🕷️ Crawler Inspector

URL Lookup

Direct Parameter Lookup

Raw Queries and Responses

1. Shard Calculation

Query:

Response:

Calculated Shard: 158 (from laksa019)

2. Crawled Status Check

Query:

curl -X POST \
  'http://laksa158.int.ahrefs:8124/' \
  -H 'Content-Type: text/plain' \
  -H 'X-ClickHouse-Database: crawler3' \
  -H 'Authorization: Basic YXBpOg==' \
  -d 'SELECT getAhrefsURLFromUnparsed(src_unparsed) AS found_url, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(download_stamp), 0) AS crawl_time, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(props_url_first_seen), 0) AS first_indexed_time, download_http_code AS http_code, src_unparsed AS src_unparsed, src_root_hash AS src_root_hash, history_drop_reason AS history_drop_reason, meta_title AS meta_title, meta_descriptions AS meta_descriptions, attrs_boilerpipe_text AS attrs_boilerpipe_text, attrs_markdown AS attrs_markdown, attrs_readable_markdown AS attrs_readable_markdown, meta_canonical AS meta_canonical FROM crawler3.page_info_local FINAL PREWHERE (src_root_hash, src_unparsed) IN ((getAhrefsRootHashFromUnparsed(getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU\')), getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU\'))) FORMAT JSONEachRow'

Response:

{"found_url":"https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU","crawl_time":1774129333,"first_indexed_time":1737303169,"http_code":200,"src_unparsed":"com,afp!factcheck,\/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU s443","src_root_hash":"12452430996784097958","history_drop_reason":null,"meta_title":"Divorce remains banned in Catholic-majority Philippines | Fact Check","meta_descriptions":["Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025."],"attrs_boilerpipe_text":"Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025.\n\"Finally, divorce has been approved in the Philippines,\" read the overlaid text on a\nFacebook reel\nshared on January 7, 2025.\nIt shows legislator Kristine Singson-Meehan, a deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, saying House Bill 9349, the \"Absolute Divorce Act\", has been \"approved on third and final reading\".\nScreenshot of the false Facebook post taken on January 13, 2025\nAt present the only way to exit a failed union in the Philippines is to bring an embarrassing, expensive and labyrinthine civil case of\nannulment\nwhere a judge declares a marriage invalid on\ngrounds\nthat include the spouses having \"psychological incapacity\"\n(archived links\nhere\nand\nhere\n).\nApplicants must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse entered the union while afflicted by a disorder such as narcissism.\nThe process can take anywhere from one to 10 years to wind through the creakingly slow and overburdened Philippine court system and cost as much as $10,000 or more in a country plagued by poverty -- with no guarantee of success.\nThe most powerful opponent to divorce in the Philippines is the Catholic Church, which is also against abortion and contraceptives.\nAround 78 percent of the country's 110 million people are Catholic, according to official census data, and many politicians are wary of contradicting the Church on sensitive social issues.\nSimilar claims that the Philippines legalised divorce were also shared on\nFacebook\nand\nTikTok\n.\nComments on the posts show people believed the posts. \"Where do I go to file?\" asked one. Another said, \"Thank you it has been finally approved. I wonder how much this would cost?\"\nMisrepresented video\nHowever, keyword searches found the video used in the posts published on the\nYouTube account of local broadsheet \nManila Bulletin\non May 22, 2024 (\narchived link\n). \n\"House approves pro-divorce bill anew in close vote,\" the clip's headline read.\nThe one-minute, 23-second clip was taken from a longer footage of the House of Representative's session streamed live on their official YouTube channel on the same day. \nAt the livestream's\n1:45:32 mark,\nDeputy Speaker Singson-Meehan can be heard reading out the votes and announcing the measure had been approved by the 317-member House of Representatives (\narchived link\n).\nBelow is a screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the one streamed live by the House of Representatives (right):\nScreenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the House of Representatives livestream (right)\nThe bill only\nbecomes law\nif the Senate, the upper house of Congress, also passes it and President Ferdinand Marcos fails to use his veto (\narchived link\n).\nAccording to the Senate\nwebsite\n, the measure is \"pending second reading\" and had not been approved as of January 19, 2025 (\narchived link\n).\nScreenshot showing the bill's status at the Senate\nM\nPhilippine fact-checking organisation\nVera Files\nhas also debunked similar claims.\nCopyright © AFP 2017-2026.\nAny commercial use of this content requires a subscription. Click\nhere\nto find out more.\nIs there content that you would like AFP to fact-check? Get in touch.\nContact us\nE-mail","attrs_markdown":"[Skip to main content](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU#main-content)\n\n[![Home](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/themes\/custom\/factuel\/afp-logo-light.svg)](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/ \"Home\")\n\n[Fact Check](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/ \"Home\")\n\n- Search\n- [Contact](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/contact)\n\nDark mode\n\n##### Navigation principale\n- [Home](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/)\n- [About AFP](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/about-afp)\n- [How we work](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/How-we-work)\n- [Editorial & ethical standards](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/AFPs-editorial-and-ethical-standards)\n- [Fact-Checking Stylebook](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/afp-fact-checking-stylebook)\n- [Meet the team](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/Meet-team)\n- [Training](https:\/\/digitalcourses.afp.com\/)\n- [Subscribe](https:\/\/www.afp.com\/en\/products\/afp-fact-check?