Professional Documents
Culture Documents
• Q: Is Sen. Grace Poe a natural born Filipino? • Q: Is Sen. Grace Poe a natural born Filipino?
• A: YES • A: YES
• First, there is a high probability that Grace Poe’s parents • Second, by votes of 7-5, the SC pronounced that
are Filipinos. Her physical features are typical of Filipinos. foundlings are as a class, natural-born citizens.
• The fact that she was abandoned as an infant in a • This is based on the finding that the deliberations of the
municipality where the population of the Philippines is 1934 Constitutional Convention show that the framers
overwhelmingly Filipinos such that there would be more intended foundlings to be covered by the enumeration.
than 99% chance that a child born in such province is a • While the 1935 Constitution’s enumeration is silent as to
Filipino is also a circumstantial evidence of her parents’ foundlings, there is no restrictive language which would
nationality. definitely exclude foundlings either.
• That probability and the evidence on which it is based are • Because of silence and ambiguity in the enumeration with
admissible under Rule 128, Section 4 of the Revised Rules respect to foundlings, the SC felt the need to examine the
on Evidence. intent of the framers.
• To assume otherwise is to accept the absurd, if not the • (Grace Poe v. COMELEC, GR 221697, GR 221698-700
virtually impossible, as the norm. (Grace Poe v. March 8, 2016)
COMELEC, GR 221697, GR 221698-700 March 8, 2016)
• Q: Is Sen. Grace Poe a natural born Filipino? • Q: What is the effect if a dual citizen (Fil-Am) resumes
• A: YES using his foreign passport?
• Third, that foundlings are automatically conferred with • A: This will effectively negate his Affidavit of
natural-born citizenship is supported by treaties and the Renunciation of foreign citizenship. He will be deemed
general principles of international law. a foreign national. Citizenship is not a matter of
• The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating convenience. It is a badge of identity that comes with
to the Conflict of Nationality Laws (“1930 Hague attendant civil and political rights accorded by the state to
Convention”) states that: its citizens.
• Article 14: A child whose parents are both unknown • It likewise demands the concomitant duty to maintain
shall have the nationality of the country of birth. If the allegiance to one's flag and country. While those who
child's parentage is established, its nationality shall be acquire dual citizenship by choice are afforded the right of
determined by the rules applicable in cases where the suffrage, those who seek election or appointment to public
parentage is known. A foundling is, until the contrary is office are required to renounce their foreign citizenship to
proved, presumed to have been born on the territory of be deserving of the public trust. Holding public office
the State in which it was found. (Grace Poe v. demands full and undivided allegiance to the Republic and
COMELEC, GR 221697, GR 221698-700 March 8, 2016) to no other.. (Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649.
April 16, 2013)
• Q: What is the effect of reacquisition of • Q: Distinguish the two kinds of dual citizens
Philippine citizenship as to the • A:
domicile/residence requirement for running as • Dual citizens by virtue of birth (Born Dual), are not
a mayoralty candidate? required by law to take the oath of renunciation as
• A: Reacquisition of Philippine citizenship under the mere filing of the certificate of candidacy
R.A. 9225 has no automatic impact or effect on a already carries with it an implied renunciation of
candidate’s residence/domicile. He merely has an foreign citizenship.
option to again establish his domicile in the • Dual citizens by naturalization (Acquired Dual), on
municipality, which place shall become his new the other hand, are required to take not only the
domicile of choice. The length of his residence Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
therein shall be determined from the time he Philippines but also to personally renounce foreign
made it his domicile of choice and it shall not citizenship in order to qualify as a candidate for
retroact to the time of his birth. (Japson v. public office. (Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
COMELEC, G.R .No. 180088, Jan. 19,2009) 195649. April 16, 2013)
• QUESTION: • Answer:
• “A” is a naturalized citizen of • “A” must comply with the requirements set in
another country who reacquires R.A 9225. Sec 5(3) of R.A. 9225 states that
Filipino citizenship. On the other naturalized citizens who reacquire Filipino
citizenship and desire to run for public office
hand, “B” possesses dual
shall “…make a personal and sworn
citizenship by birth. renunciation of any and all foreign
• If they desire to run for elective citizenship before any public officer
public office, what requirement must authorized to administer an oath” aside from
they comply with as regards their the oath of allegiance prescribed in Section
citizenship? 3 of R.A. 9225.
