung mga ginawa niyang illegal porn ay hindi niya ginawa habang nagpra-practice siya as a doctor.

kung ganiyan nga ang takbo ng isip ng pinoy, hindi mapaparusahan si chavit.

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

A typical Philippine NO JUSTICE ugh!

anonylurker: tomato, tomahto. divorce versus legal separation then annulment. alam mo ba kung magkano ang upfront fees for the latter, tapos hindi pa sigurado?

what is wrong with just divorce, whose cost is within the reach of the regular mamamayan?

like i said, annulment is reserved for the rich and powerful. what a monumental joke.

141
anonylurker
September 12, 2009
04:15 AM

mahayhay

thanks for the confirmation.

So yung claims ni Chavit na kinakwartahan lang ni Che si Chavit is also another lie. Che has the right to ask for her share of the property naman e.

Actually, my understanding of the supposed 'love letter' evidences is a request for settlement of the sharing of assets eg. request for monthly allowance, which she is entitled to in the first place.

---

in short, allowance, bilang kerida, wla siyang karapatan sa ano mang assets ni chavit, kahit acquired ito during their cohabitation, di rin siya pwedeng mag-mana kapag namatay si chavit, dahil illegal siya, yung mga anak nila ang pwedeng mag-mana sa properties ng ama.

likened sa case ni gretchen baretto ang situation ni che, kerida din, good thing lang kay greta, hindi sia nabubogbog ng partner.

his ugly face reflects his bad and ugly personality.

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

anonylurker

I dont think tinatablan pa si Gloria Arroyo these days. With everyone questioning her family's SALN - the last thing on her mind is to find a solution of a domestic dispute.

Also, bear in mind GMA appears to be controlled by the men in her life. So I dont think she will ever understand fully the rights of women.Lets stop kidding ourselves - GMA probably has looked the other way several times in her own personal life to keep the marriage and the family intact.

Paki eksplika nga Malacanang, Chavit at Norberto Gonzales, bakit si Chavit Singson, ay may dala-dalawang miembro ng Presidential Security Group as bodyguards. Kasalukuyang miembro ng PSG ha. Dalawa pa. When the administration pulled out the PSG people na nagbabantay kay Cory Aquino in her dying days?

At kailan naman naging entitled ang isang cabinet member, DEPUTY lang ha, ng PSG bodyguard, hindi lang ISA , pero dalawa pa.

Monicafer, kung ako si Richard Catral, hindi ako lalabas to CONFIRM na mist_ress ko nga si Che Tiongson. Kasi that will give FREE ammunition to legal wife Kaye Catral, confirming, na ako, si Richard Catral, is guilty of concubinage with the concubine Che Tiongson. For my, if I were Richard Catral, skin, or foreskin or whatever is left of IT, I would disappear for a year or two, and let all of this die down. Let Che deal with this on her own. Richard Catral has his own battle to fight, with his other mis_tresses, not to mention, with his own in-laws, the parents of Kaye Catral, and with Kaye Catral herself. If I were Richard Catral, I would go back to my wife, Kaye Catral, on bended knees, and promise the moon and stars, so that Kaye will take me back, even if in the back of my mind, I will surely get back in the game, when this Che-Chavit scandal cools down.

Family Code of the Philippines

Article 148. For couples who are cohabiting, but does not fall under the category of article 147. For couples who are in a bigamous marriage, or adulterous or concubinage relationships, or where both man and woman are married to others, they have to prove ACTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS. In this case of Che Tiongson, Che already admitted, that she never had any source of income, therefore, she has no share in anything she owned during her COHABITATION with Chavit.

Some news media are doing a disservice to the Filipino nation, by the misinformation they are spreading, calling the cohabitation between Che Tiongson and Chavit Singson a COMMON LAW MARRIAGE. Chavit Singson is INCAPACITATED, or CAN NOT LEGALLY MARRY Che Tiongson, since Chavit Singson is already legally married to Evelyn Versoza Singson. A man and woman, who are CAPACITATED, or has no legal impediment to get married, choose not to get marry, but lived as husband and wife, thru cohabitation, are the ones who can be called in a COMMON LAW MARRIAGE. Example was Dolphy and Alma Moreno, when they were still living together as husband and wife, both can legally marry each other, but did not, but still lived as husband and wife. At that time, both Alma Moreno and Dolphy were not married to anyone else.