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ALL-PDT-202303-Factcheck&utm_content=Banner)\n- [Contact](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/Contact)\n- [Corrections](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/corrections)\n- [FactCRICIS](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/FactCRICIS)\n\nChoose language\n\n- Search\n- [Contact](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/contact)\n\n## Primary tabs\n- [View](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU)  [Toggle tabs as a menu](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU)\n- [Revisions](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/node\/63946\/revisions)\n\nShare:\n\n![](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/sites\/default\/files\/medias\/factchecking\/g2\/2025-01\/2497eb86dd694bcff64eba302d070cd8856a51f4.jpeg)\n\n# Divorce remains banned in Catholic-majority Philippines\n- This article is more than one year old.\n- Published on January 19, 2025 at 02:48\n- 3 min read\n- By [Lucille SODIPE](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/lucille-sodipe),  [AFP Philippines](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/afp-philippines)\n\nDivorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025.\n\n\"Finally, divorce has been approved in the Philippines,\" read the overlaid text on a [Facebook reel](https:\/\/mvau.lt\/media\/89c75c5c-e116-464f-9685-2ae7d37ad768) shared on January 7, 2025.\n\nIt shows legislator Kristine Singson-Meehan, a deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, saying House Bill 9349, the \"Absolute Divorce Act\", has been \"approved on third and final reading\".\n\nImage\n\n![](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/image_in_article\/public\/medias\/factchecking\/g2\/2025-01\/b1d2339db55a295a2289e6b240cb19c4e433d93e.jpeg?itok=vQV-BE7z)\n\nScreenshot of the false Facebook post taken on January 13, 2025\n\nAt present the only way to exit a failed union in the Philippines is to bring an embarrassing, expensive and labyrinthine civil case of [annulment](https:\/\/www.sinardaily.my\/article\/197357\/focus\/world\/we-want-to-be-free-filipinos-demand-right-to-divorce) where a judge declares a marriage invalid on [grounds](https:\/\/www.officialgazette.gov.ph\/1987\/07\/06\/executive-order-no-209-s-1987\/) that include the spouses having \"psychological incapacity\" (archived links [here](https:\/\/perma.cc\/E5WE-HV32) and [here](https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20170718124122\/https:\/\/www.officialgazette.gov.ph\/1987\/07\/06\/executive-order-no-209-s-1987\/)).\n\nApplicants must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse entered the union while afflicted by a disorder such as narcissism.\n\nThe process can take anywhere from one to 10 years to wind through the creakingly slow and overburdened Philippine court system and cost as much as \\$10,000 or more in a country plagued by poverty -- with no guarantee of success.\n\nThe most powerful opponent to divorce in the Philippines is the Catholic Church, which is also against abortion and contraceptives.\n\nAround 78 percent of the country's 110 million people are Catholic, according to official census data, and many politicians are wary of contradicting the Church on sensitive social issues.\n\nSimilar claims that the Philippines legalised divorce were also shared on [Facebook](https:\/\/perma.cc\/VJ5Z-MQ8T) and [TikTok](https:\/\/perma.cc\/Z6YR-GQF8?type=image).\n\nComments on the posts show people believed the posts. \"Where do I go to file?\" asked one. Another said, \"Thank you it has been finally approved. I wonder how much this would cost?\"\n\n### Misrepresented video\nHowever, keyword searches found the video used in the posts published on the verified YouTube account of local broadsheet [Manila Bulletin](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=xy5VKBsy4t4) on May 22, 2024 ([archived link](https:\/\/perma.cc\/8LZA-GRPZ?type=image)).\n\n\"House approves pro-divorce bill anew in close vote,\" the clip's headline read.\n\nThe one-minute, 23-second clip was taken from a longer footage of the House of Representative's session streamed live on their official YouTube channel on the same day.\n\nAt the livestream's [1:45:32 mark,](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/live\/iF1omw2TQK4?si=7iGmLAMjXSOyT73I&t=6332) Deputy Speaker Singson-Meehan can be heard reading out the votes and announcing the measure had been approved by the 317-member House of Representatives ([archived link](https:\/\/perma.cc\/BEL4-3GW5?type=image)).