• Answer:
• “B” need not comply with the twin requirements of
BENGZON V. HRET (2001)
swearing an oath of allegiance and executing a May a natural-born Filipino who became an American
renunciation of foreign citizenship because he is a citizen still be considered a natural-born Filipino upon
his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship and,
natural-born Filipino who did not subsequently therefore, qualified to run for Congressman?
become a naturalized citizen of another country. It
is sufficed, if upon the filing of his certificate of ANSWER: YES. Repatriation results in the recovery of
candidacy, he elects Philippine citizenship to the original nationality.
terminate his status as person with dual citizenship This means that a naturalized Filipino who lost his
considering that his condition in the unavoidable citizenship will be restored to his prior status as a
naturalized Filipino citizen.
consequence of conflicting laws of different States. On the other hand, if he was originally a natural-born citizen
(Cordora v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176947, before he lost his Philippine citizenship, he will be
February 19, 2009). restored to his former status as a natural-born Filipino.
Suggested Answer:
2010 BAR QUESTION
A. 1) According to Section 4, Article IV of the
Constitution, Filipino citizens who marry aliens retain
• What are the effects of their citizenship, unless by their act or omission they
are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.
marriages of: 2) According to Mo Ya Lim Yao v. Commissioner of
Immigration, 41 SCRA 292, under Section 15 of the
• 1) a citizen to an alien; Revised Naturalization Law, a foreign woman who
marries a Filipino citizen becomes a Filipino citizen
• 2) an alien to a citizen; on their provided she possesses none of the disqualifications
for naturalization. A foreign man who marries a
Filipino citizen does not acquire Philippine citizenship.
spouses and children? However, under Section 3 of the Revised Naturalization
Act, in such a case the residence requirement for
Discuss. naturalization will be reduced from ten (10) to five (5)
years. Under Section 1(2), Article IV of the
Constitution, the children of an alien and a Filipino
citizen are citizens of the Philippines.
• Q: Distinguish between RETENTION and RE- • Q: Distinguish between RETENTION and RE-
ACQUISITION of Philippine Citizenship under RA 9225. ACQUISITION of Philippine Citizenship under RA 9225.
• A: • A:
• The law makes a distinction between those natural-born • The reacquisition will apply to those who lost their
Filipinos who became foreign citizens before and after Philippine citizenship by virtue of Commonwealth Act 63 or
the effectivity of R.A. 9225. before the effectivity of RA 9225. -- the Filipinos who lost
• Under the first paragraph are those natural-born Filipinos their citizenship is deemed to have reacquired their
who have lost their citizenship by naturalization in a foreign Philippine citizenship upon the effectivity of the act. Hence
country before RA 9225 - who shall re-acquire their they are not deemed Natural Born but only naturalized.
Philippine citizenship upon taking the oath of allegiance to • The second aspect is the retention of Philippine citizenship
the Republic of the Philippines. [Citizenship was lost] applying to future instances. For these citizens, who lost
• The second paragraph covers those natural-born Filipinos their citizenship after the effectivity of RA 9225 -- they are
who became foreign citizens after R.A. 9225 took effect, deemed NEVER to have LOST their Filipino citizenship.
who shall retain their Philippine citizenship upon taking the Does, upon taking their oath they are deemed to have
same oath. [Citizenship was NEVER LOST]. retained their NATURAL BORN status.
• David vs. Agbay, 753 SCRA 526 (2015) • David vs. Agbay, 753 SCRA 526 (2015)
• Q: Is failure to sign an application for registration a • Q: Is the “No Bio, No Boto” or Biometrics requirement
valid ground to cancel a voter’s registration? of the COMELEC Constitutional?
