Mo Ya Lim Yao vs.

Commissioner of Immigration [GR L-21289, 4 October 1971] En Banc, Barredo (J): 4 concur, 1 reserves right to file separate concurring opinion, 1 concurs except as the interpretation accorded some American decisions as to which he is not fully persuaded, 1 dissents in separate opinion Facts: On 8 February 1961, Lau Yuen Yeung applied for a passport visa to enter the Philippines as a nonimmigrant. In the interrogation made in connection with her application for a temporary visitor's visa to enter the Philippines, she stated that she was a Chinese residing at Kowloon, Hongkong, and that she desired to take a pleasure trip to the Philippines to visit her great granduncle Lau Ching Ping for a period of one month. She was permitted to come into the Philippines on 13 March 1961, and was permitted to stay for a period of one month which would expire on 13 April 1961. On the date of her arrival, Asher Y, Cheng filed a bond in the amount of P1,000.00 to undertake, among others, that said Lau Yuen Yeung would actually depart from the Philippines on or before the expiration of her authorized period of stay in this country or within the period as in his discretion the Commissioner of Immigration or his authorized representative might properly allow. After repeated extensions, Lau Yuen Yeung was allowed to stay in the Philippines up to 13 February 1962. On 25 January 1962, she contracted marriage with Moy Ya Lim Yao alias Edilberto Aguinaldo Lim an alleged Filipino citizen. Because of the contemplated action of the Commissioner of Immigration to confiscate her bond and order her arrest and immediate deportation, after the expiration of her authorized stay, she brought an action for injunction with preliminary injunction. At the hearing which took place one and a half years after her arrival, it was admitted that Lau Yuen Yeung could not write either English or Tagalog. Except for a few words, she could not speak either English or Tagalog. She could not name any Filipino neighbour, with a Filipino name except one, Rosa. She did not know the names of her brothers-in-law, or sisters-in-law. The Court of First Instance of Manila (Civil Case 49705) denied the prayer for preliminary injunction. Moya Lim Yao and Lau Yuen Yeung appealed.

Issue: Whether Lau Yuen Yeung ipso facto became a Filipino citizen upon her marriage to a Filipino citizen. Held: Under Section 15 of Commonwealth Act 473, an alien woman marrying a Filipino, native born or naturalized, becomes ipso facto a Filipina provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines under Section 4 of the same law. Likewise, an alien woman married to an alien who is subsequently naturalized here follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his oath as Filipino citizen, provided that she does not suffer from any of the disqualifications under said Section 4. Whether the alien woman requires to undergo the naturalization proceedings, Section 15 is a parallel provision to Section 16. Thus, if the widow of an applicant for naturalization as Filipino, who dies during the proceedings, is not required to go through a naturalization proceedings, in order to be considered as a Filipino citizen hereof, it should follow that the wife of a living Filipino cannot be denied the same privilege. This is plain common sense and there is absolutely no evidence that the Legislature intended to treat them differently. As the laws of our country, both substantive and procedural, stand today, there is no such procedure (a substitute for naturalization proceeding to enable the alien wife of a Philippine citizen to have the matter of her own citizenship settled and established so that she may not have to be called upon to prove it every time she has to perform an act or enter into a transaction or business or exercise a right reserved only to Filipinos), but such is no proof that the citizenship is not vested as of the date of marriage or the husband's acquisition of citizenship, as the case may be, for the truth is that the situation obtains even as to native-born Filipinos. Every time the citizenship of a person is material or indispensible in a judicial or administrative case, Whatever the corresponding court or administrative authority decides therein as to such citizenship is generally not considered as res adjudicate, hence it has to be threshed out again and again as the occasion may demand. Lau Yuen Yeung, was declared to have become a Filipino citizen from and by virtue of her marriage to Moy Ya Lim Yao al as Edilberto Aguinaldo Lim, a Filipino citizen of 25 January 1962.