\n\nBelow is a screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the one streamed live by the House of Representatives (right):\n\nImage\n\n![](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/image_in_article\/public\/medias\/factchecking\/g2\/2025-01\/5c4af0ba5bdf81e90a233b744c1b847a4054b0ad.jpeg?itok=G9K78gGC)\n\nScreenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the House of Representatives livestream (right)\n\nThe bill only [becomes law](https:\/\/lawphil.net\/consti\/cons1987.html) if the Senate, the upper house of Congress, also passes it and President Ferdinand Marcos fails to use his veto ([archived link](https:\/\/perma.cc\/EK5Y-KLGF)).\n\nAccording to the Senate [website](https:\/\/legacy.senate.gov.ph\/lis\/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443), the measure is \"pending second reading\" and had not been approved as of January 19, 2025 ([archived link](https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20240826122035\/https:\/\/legacy.senate.gov.ph\/lis\/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443)).\n\nImage\n\n![](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/image_in_article\/public\/medias\/factchecking\/g2\/2025-01\/d1286477c0530ab07195c478c7a3d5a0c08e3583.jpeg?itok=wZ6Q-VgN)\n\nScreenshot showing the bill's status at the Senate\n\nThe divorce bill is not one of the priority measures of President Ferdinand Marcos, as seen in a [list](https:\/\/ledac.neda.gov.ph\/resources-2\/19th-congress\/) from the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) dated December 9, 2024 ([archived link](https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20240813191354\/https:\/\/ledac.neda.gov.ph\/resources-2\/19th-congress\/)).\n\nMarcos heads the LEDAC, a body that determines the legislative priorities of the government.\n\nPhilippine fact-checking organisation [Vera Files](https:\/\/verafiles.org\/articles\/fact-check-claim-that-ph-legalized-divorce-misleads) has also debunked similar claims.\n\n**Copyright © AFP 2017-2026.** Any commercial use of this content requires a subscription. Click [here](https:\/\/www.afp.com\/en\/products\/afp-fact-check?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ALL-PDT-202303-Factcheck&utm_content=Banner) to find out more.\n\nShare:\n\nIs there content that you would like AFP to fact-check? Get in touch.\n\nContact us\n\n- [E-mail](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/contact-0)\n\n[Next article](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/doc.afp.com.36TA7EP)   [Previous article](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/doc.afp.com.36U69B9)\n\n[![Digital courses](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/sites\/default\/files\/inline-images\/600x200-en.png)](https:\/\/digitalcourses.afp.com\/?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=Banner&utm_campaign=ALL-AWA-202202-PDT-_Google-launch&utm_content=Undefined)\n\nFact Check\n\n[![](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/themes\/custom\/factuel\/images\/badgemaldita.png)](http:\/\/poynter.org\/ifcn\/) [![](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/themes\/custom\/factuel\/images\/badgeefcsn.png)](https:\/\/efcsn.com\/)\n\nContact us\n\n- [Contact](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/Contact)\n\nFollow us\n\n- [FaceBook](https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AFPFactCheck\/)\n- [Twitter](https:\/\/twitter.com\/AFPFactCheck)\n- [Instagram](https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/afpfactcheck\/)\n\n- [Terms of use](https:\/\/www.afp.com\/en\/terms-use)\n- [Privacy policy](https:\/\/www.afp.com\/en\/privacy-policy \"Privacy policy\")\n- [Legal information](https:\/\/www.afp.com\/en\/legal-information \"Legal information\")\n- [Cookie settings](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/Cookie-settings)\n\n**Copyright © AFP 2017-2026. All rights reserved.** Users can access and consult this website and use the share features available for personal, private, and non-commercial purposes. Any other use, in particular any reproduction, communication to the public or distribution of the content of this website, in whole or in part, for any other purpose and\/or by any other means, without a specific licence agreement signed with AFP, is strictly prohibited. The subject matter depicted or included via links within the Fact Checking content is provided to the extent necessary for correct understanding of the verification of the information concerned. AFP has not obtained any rights from the authors or copyright owners of this third party content and shall incur no liability in this regard. AFP and its logo are registered trademarks.","attrs_readable_markdown":"Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025.