CEDAW/C/SR.1406 43. Ms. Verzosa (Philippines) said that statistics on women in sports were inconsistent and incomplete. In general, however, there were fewer women than men who participated in sports, and fewer awards and prizes were available for them. Therefore, that subject had been addressed in the Magna Carta of Women, in the section entitled “Women in Sports”. 44. Ms. Jahan asked what measures the Government was taking to implement the provisions of the Magna Carta of Women related to equality for women and the elimination of discrimination against them, in particular in view of its section 12, which specified that discriminatory laws would be amended or repealed within three years after the enactment of that instrument. What steps was the Philippine Commission on Women taking to encourage the new Congress to take action? She pointed out that the Magna Carta indicated that customary laws related to marital relations would be respected provided that they did not discriminate against women. However, the Muslim Code of Personal Laws was filled with discriminatory provisions. It would be useful to know if any studies had been undertaken by the Government to improve women’s equal recognition before the law that took into consideration the country’s legal pluralism. 45. Ms. Nadaraia, invoking article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention, said that the Magna Carta of Women was presented as a translation of the Convention into the Philippine national legal framework. A number of laws observed by Muslims in the country, however, were at variance with the provisions of the article. The Muslim Code allowed for polygamy, early marriage and arranged marriage; it also allowed a husband to choose the family residence and to refuse to permit his wife to exercise a profession or occupation of her choice. In some indigenous communities, abduction for forced cohabitation was still permissible. The Government should describe any measures taken to repeal customary provisions that violated the terms of the Convention. Information would also be welcome on the bills before Congress giving equal decision-making power to husbands and wives and on the time frame for their adoption. 46. Moreover, noting that many adultery cases were initiated by men wishing to harass and coerce estranged wives into handing over contested property, she enquired whether the Government planned to repeal provisions against adultery in the Revised Penal Code. She would also like to know the status of the bill on legalizing divorce and the time frame envisaged for its adoption. It would be useful to know whether husbands and wives would be granted the same rights on dissolution of the marriage and how the rights of children would be protected. 47. In addition, she would like to know the time frame for the repeal of laws banning persons with disabilities from marrying on the basis of mental, psychosocial or physical disabilities, in particular provisions that discriminated against the right of women with disabilities to marry and found a family. Lastly, she asked whether there were plans to enact a national law prohibiting discrimination against LGBT persons who wished to marry. 48. Ms. Verzosa (Philippines) said the Philippine Commission on Women had a women’s priority legislative agenda, which focused on amendments to the Family Code and other laws containing discriminatory provisions against women. The current emphasis was on encouraging Muslim women to recruit other Muslim women, so that together they could advocate for the repeal of early and forced marriage and polygamy. There were no pending bills on marriage equality. LGBT groups had stated that the first step was antidiscrimination legislation; in their view, it was too soon to begin advocating diverse forms of marriage. She noted that some Protestant sects permitted gay marriage. 49. Similarly, the Commission had decided to work first on advocating women’s right to reproductive health rather than on repealing the ban on divorce. There was much opposition from certain sectors of society. A legislator had recently introduced a divorce bill; it was GE.16-11725 9