who dies during the proceedings. for a temporary visitor's visa to enter the Philippines. On 25 January 1962. After repeated extensions. Whatever the corresponding court or administrative authority decides therein as to such citizenship is generally not considered as res adjudicate. On the date of her arrival. if the widow of an applicant for naturalizations Filipino.by the fact itself . an alien woman married to an alien who is subsequently naturalized here follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his oath as Filipino citizen. she was allowed to stay in the Philippines up to 13 February 1962. among others. Likewise. Held: Under Section 15 of Commonwealth Act 473. Ipso Facto. Commissioner of Immigration GR L-21289. Cheng filed a bond in the amount of P1. hence it has to be threshed outgain and again as the occasion may demand. Issue: Whether Lau Yuen Yeung ipso facto became a Filipino citizen upon her marriage To a Filipino citizen. an alien woman marrying a Filipino. a Filipino citizen of 25 January 1962. she brought an action for injunction with preliminary injunction. Thus. that said Lau Yuen Yeung would actually depart from the Philippines on or before the expiration of her authorized period of stay in this country or within the period as in his discretion the Commissioner of Immigration. 000. Every time the citizenship of a person is material or indispensible in a judicial or administrative case.Mo Ya Lim Yao vs. native born or naturalized. Maya Lim Yao and Lau Yuen Yeung appealed. She was permitted to come into the Philippines on 13 March 1961. provided that she does not suffer from any of the disqualifications under said Section 4. was declared to have become a Filipino citizen from and by virtue of her marriage to Moy Ya Lim Yao al as Edilberto Aguinaldo Lim. The Court of First Instance of Manila (Civil Case 49705) denied the prayer for preliminary injunction.00 to undertake. it should follow that the wife of a living Filipino cannot be denied the same privilege. 4 October 1971 Fact of the case: On 8 February 1961. Lau Yuen Yeung applied for a passport visa to Enter the Philippines as a non-immigrant.Whether the alien woman requires to undergo the naturalization proceedings. is not required to go through naturalization proceedings. Lau Yuen Yeung. becomes ipso facto a Filipina provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines under Section 4 of the same law. she contracted marriage with Moy Ya Lim Yao alias Edilberto Aguinaldo Lim an alleged Filipino citizen. in order to be considered as a Filipino citizen hereof. Section 15 is a parallel provision to Section 16. after the expiration of her authorized stay. Asher Y. Because of the contemplated action of the Commissioner of Immigration to confiscate her bond and order her arrest and immediate deportation.

of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure." The term "natural-born citizens. or on 26 January 2004. his mother. Commission on Elections [GR 151434. of the 1987 Constitution.e. a writ of preliminary injunction or any other resolution that would stay the finality and/or execution of the COMELEC resolutions. his date of birth to be 20 August 1939 and his place of birth to be Manila. paragraph 7. filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of President of the Republic of the Philippines under the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) Party. Allan F. married Bessie Kelly only a year after the birth of FPJ. The petition likewise prayed for a temporary restraining order. Collector of Customs (1912). Bessie Kelley Poe. Poe was a Filipino citizen. Ronald Allan Kelly Poe. Through its history.naturalization. 3 days later. and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such election. Fornier filed his motion for reconsideration. 1 on official leave. four modes of acquiring citizenship . (3) Allan F. a petition (SPA 04-003) before the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to disqualify FPJ and to deny due course or to cancel his certificate of candidacy upon the thesis that FPJ made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen when in truth. a Spanish subject. Poe and Bessie Kelley. on 9 January 2004. Lorenzo Poe was 84 years old. Jr. Granting. jus soli. the date. did not last long.. res judicata and jus sanguinis had been in vogue. Poe . On 23 January 2004. stated his name to be "Fernando Jr.Summary: Tecson vs. he could not have transmitted his Filipino citizenship to FPJ. (4) The father of Allan F. representing himself to be a naturalborn citizen of the Philippines. Held: Section 2. a registered voter. month and year of birth of FPJ appeared to be 20 August 1939 during the regime of the 1935 Constitution. 1 concurs. in the 2004 national elections. according to Fornier. only the Supreme Court had original and exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the basic issue on the case. 1940.. Section 4. and (5) At the time of his death on 11 September 1954." or "Ronald Allan" Poe. Poe and Bessie Kelley were married to each other on 16 September. Fornier asseverated. being the son of Lorenzo Pou. 5 concur in separate opinions. Fornier assailed the decision of the COMELEC before the Supreme Court conformably with Rule 64. (GR 161824) initiated. that Allan F. 3 dissent in separate opinions to which 2 joined Facts: On 31 December 2003. Issue: Whether FPJ was a natural born citizen. With the adoption of the 1935 Constitution and the reversal of Roa in Tan Chong vs. Article VII. Poe contracted a prior marriage to a certain Paulita Gomez before his marriage to Bessie Kelley and. jus sanguinis or blood relationship would now become the primary basis of citizenship by birth. his parents were foreigners. the latter being an illegitimate child of an alien mother. later consolidated with GR 161824. able to read and write. of the 1987 Constitution expresses that "No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. The other petitions. and his father. (FPJ). 