\n\n\"Finally, divorce has been approved in the Philippines,\" read the overlaid text on a [Facebook reel](https:\/\/mvau.lt\/media\/89c75c5c-e116-464f-9685-2ae7d37ad768) shared on January 7, 2025.\n\nIt shows legislator Kristine Singson-Meehan, a deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, saying House Bill 9349, the \"Absolute Divorce Act\", has been \"approved on third and final reading\".\n\nScreenshot of the false Facebook post taken on January 13, 2025\n\nAt present the only way to exit a failed union in the Philippines is to bring an embarrassing, expensive and labyrinthine civil case of [annulment](https:\/\/www.sinardaily.my\/article\/197357\/focus\/world\/we-want-to-be-free-filipinos-demand-right-to-divorce) where a judge declares a marriage invalid on [grounds](https:\/\/www.officialgazette.gov.ph\/1987\/07\/06\/executive-order-no-209-s-1987\/) that include the spouses having \"psychological incapacity\" (archived links [here](https:\/\/perma.cc\/E5WE-HV32) and [here](https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20170718124122\/https:\/\/www.officialgazette.gov.ph\/1987\/07\/06\/executive-order-no-209-s-1987\/)).\n\nApplicants must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse entered the union while afflicted by a disorder such as narcissism.\n\nThe process can take anywhere from one to 10 years to wind through the creakingly slow and overburdened Philippine court system and cost as much as \\$10,000 or more in a country plagued by poverty -- with no guarantee of success.\n\nThe most powerful opponent to divorce in the Philippines is the Catholic Church, which is also against abortion and contraceptives.\n\nAround 78 percent of the country's 110 million people are Catholic, according to official census data, and many politicians are wary of contradicting the Church on sensitive social issues.\n\nSimilar claims that the Philippines legalised divorce were also shared on [Facebook](https:\/\/perma.cc\/VJ5Z-MQ8T) and [TikTok](https:\/\/perma.cc\/Z6YR-GQF8?type=image).\n\nComments on the posts show people believed the posts. \"Where do I go to file?\" asked one. Another said, \"Thank you it has been finally approved. I wonder how much this would cost?\"\n\n### Misrepresented video\nHowever, keyword searches found the video used in the posts published on the YouTube account of local broadsheet [Manila Bulletin](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=xy5VKBsy4t4) on May 22, 2024 ([archived link](https:\/\/perma.cc\/8LZA-GRPZ?type=image)).\n\n\"House approves pro-divorce bill anew in close vote,\" the clip's headline read.\n\nThe one-minute, 23-second clip was taken from a longer footage of the House of Representative's session streamed live on their official YouTube channel on the same day.\n\nAt the livestream's [1:45:32 mark,](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/live\/iF1omw2TQK4?si=7iGmLAMjXSOyT73I&t=6332) Deputy Speaker Singson-Meehan can be heard reading out the votes and announcing the measure had been approved by the 317-member House of Representatives ([archived link](https:\/\/perma.cc\/BEL4-3GW5?type=image)).\n\nBelow is a screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the one streamed live by the House of Representatives (right):\n\nScreenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the House of Representatives livestream (right)\n\nThe bill only [becomes law](https:\/\/lawphil.net\/consti\/cons1987.html) if the Senate, the upper house of Congress, also passes it and President Ferdinand Marcos fails to use his veto ([archived link](https:\/\/perma.cc\/EK5Y-KLGF)).\n\nAccording to the Senate [website](https:\/\/legacy.senate.gov.ph\/lis\/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443), the measure is \"pending second reading\" and had not been approved as of January 19, 2025 ([archived link](https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20240826122035\/https:\/\/legacy.senate.gov.ph\/lis\/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443)).\n\nScreenshot showing the bill's status at the Senate\n\nM\n\nPhilippine fact-checking organisation [Vera Files](https:\/\/verafiles.org\/articles\/fact-check-claim-that-ph-legalized-divorce-misleads) has also debunked similar claims.\n\n**Copyright © AFP 2017-2026.** Any commercial use of this content requires a subscription. Click [here](https:\/\/www.afp.com\/en\/products\/afp-fact-check?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ALL-PDT-202303-Factcheck&utm_content=Banner) to find out more.\n\nIs there content that you would like AFP to fact-check? Get in touch.\n\nContact us\n\n- [E-mail](https:\/\/factcheck.afp.com\/contact-0)","meta_canonical":null}

