CYPRUS held the worst record for bigamy in the world, claimed DISY deputy Christodoulos Taramoundas at a House Committee meeting, earlier this week. This dubious record was not achieved because Cypriots had a predilection for having two matrimonial partners at the same time, but because of ignorance of the law.
Until as recently as 15 years ago, the issuing of divorces for church marriages was the exclusive responsibility of the Greek Orthodox Church. The law has changed since then, with the civil courts being given the authority for issuing divorces. For a divorce to be legally valid, a couple needs to apply for it in a civil court, even if the church court had issued divorce papers.
But many couples seem unaware of this and do not apply to a civil court for divorce papers after going to a church court. If one of them re-marries, he or she is a bigamist in the eyes of the law, because the state had not annulled the marriage. Speaking at the committee meeting, the legal commissioner said these people were in violation of the law, but its implementation and the question of whether to punish the ‘ignorant’ bigamist, was a political decision.
Would it be a political decision because it would cause a feud between the State and the Church, which had fought against the move to introduce civil divorce? Probably, and the Church is not without blame. If the Church informed couples that applied for a divorce of the need to apply to the state as well, the problem of bigamy would not exist. But this clearly does not happen. And the Church is perfectly happy to allow someone who has secured a church divorce to remarry, even if the person is not legally divorced.
The State should never have allowed this practice to go on. Apart from being a clear case of the Church showing contempt for and undermining the authority of the State, it also gives rise to legal problems. If a bigamist passes away who would be his legal heir? The ex-wife, who was still his wife in the eyes of the law, or the second wife who is only recognised as such by the Church? More complicated legal issues would arise if the bigamist had children from both marriages.
This is why the State needs to take a tough line – individuals need to be protected. We are not saying that it should seek custodial sentences against people who have remarried without securing a divorce from the state, because there was no intent to deceive anyone. Admittedly, ignorance of the law is no defence, but allowances should be made for the fact that people genuinely considered a Church divorce sufficient. But unless charges are brought against the reluctant bigamists, we will continue to hold the world record for bigamy.
The state needs to bring charges against a couple of the reluctant bigamists. The imposition of a hefty fine would resolve the bigamy problem in no time. And if this does not have the desired effect the State should seriously consider taking legal action against the Church itself, for marrying people who have not been issued divorce papers from a civil court. The Church is actively encouraging people to show contempt for the law, an unacceptable occurrence which must be stopped.