Family Code of the Philippines

Property Regime of Unions With Out Marriage

Article 147. When a man or a woman CAPACITATED TO MARRY EACH OTHER, live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit or marriage or under a void marriage, their wages and salaries shall be owned by them in equal shares and the property acquired by both of them through their work or industry shall be governed by the rules of co-ownership.

mahayhay, may you pls. post here where we can find a law in the Philippines recognizing COMMON LAW MARRIAGE ? Also ang pagkaka alam ko ng COMMON LAW MARRIAGE is when couples, which has no impediment to legally marry, choose not to marry, but lived as husband and wife. COHABITATION alone is not enough for COMMON LAW MARRIAGE.

Did you know if Chavit and Che, filed income tax as a married couple, for instance ?

*** This comment has been deactivated due to inappropriate content ***

As for this issue being purely domestic, Malacanang officials should have considered that Chavit used his influence and relationship with media people to defend himself. This is no longer a domestic issue because Chavit, a public official, chose to air his dirty laundry in a public forum.

Their tolerance of Chavit's very vocal and callous refusal to accept culpability reflects on the administration whether they accept it or not. By choosing not to do anything, they have inadvertently given their approval of Chavit's despicable actions.

Shame on Gloria. Babae ka pa naman.

note to brad-peet 127 I agree, Chavit has to prove na nahuli niya si Richard at Che. Baka naman pati eto magawan niya ng paraan, at kumuha siya ng duplicate para litratuhan to portray Che at Richard. Sana naman lumabas si Richard at linawin niya kung ano talaga ang nangyari. Idemanda din niya si Chavit, kalimutan ang pride at this time kailangan magkaisa upang ibagsak si Chavit.

As for this issue being purely domestic, Malacanang officials should have considered that Chavit used his influence and relationship with media people to defend himself. This is no longer a domestic issue because Chavit, a public official, chose to air his dirty laundry in a public forum.

Their tolerance of Chavit's very vocal and callous refusal to accept culpability reflects on the administration whether they accept it or not. By choosing not to do anything, they have inadvertently given their approval of Chavit's despicable actions.

Shame on Gloria. Babae ka pa naman.

malalampasan ni Chavit ang problema na 'to because he's Chavit. Just watch!

It's sickening! just like the Jimenez family!

Poor us-their victims!

MAKAPAL nga ang mukha nitong si Chavit, just look at his picture hihihi. Walang integrity and prinsipyo. No moral fiber in his body. Typical politician.

I totally agree with you brad_peet 127-132. Chavit is beyond immoral. I cannot believe that the President is just going to let this issue go without intervention. Well actually they might be two peas in a pod.

So if he killed Che, it is okay because it is outside of his Cabinet job? And it is domestic problem? What a moronic mentality this government has?

sabi ko na nga ba eh, tama yung comment ko prevously on another article related to this, na yan ang sasabihin ng malacanang, it's a domestic problem and they will not interefere. kasi nga takot sila dahil baka kumanta si chavit ng MALA-SOPRANONG boses, eh mukhang maraming alam na KANTA si chavit. saan ka naman nakakita ng government official na sasabihan ang malacanang na hindi sya magli-leave, kung gusto nila i-fire out sya. oh di ba ang lakas ng loob! tameme ang malacanang kaya ang sinabi na lang it's a domestic problem

Click here to login

• 

  In Focus

  PEP EXCLUSIVE: John Wayne Sace on being pasaway: "Burado na sa isipin ko yun..."

  He wants to revive career "para sa future ng anak ko."

• 

  In a glimpse

  JM De Guzman and Charee Pineda's characters in Angelito: Batang Ama battle for their son's custody

  Airing time of JM De Guzman's Angelito: Batang Ama extended to one hour on ABS-CBN

• 

  Profiles

  ChicoSci vocalist Miggy Chavez plans to venture into tattooing and acting

  After playing a small role in Segunda Mano , Miggy says "Why not?" to doing more mainstream projects.

• 

  Looking Back

  Star For All Seasons Vilma Santos looks back at her 50 years in showbiz

  Vilma names her most memorable films and favorite leading men.