3. Robots.txt Check

Query:

Response:

4. Spam/Ban Check

Query:

Response:

5. Seen Status Check

ℹ️ Skipped - page is already crawled

📄

INDEXABLE

✅

CRAWLED

28 days ago

🤖

ROBOTS ALLOWED

Page Info Filters

Filter	Status	Condition	Details
HTTP status	PASS	`download_http_code = 200`	HTTP 200
Age cutoff	PASS	`download_stamp > now() - 6 MONTH`	0.9 months ago
History drop	PASS	`isNull(history_drop_reason)`	No drop reason
Spam/ban	PASS	`fh_dont_index != 1 AND ml_spam_score = 0`	ml_spam_score=0
Canonical	PASS	`meta_canonical IS NULL OR = '' OR = src_unparsed`	Not set

Page Details

Property	Value
URL	https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU
Last Crawled	2026-03-21 21:42:13 (28 days ago)
First Indexed	2025-01-19 16:12:49 (1 year ago)
HTTP Status Code	200
Meta Title	Divorce remains banned in Catholic-majority Philippines \| Fact Check
Meta Description	Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025.
Meta Canonical	null
Boilerpipe Text	Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025. "Finally, divorce has been approved in the Philippines," read the overlaid text on a Facebook reel shared on January 7, 2025. It shows legislator Kristine Singson-Meehan, a deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, saying House Bill 9349, the "Absolute Divorce Act", has been "approved on third and final reading". Screenshot of the false Facebook post taken on January 13, 2025 At present the only way to exit a failed union in the Philippines is to bring an embarrassing, expensive and labyrinthine civil case of annulment where a judge declares a marriage invalid on grounds that include the spouses having "psychological incapacity" (archived links here and here ). Applicants must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse entered the union while afflicted by a disorder such as narcissism. The process can take anywhere from one to 10 years to wind through the creakingly slow and overburdened Philippine court system and cost as much as $10,000 or more in a country plagued by poverty -- with no guarantee of success. The most powerful opponent to divorce in the Philippines is the Catholic Church, which is also against abortion and contraceptives. Around 78 percent of the country's 110 million people are Catholic, according to official census data, and many politicians are wary of contradicting the Church on sensitive social issues. Similar claims that the Philippines legalised divorce were also shared on Facebook and TikTok . Comments on the posts show people believed the posts. "Where do I go to file?" asked one. Another said, "Thank you it has been finally approved. I wonder how much this would cost?" Misrepresented video However, keyword searches found the video used in the posts published on the YouTube account of local broadsheet Manila Bulletin on May 22, 2024 ( archived link ). "House approves pro-divorce bill anew in close vote," the clip's headline read. The one-minute, 23-second clip was taken from a longer footage of the House of Representative's session streamed live on their official YouTube channel on the same day. At the livestream's 1:45:32 mark, Deputy Speaker Singson-Meehan can be heard reading out the votes and announcing the measure had been approved by the 317-member House of Representatives ( archived link ). Below is a screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the one streamed live by the House of Representatives (right): Screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the House of Representatives livestream (right) The bill only becomes law if the Senate, the upper house of Congress, also passes it and President Ferdinand Marcos fails to use his veto ( archived link ). According to the Senate website , the measure is "pending second reading" and had not been approved as of January 19, 2025 ( archived link ). Screenshot showing the bill's status at the Senate M Philippine fact-checking organisation Vera Files has also debunked similar claims. Copyright © AFP 2017-2026. Any commercial use of this content requires a subscription. Click here to find out more. Is there content that you would like AFP to fact-check? Get in touch. Contact us E-mail
Markdown	[Skip to main content](https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU#main-content) [![Home](https://factcheck.afp.com/themes/custom/factuel/afp-logo-light.svg)](https://factcheck.afp.com/ "Home") [Fact Check](https://factcheck.afp.com/ "Home") - Search - [Contact](https://factcheck.afp.com/contact) Dark mode ##### Navigation principale - [Home](https://factcheck.afp.com/) - [About AFP](https://factcheck.afp.com/about-afp) - [How we work](https://factcheck.afp.com/How-we-work) - [Editorial & ethical standards](https://factcheck.afp.com/AFPs-editorial-and-ethical-standards) - [Fact-Checking Stylebook](https://factcheck.afp.com/afp-fact-checking-stylebook) - [Meet the team](https://factcheck.afp.com/Meet-team) - [Training](https://digitalcourses.afp.com/) - [Subscribe](https://www.afp.com/en/products/afp-fact-check?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ALL-PDT-202303-Factcheck&utm_content=Banner) - [Contact](https://factcheck.afp.com/Contact) - [Corrections](https://factcheck.afp.com/corrections) - [FactCRICIS](https://factcheck.afp.com/FactCRICIS) Choose language - Search - [Contact](https://factcheck.afp.com/contact) ## Primary tabs - [View](https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU) [Toggle tabs as a menu](https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU) - [Revisions](https://factcheck.afp.com/node/63946/revisions) Share: ![](https://factcheck.afp.com/sites/default/files/medias/factchecking/g2/2025-01/2497eb86dd694bcff64eba302d070cd8856a51f4.jpeg) # Divorce remains banned in Catholic-majority Philippines - This article is more than one year old. - Published on January 19, 2025 at 02:48 - 3 min read - By [Lucille SODIPE](https://factcheck.afp.com/lucille-sodipe), [AFP Philippines](https://factcheck.afp.com/afp-philippines) Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025. "Finally, divorce has been approved in the Philippines," read the overlaid text on a [Facebook reel](https://mvau.lt/media/89c75c5c-e116-464f-9685-2ae7d37ad768) shared on January 7, 2025. It shows legislator Kristine Singson-Meehan, a deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, saying House Bill 9349, the "Absolute Divorce Act", has been "approved on third and final reading". Image ![](https://factcheck.afp.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_in_article/public/medias/factchecking/g2/2025-01/b1d2339db55a295a2289e6b240cb19c4e433d93e.jpeg?itok=vQV-BE7z) Screenshot of the false Facebook post taken on January 13, 2025 At present the only way to exit a failed union in the Philippines is to bring an embarrassing, expensive and labyrinthine civil case of [annulment](https://www.sinardaily.my/article/197357/focus/world/we-want-to-be-free-filipinos-demand-right-to-divorce) where a judge declares a marriage invalid on [grounds](https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-1987/) that include the spouses having "psychological incapacity" (archived links [here](https://perma.cc/E5WE-HV32) and [here](https://web.archive.org/web/20170718124122/https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-1987/)). Applicants must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse entered the union while afflicted by a disorder such as narcissism. The process can take anywhere from one to 10 years to wind through the creakingly slow and overburdened Philippine court system and cost as much as \$10,000 or more in a country plagued by poverty -- with no guarantee of success. The most powerful opponent to divorce in the Philippines is the Catholic Church, which is also against abortion and contraceptives. Around 78 percent of the country's 110 million people are Catholic, according to official census data, and many politicians are wary of contradicting the Church on sensitive social issues. Similar claims that the Philippines legalised divorce were also shared on [Facebook](https://perma.cc/VJ5Z-MQ8T) and [TikTok](https://perma.cc/Z6YR-GQF8?type=image). Comments on the posts show people believed the posts. "Where do I go to file?" asked one. Another said, "Thank you it has been finally approved. I wonder how much this would cost?" ### Misrepresented video However, keyword searches found the video used in the posts published on the verified YouTube account of local broadsheet [Manila Bulletin](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy5VKBsy4t4) on May 22, 2024 ([archived link](https://perma.cc/8LZA-GRPZ?type=image)). "House approves pro-divorce bill anew in close vote," the clip's headline read. The one-minute, 23-second clip was taken from a longer footage of the House of Representative's session streamed live on their official YouTube channel on the same day. At the livestream's [1:45:32 mark,](https://www.youtube.com/live/iF1omw2TQK4?si=7iGmLAMjXSOyT73I&t=6332) Deputy Speaker Singson-Meehan can be heard reading out the votes and announcing the measure had been approved by the 317-member House of Representatives ([archived link](https://perma.cc/BEL4-3GW5?type=image)). Below is a screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the one streamed live by the House of Representatives (right): Image ![](https://factcheck.afp.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_in_article/public/medias/factchecking/g2/2025-01/5c4af0ba5bdf81e90a233b744c1b847a4054b0ad.jpeg?itok=G9K78gGC) Screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the House of Representatives livestream (right) The bill only [becomes law](https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html) if the Senate, the upper house of Congress, also passes it and President Ferdinand Marcos fails to use his veto ([archived link](https://perma.cc/EK5Y-KLGF)). According to the Senate [website](https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lis/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443), the measure is "pending second reading" and had not been approved as of January 19, 2025 ([archived link](https://web.archive.org/web/20240826122035/https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lis/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443)). Image ![](https://factcheck.afp.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_in_article/public/medias/factchecking/g2/2025-01/d1286477c0530ab07195c478c7a3d5a0c08e3583.jpeg?itok=wZ6Q-VgN) Screenshot showing the bill's status at the Senate The divorce bill is not one of the priority measures of President Ferdinand Marcos, as seen in a [list](https://ledac.neda.gov.ph/resources-2/19th-congress/) from the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) dated December 9, 2024 ([archived link](https://web.archive.org/web/20240813191354/https://ledac.neda.gov.ph/resources-2/19th-congress/)). Marcos heads the LEDAC, a body that determines the legislative priorities of the government. Philippine fact-checking organisation [Vera Files](https://verafiles.org/articles/fact-check-claim-that-ph-legalized-divorce-misleads) has also debunked similar claims. Copyright © AFP 2017-2026. Any commercial use of this content requires a subscription. Click [here](https://www.afp.com/en/products/afp-fact-check?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ALL-PDT-202303-Factcheck&utm_content=Banner) to find out more. Share: Is there content that you would like AFP to fact-check? Get in touch. Contact us - [E-mail](https://factcheck.afp.com/contact-0) [Next article](https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36TA7EP) [Previous article](https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.36U69B9) [![Digital courses](https://factcheck.afp.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/600x200-en.png)](https://digitalcourses.afp.com/?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=Banner&utm_campaign=ALL-AWA-202202-PDT-_Google-launch&utm_content=Undefined) Fact Check [![](https://factcheck.afp.com/themes/custom/factuel/images/badgemaldita.png)](http://poynter.org/ifcn/) [![](https://factcheck.afp.com/themes/custom/factuel/images/badgeefcsn.png)](https://efcsn.com/) Contact us - [Contact](https://factcheck.afp.com/Contact) Follow us - [FaceBook](https://www.facebook.com/AFPFactCheck/) - [Twitter](https://twitter.com/AFPFactCheck) - [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/afpfactcheck/) - [Terms of use](https://www.afp.com/en/terms-use) - [Privacy policy](https://www.afp.com/en/privacy-policy "Privacy policy") - [Legal information](https://www.afp.com/en/legal-information "Legal information") - [Cookie settings](https://factcheck.afp.com/Cookie-settings) Copyright © AFP 2017-2026. All rights reserved. Users can access and consult this website and use the share features available for personal, private, and non-commercial purposes. Any other use, in particular any reproduction, communication to the public or distribution of the content of this website, in whole or in part, for any other purpose and/or by any other means, without a specific licence agreement signed with AFP, is strictly prohibited. The subject matter depicted or included via links within the Fact Checking content is provided to the extent necessary for correct understanding of the verification of the information concerned. AFP has not obtained any rights from the authors or copyright owners of this third party content and shall incur no liability in this regard. AFP and its logo are registered trademarks.
Readable Markdown	Divorce remains illegal in Catholic-majority Philippines, the only place outside the Vatican where it is outlawed, contrary to claims that surfaced on Facebook and TikTok in January 2025. The posts misrepresented footage that showed the Southeast Asian archipelago's lower house of Congress approving a divorce bill in May 2024. The Senate had not passed the measure as of January 19, 2025. "Finally, divorce has been approved in the Philippines," read the overlaid text on a [Facebook reel](https://mvau.lt/media/89c75c5c-e116-464f-9685-2ae7d37ad768) shared on January 7, 2025. It shows legislator Kristine Singson-Meehan, a deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, saying House Bill 9349, the "Absolute Divorce Act", has been "approved on third and final reading". Screenshot of the false Facebook post taken on January 13, 2025 At present the only way to exit a failed union in the Philippines is to bring an embarrassing, expensive and labyrinthine civil case of [annulment](https://www.sinardaily.my/article/197357/focus/world/we-want-to-be-free-filipinos-demand-right-to-divorce) where a judge declares a marriage invalid on [grounds](https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-1987/) that include the spouses having "psychological incapacity" (archived links [here](https://perma.cc/E5WE-HV32) and [here](https://web.archive.org/web/20170718124122/https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-1987/)). Applicants must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse entered the union while afflicted by a disorder such as narcissism. The process can take anywhere from one to 10 years to wind through the creakingly slow and overburdened Philippine court system and cost as much as \$10,000 or more in a country plagued by poverty -- with no guarantee of success. The most powerful opponent to divorce in the Philippines is the Catholic Church, which is also against abortion and contraceptives. Around 78 percent of the country's 110 million people are Catholic, according to official census data, and many politicians are wary of contradicting the Church on sensitive social issues. Similar claims that the Philippines legalised divorce were also shared on [Facebook](https://perma.cc/VJ5Z-MQ8T) and [TikTok](https://perma.cc/Z6YR-GQF8?type=image). Comments on the posts show people believed the posts. "Where do I go to file?" asked one. Another said, "Thank you it has been finally approved. I wonder how much this would cost?" ### Misrepresented video However, keyword searches found the video used in the posts published on the YouTube account of local broadsheet [Manila Bulletin](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy5VKBsy4t4) on May 22, 2024 ([archived link](https://perma.cc/8LZA-GRPZ?type=image)). "House approves pro-divorce bill anew in close vote," the clip's headline read. The one-minute, 23-second clip was taken from a longer footage of the House of Representative's session streamed live on their official YouTube channel on the same day. At the livestream's [1:45:32 mark,](https://www.youtube.com/live/iF1omw2TQK4?si=7iGmLAMjXSOyT73I&t=6332) Deputy Speaker Singson-Meehan can be heard reading out the votes and announcing the measure had been approved by the 317-member House of Representatives ([archived link](https://perma.cc/BEL4-3GW5?type=image)). Below is a screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the one streamed live by the House of Representatives (right): Screenshot comparison of the video in the false posts (left) and the House of Representatives livestream (right) The bill only [becomes law](https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html) if the Senate, the upper house of Congress, also passes it and President Ferdinand Marcos fails to use his veto ([archived link](https://perma.cc/EK5Y-KLGF)). According to the Senate [website](https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lis/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443), the measure is "pending second reading" and had not been approved as of January 19, 2025 ([archived link](https://web.archive.org/web/20240826122035/https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lis/bill_res.aspx?congress=19&q=SBN-2443)). Screenshot showing the bill's status at the Senate M Philippine fact-checking organisation [Vera Files](https://verafiles.org/articles/fact-check-claim-that-ph-legalized-divorce-misleads) has also debunked similar claims. Copyright © AFP 2017-2026. Any commercial use of this content requires a subscription. Click [here](https://www.afp.com/en/products/afp-fact-check?utm_source=AFP_Factuel&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ALL-PDT-202303-Factcheck&utm_content=Banner) to find out more. Is there content that you would like AFP to fact-check? Get in touch. Contact us - [E-mail](https://factcheck.afp.com/contact-0)
Shard	158 (laksa)
Root Hash	12452430996784097958
Unparsed URL	com,afp!factcheck,/doc.afp.com.36TK9BU s443