3 March 2004) Tecson vs. so as to be allowed to run for the office of the President of the Philippines. Poe was Lorenzo Poe. both challenging the jurisdiction of the COMELEC and asserting that. Secretary of Labour (1947). Poe [GR 161823] and Fornier vs. Commission on Elections (GR 151434. Jus soli. (2) FPJ was born to them on 20 August 1939. was a Spanish national. FPJ. in relation to Rule 65. In his certificate of candidacy." is defined to include "those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. i. Commission on Elections [GR 151824] En Banc. Considering the reservations made by the parties on the veracity of some of the entries on the birth certificate of FPJ and the marriage certificate of his parents. (2) even if no such prior marriage had existed. per Roa vs. also Velez vs. Allan Poe. Victorino X. 1 on leave but allowed to vote. would include GR 161434 and GR 161634. Poe. could qualify a person to being a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. The marriage certificate of Allan F. The motion was denied on 6 February 2004 by the COMELEC en banc. jus soli and jus sanguinis. the only conclusions that could be drawn with some degree of certainty from the documents would be that (1) The parents of FPJ were Allan F. 3 March 2004]. On 10 February 2004. Fornier. Only two. at least forty years of age on the day of the election. the COMELEC dismissed SPA 04-003 for lack of merit. also known as Fernando Poe. Fornier based the allegation of the illegitimate birth of FPJ on two assertions: (1) Allan F. under Article VII." Herein. was an American.

2004 FACTS: Petitioners questioned the jurisdiction of the COMELEC in taking cognizance of and deciding the citizenship issue affecting Fernando Poe Jr. and Rule 14 of the "Rules of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal." promulgated by the Supreme Court on April 1992 categorically speak of the jurisdiction of the tribunal over contests relating to the election. An examination of the phraseology in Rule 12. the birth certificate of FPJ.and Bessie Kelley. the election contest can only contemplate a post-election scenario. The Comelec dismissed the petition. and to deny due course or to cancel his certificate of candidacy on the ground that the latter made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by claiming to be a natural-born Filipino when in truth his parents were foreigners and he is an illegitimate child. . They asserted that under Section 4(7) . the applicable law then controlling was the 1935 constitution. must not only be material. This rule again presupposes a post-election scenario. only the Supreme Court had original and exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the basic issue of the case. as to whether or not he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. COMELEC. of the Philippines. Article VII of the 1987 Constitution. in relation to Section 74. 1939. ISSUE: As the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) . ISSUE: The controversy in the case at bar centers on the citizenship of Fernando Poe. and not of "candidates" for President or VicePresident. In such context. this appeal. and the death certificate of Lorenzo Pou are documents of public record in the custody of a public officer. In Rule 14. which reason that petitioners filed a petition before the Comelec to disqualify private respondent Fernando Poe. Jr. RULING: Before discussing on the issue at hand it is worth stressing that since private respondent Fernando Poe. March 3. of the 1987 Constitution. But while the totality of the evidence may not establish conclusively that FPJ is a naturalborn citizen of the Philippines. questioning the qualifications of a candidate for the presidency or vice-presidency before the elections are held. but also deliberate and wilful. FACTS: The case at bar is a consolidated case filed by petitioners questioning the certificate of candidacy of herein private respondent Ronald Allan Kelly Poe also known as Fernando Poe. only a registered candidate who would have received either the second or third highest number of votes could file an election protest. which. the evidence on hand still would preponderate in his favour enough to hold that he cannot be held guilty of having made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy in violation of Section 78. Hence. The petitions were dismissed. Jr. The documents have been submitted in evidence by both contending parties during the proceedings before the COMELEC. or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office. A quo warranto proceeding is generally defined as being an action against a person who usurps. Jr. The issue on private respondent s citizenship is so essential in view of the constitutional provision that. Fornier has utterly failed to substantiate his case before the Court. does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction over the qualifications of presidential candidates? RULING: No. notwithstanding the ample opportunity given to the parties to present their position and evidence. The latter filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of President of the Philippines under the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) party. paragraph 7. returns and qualifications of the "President" or "Vice-President". Jr. He represented himself in said certificate as a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. GR 16134 . defined by Section 4. would not include cases directly brought before it. intrudes into. 13. and to prove whether or not there has been material misrepresentation. It is fair to conclude that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. was born on August 20. as so ruled in RomualdezMarcos vs. COMELEC . of the Omnibus Election Code. Tecson vs.

