Supreme Court urges Congress to act on same-sex couples’ rights

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

February 10, 2026 | 2:55pm

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court urged Congress to take a more active role in addressing the rights of same-sex couples.

In its ruling in the case of Josef vs Ursua, promulgated on February 5, the high court pointed out that the judiciary cannot resolve all policy concerns regarding same-sex rights, urging Congress to address the legal invisibility of homosexual relationships.

“Thus, this Court does not have the monopoly to assure the freedom and rights of homosexual couples. With the political, moral, and cultural questions that surround the issue concerning the rights of same-sex couples, political departments, especially the Congress, must be involved to quest for solutions, which balance interests while maintaining fealty to fundamental freedoms. The process of legislation exposes the experiences of homosexuals who have been oppressed, ensuring that they are understood by those who stand with the majority. Mostly, public reason needs to be first shaped through the crucible of campaigns and advocacies within our political forums before it is sharpened for judicial fiat.”

In this case, the Supreme Court said that same-sex couples living together can be considered co-owners of property acquired during their relationship, provided there is clear evidence of actual contribution.

The high court said that property relations between same-sex couples are governed by Article 148 of the Family Code.

RELATED: What is Article 148 of the Family Code

In a separate concurrence in the case, Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier asserted that the scope of Article 148 is broad enough to include same-sex couples, noting that limiting it to heterosexual pairs would create an unjustified legal disparity that ignores the prevailing values of modern society.

“Foremost, I emphasize my earnest support to the plight of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and other gender and sexual minorities (LGBTQI+) community. However, granting the exact same bundle of rights accorded to heterosexual relationships to homosexual relationships is an admirable feat that falls outside judicial might for now sans the necessary legislation,” Lazaro-Javier said.

“Given the prevailing values in modern society as well as the glaring yet unjustified difference in the treatment of heterosexual couples vis-a-vis their homosexual counterparts, I do not see any reason why the protection of Article 148 of the Family Code should not be extended to members of the LGBTQI+ community,” she added.

Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen also pointed out in a separate concurring opinion that Article 148 of the Family Code applies to all forms of cohabitation regardless of gender, maintaining that same-sex unions are normal relationships that must be legally recognized to avoid making such intimate bonds invisible under the law.

“To be different is not to be abnormal. A same-sex relationship is a normal relationship and therefore should be covered by Article 148 of the Family Code. Otherwise, we render legally invisible some forms of legitimate intimate relationships,” Leonen said.

“In interpreting our laws, we should be mindful of the reality that our freedoms should be individually and socially meaningful. This case serves as an instance wherein we can use the law to protect people who are not entirely within its fringes,” he added.

RELATED: Supreme Court: Same-sex couples can be recognized as property co-owner