• A: YES. Failure to affix his signature to the application for • A: YES. This requirement is not a "qualification" to the
registration will necessarily invalidate his application for exercise of the right of suffrage, but a mere aspect of the
registration. registration procedure, of which the State has the right to
reasonably regulate.
• Section 10 of RA 8189, explicitly provides: x x x To register
as a voter, he shall personally accomplish an application • It was institutionalized conformant to the limitations of the
form for registration x x x in three (3) copies x x x The 1987 Constitution and is a mere complement to the existing
Voter's Registration Act of 1996.
application for registration shall contain three (3) specimen
signatures of the applicant x x x .” • Thus, unless it is shown that a registration requirement rises
to the level of a literacy, property or other substantive
• Gunsi’s application for registration did not comply with the
requirement as contemplated by the Framers of the
minimum requirements of RA No. 8189. This leads to only
Constitution — the same cannot be struck down as
one conclusion: that Gunsi, not having demonstrated that
he duly accomplished an application for registration, is not unconstitutional, as in this case.
a registered voter. Gunsi v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 168792, • (Kabataan Party-List v. Commission on Elections, G.R.
23 February 2009 No. 221318, December 16, 2015)
“Any question as to whether a person It is from the point of view of a third state that
possesses the nationality of a particular state the problem may arise, in which case the law of
should be determined in accordance with the the country of which the person is both a
law of that state.” national and a domiciliary should be applied.
Thus, the state of which an individual is a His nationality will be that where he resides,
national, even if he is simultaneously a national pays taxes, owns property, or votes. This is
of another state, shall consider him as the theory of effective nationality link.
exclusively its own national.
What is DOMICILE?
What is DOMICILE?
• In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a
It is one’s permanent place of permanent resident in a particular jurisdiction.
abode. Article 50 of the Civil • A person can remain domiciled in a jurisdiction even after
they have left it, if they have maintained sufficient links with
Code provides: that jurisdiction or have not displayed an intention to leave
permanently (i.e., if that person has moved to a different
state, but has not yet formed an intention to remain there
“For the exercise of civil rights indefinitely).
• A corporation’s place of domicile is equivalent to its place of
and the fulfillment of civil incorporation.
obligations, the domicile of • Traditionally many common law jurisdictions considered a
person's domicile to be a determinative factor in the conflict
natural persons is the place of of laws and would, for example, only recognize a divorce
their habitual residence.” conducted in another jurisdiction if at least one of the
parties were domiciled there at the time it was conducted.
• Q: How is domicile defined in conflict of • Q: What are the four (4) fundamental
laws? principles of Domicile?
• A: Domicile is the place where a person has • A:
certain settled and fixed legal relations. • 1. No natural person must ever be
• It is assigned to him by the law at the without a domicile.
moment of birth (domicile of origin). This is • 2. No natural person can have two or
not easily lost. more domiciles at the same time.
• Intention without residence or residence • 3. Every natural person may establish
without intention will not suffice for the and change his domicile.
acquisition of domicile but will be sufficient • 4. A domicile once acquired is retained
for the retention of an existing domicile. until a new one is gained.
Marcos v. COMELEC,
[G.R. No. 119976. September 18, 1995] Aquino v. COMELEC (1995)
- She indicated in her COC that her residence in Leyte • Butz Aquino was a Senator residing in Tarlac
is 7 months. The Constitution requires 1 year when he filed a COC for Congressman of Makati
residence. Is she qualified? City.
- YES. The principle of animus revertendi was used to • He leased a condo unit in Makati City 1 year
show that she has an “intention to return” to the place before the election. Is he qualified?
where she seeks to be elected.
• NO. The term “residence,” as used in election
- The SC has held that the term “residence” is vague. It law, is CLEAR.
ruled that “domicile” and “residence” are synonymous. • It imports not only an intention to reside in a
- The SC also ruled that the moment FM died, Imelda fixed place but also a personal presence in that
automatically reverted to her domicile of origin. place, coupled with conduct indicative of such
- “Her husband is dead and he cannot rule her beyond intention.
the grave.”