Evidently. was in fact a natural-born citizen of the Philippines regardless of whether or not he is legitimate or illegitimate. it should be sound to conclude. 1954 at the age of 84 years. Pangasinan. in such death certificate. there is no doubt that Allan Poe father of private respondent Fernando Poe. Fernando Poe. Pangansinan. the residence of Lorenzo Poe was stated to be San Carlos. since the latter is governed by the provisions of the 1935 Constitution which constitution considers as citizens of the Philippines those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship.No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. was a Filipino citizen. . Based on the evidence presented which the Supreme consider as viable is the fact that the death certificate of Lorenzo Poe. father of Allan Poe. at least forty years of age on the day of the election. Jr. who in turn was the father of private respondent Fernando Poe. able to read and write. a registered voter. And. or at least to presume. and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such election. Considering that the allegations of petitioners are not substantiated with proof and since Lorenzo Poe may have been benefited from the en masse Filipinization that the Philippine Bill had effected in 1902. in San Carlos. that the place of residence of a person at the time of his death was also his residence before death. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary. indicates that he died on September 11. Jr. Jr.

WON his citizenship has retroacted to the time he took the bar. filed An application to take the 98 Bar Examinations. applied for a passport temporary visa to enter Phils as non-immigrant. Louis University in Baguio City. the latter not being a tedious and painstaking process. and Prescila Dulay. 1961. OSG commented that Ching being the legitimate child of a Chinese father and a Filipino mother and born under the 1935 Consti was a Chinese citizen and continued to be so. Filipina. July 1999: Ching filed Manifestation w/ Affidavit of Election of Phil Citizenship And his Oath of Allegiance. Philippine citizenship can never be treated like a commodity that can be claimed when needed and suppressed when convenient. Although the Court is sympathetic of his plight. in La Union. and may be extended up to 7 yrs. Date of her arrival: bond of P1. Ching has resided In the Phils July 1998: Ching. controlling statues and jurisprudence compel the Court in its decision. from the Cuenco case ISSUES: 1)WON Ching has elected Phil citizenship w/in a reasonable time 2)if affirmative. HELD: Court denies Vicente D Ching s application for admission to the Philippine Bar (Ouch!) RATIO: 1& 2) No. 1962: Lau Yuen Yeung married Moya Lim Yao.He was already more than 14 yrs over the age of majority. by any reasonable yardstick. he was already 35 yrs old when he complied w/ the requirements of C. a Filipino citizen. Jan 25. from the Velayocase. Commissioner of Immigration(1971) Appeal from a decision of CFI of Manila FACTS: Feb 1961: Ms Lau Yuen Yeung. 1962: Final date of visa expiration.Since birth. Two conditions of an effective election of Phil citizenship (from OSG): 1st the mother of the person making the election must be a Phil citizen 2nd election must be made upon reaching the age of majority (w/c means a reasonable time interpreted by the Sec of Justice as 3 yrs. after graduating from St. 914 Petition for Admission to the Phil Bar. the allowable pd w/in which to exercise the privilege. Ching has offered no reason why he delayed his election of Phil citizenship. HK Chinese. Commissioner of Immigration ordered plaintiff Lau Yuen Yeung to leave the Phils. Feb 28. . enthusiasm and promptitude. Voter Cert from COMELEC. Visa s expiry extended many times.CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I In re Ching. and Cert as a member of the Sangguniang Bayan of Tubao. Also. He was Further required to submit more proof of citizenship. If Ching formally elects Phil citizenship. and Lau Yuen Yeung v. FACTS: April 1964: Vicente D Ching born as the legitimate son of sps Tat Ching. April 1999: results of Bar Exams were released and Ching passed. Chinese Citizen. La Union also from COMELEC. Moya Lim Yaoalias Edilberto Aguinaldo Lim. unless upon reaching the age of majority he elected Phil citizenship. Expiration date after 1 month April 13. March 1961: Visa granted. Ching s election was clearly beyond. No 625 in June 99. Plaintiff brings this action to court for issuance of writ of injunction. It should be availed of with fervour. cause her arrest and immediate deportation. Purpose of pleasure trip was to visit her great grand uncle Lau Ching Ping for a month.000 filed by Asher Cheng to ensure her departure before visa expires.A. Being born in April 1964. Bar Matter No. it would already be beyond the reasonable time allowed by present jurisprudence. Sept 1998: Court allowed Ching to take the exams provided he must submit Proof of his Phil citizenship Nov 1998: Ching submitted certification that he is CPA.

