The civil courts should adopt the Church tribunal's concept of having a third person defending the marriage itself when treating annulment cases, according to Pro Vicar General Mgr Anton Gouder.
The Church yesterday made its case against divorce in reaction to the Martin Scicluna report published by The Today Public Policy Institute in May, which had advocated the introduction of divorce legislation.
The 31-page Church report concluded that, from a social perspective, Malta did not need to introduce divorce because the situation of broken families would only be made worse.
Asked to comment on whether civil annulment was the "Maltese way out" to be able to re-marry as suggested by some lawyers, Mgr Gouder said it was wrong if couples obtained an annulment simply because they agreed between themselves. He insisted that an annulment was not simply a case of one individual against the other but of a couple against the institution of marriage.
"It is for this reason that the Church tribunal, which has years of experience in dealing with failed marriages, has an official who acts as the defender of the bond when deciding on annulment cases. The civil courts should adopt a similar principle and have an official who makes the case for the marriage irrespective of what the individual parties say," Mgr Gouder said.
The report highlighted a number of what it termed as faults in Mr Scicluna's document insisting that it was based on wrong statistical data, material that was not sourced and unsubstantiated statements.
It disputed the argument that divorce should be introduced because there were a number of negative social situations in society. None of the social ills could be healed or diminished by divorce.
On the contrary, from a social perspective, divorce would only make the situation worse, the Church report argued.
It also contested the fact that the introduction of divorce would reduce the number of cohabiting couples.
Backing his argument by foreign research, Mgr Gouder said that what sounded logical was however contradicted by facts, which showed that in other countries the number of cohabiting couples actually went up despite the presence of divorce.
The report described as "contradictory" Mr Scicluna's argument that those who were pro-divorce were also in favour of marriage. "They are in favour of the marriage they wish to enter into while, at the same time, they disregard their first marriage," Mgr Gouder said. He insisted that research showed that second and third marriages proved to be less stable than the first.
The report, For Worse Not For Better, was compiled by Progett Impenn, a Church initiative in favour of families and marriage and made up of representatives from the Diocesan Family Commission, Caritas and the Cana Movement. The title is a reference to the Scicluna report called: For Worse, For Better: Re-Marriage After Legal Separation.
ksansone@timesofmalta.com