there is no reason why an alien who has been in the Phils as a temporary Visitor but who has in the meanwhile become Filipino should be required to still leave the Phils for a foreign country. only to apply for a re-entry and undergo the same process of showing that he is entitled to come back. Furthermore. Sec 9 of the Immigration Act states: An alien who is admitted as a nonimmigrant cannot remain in the Philspermanently.e.A. Hence. she was found unable to write either English or Tagalog. From CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I the history of the law traced in the case. In reference.Likewise. It is unreasonable that they still have to be taken Abroad so that they have a right to have permanent residence here.4.Court hearing 10 months after the marriage: Plaintiff is 7 mos pregnant. she need not prove that she possesses all the qualifications. provided that she does not suffer from any of the disqualifications under Sec. Consider the case of minor children of an alien who is naturalized: It is obvious that they become ipso Facto citizens of the Phils. She did not know the names of her bros/sisters-in-law. Moreover. Naturalization of an alien visitor as a Phil citizen logically produces the effect of conferring upon the person ipso facto all the rights of citizenship including entitlement to permanently stay in the Phils outside the orbit of authority of the Comm of Immigration because the Immigration Law is a law only for aliens and is inapplicable to Phil citizens. The basis of the judgment is Sec 15 of the Naturalization Law. a non-immigrant alien must first depart voluntarily to some foreign country & procure from the appropriate Phil consul the proper visa & thereafter undergo examination by the officers of the Bureau of Immigration at a Phil port of entry for determination of his admissibility in accordance w/ the requirements of this Act. an alien woman married to an alien who is subsequently naturalized here follows the Phil citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his oath as Fil citizen. copied verbatim and adopted from its American counterpart. HELD: Judgment dismissing petition for injunction reversed and set aside. this ruling is more consistent with the spirit of family solidarity as manifested in the CC (Art 52) unlike the Burca ruling which in effect divides and separates H from W in giving all the qualifications and requirements to become a naturalized citizen. WON her marriage to co-plaintiff justified or excused her failure to depart from the Phils before date of expiration of visa. ISSUES: 1)WON plaintiff may be deemed a Phil citizen by virtue of her marriage to a Filipino 2)If affirmative. an alien woman marrying a Filipino citizen should not be disqualified from becoming a citizen. ipso facto becomes a Filipina provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philsunder Sec 4 of C. it is shown that the American provision shows intent to remove racial requirements for naturalization. w/c in turn was taken directly. Lau Yuen Yeung declared to have become a Filipino citizen from and by virtue of her marriage to Moya Lim. 473. Rosa. Burcaruling) wherein alien women who marry Filipino citizens do not acquireautomatically Philippine citizenship. this new ruling might be used as a convenient means ofcircumventing the restrictive policies of the Phil Naturalization Law. Under the new doctrine. settled is the rule in statutory construction that laws if modelled and copied from another state law must be understood and construed in the jurisdiction which they were taken. However. native-born or naturalized. 2)Yes. Moreover. But .To obtain permanent admission. It reversed former rulings (i. She could not name any Filipino neighbour except for one. IMPLICATIONS OF MOYA LIM YAO RULING: It finally settled the long drawn controversy over the citizenship status of alien women who marry Philippine citizens. RATIO: 1)Alien woman who marries a Fil citizen.

J Reyes: The adoption of similar rulings in the American courts is tenable if and only if the Phil Statute had been in its entirety a reproduction of the American model. The spirit of the American law. . the naturalization law should be rigidly enforced and strictly construed in favor of the govt and against the applicant for citizenship. decidedly favourable to the absorption of immigrants is not in our Consti and laws. Dissenting Opinion.in case of doubt.

Electoral Tribunal the major issue was whether Jose Ong. he was able to obtain a certificate of residence from the Spanish colonial administration. he filed with the Court of First Instance of Samar an application for naturalization. The Court affirmed the decision of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal declaring Jose Ong. In 1984 and 1986. nine years of age. He. In 1915. as well as those born before 17 January 1973. Jose Ong. What is material to the case is whether he elected Filipino citizenship when he reached the age of majority as provided for by Section 1 (4) Article IV of the 1935 Constitution which was the operative law when he was born. cannot be less binding than the filing of a sworn statement or formal declaration. Samar. he went to Manila to complete his higher education and eventually found employment there. Jose Jr. who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of [3] majority. Jr. was born in China in 1905. These. citizenship to his mother who was a natural-born Filipina. election can be both formal and informal.[5] Furthermore. and still finishing his elementary education in Samar when his father took his oath. and other categorical acts of similar nature are themselves formal manifestations of choice.In the case of Co vs. Agripina Lao. Jr. a natural-born Filipino citizen. Jose Ong Chuan. In In Re Mallare (59 SCRA 45 [1974]) it was held that the exercise of the right of suffrage when one comes of age constitutes a positive act of election of Philippine citizenship. Jose Ong Jr. Article IV of the 1987 Constitution. After completing his elementary education. running for public office. however. was then a minor. He ran and won in the 1987 elections for representative in the second district of Northern Samar. of Filipino mothers. In 1971. he was not a natural-born citizen. the declaration was made final and executory on 15 May 1957. the grandfather of Jose Ong. Samar. whereby under earlier laws. He married a natural-born Filipina. Jr. Under the 1987 Constitution. according to the court. Section 1(3) of the 1987 Constitution was interpreted by the Court as applying to those who elected Filipino citizenship not only after 2 February 1987 but also to those who elected citizenship before that date. He was declared a Filipino citizen on 28 April 1955. Article IV Section 2 of 1987 constitution defines natural-born citizens as those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine [1] citizenship. Entering a profession open only to Filipinos. serving in public office where citizenship is a qualification. registered and voted in Samar. His opponents protested his election to the post on the grounds that he is not a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. his elder brother was elected a delegate of the 1971 Constitutional Convention.[6] [2] .[4] The Court s based its resolution of the issue by tracing Jose Ong. voting during election. Article VI in relation to Sections 2 and 1(3). Jr. is a natural-born Filipino citizen in contemplation of Section 6. He took his Oath of Allegiance and was issued a corresponding certificate of Naturalization. natural-born status can only be accorded to individuals who elected citizenship upon reaching majority. Emil s status as a natural-born citizen was challenged. Jr. declared Emil as a natural-born Filipino. The rule in the Mallare case was applied whereby Jose Ong s exercise of the right of suffrage and the participation in election exercises were considered positive acts of electing Philippine citizenship. Records show that Ong Te. to formally or in writing elect citizenship when he came of age as he was already a citizen since he was nine by virtue of his mother being a natural-born citizen and his father a naturalized Filipino. In the opinion of the Court it is not necessary for Ong. s father. He also established his residence in Laoang. The Convention. It was intended to correct the anomalous situation where one born of a Filipino father and an alien mother was automatically granted the status of natural-born citizen while one born of Filipino mother and an alien father would still have to elect Philippine citizenship. he was brought by Ong Te to Samar where he grew up. He established his residence in Laoang. As such. however. Jr. frequently went home to Samar where he grew up.. He was baptized into Christianity. arrived in the Philippines in 1895. In 15 February 1954.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful