H.1.4.
GRACE POE v COMELEC
FACTS:
 Grace Poe (Poe) was found abandoned in a church in
Jaro Iloilo sometime 1968. Parental care was passed to
the relatives of Edgardo Militar, the person who found
the child. The relatives then reported and registered the
child as a founding with the Civil Registrar of Iloilo. The
child was then named Mary Grace Militar. The child was
subsequently adopted by Fernando Poe, Jr and Susan
Roces sometime in 1974. Necessary annotations were
placed in the child’s foundling certificate but it was only
in 2005 that Susan Roces discovered that their lawyer
failed to secure a new Certificate of Live Birth indicating
Poe’s new name as well as the name of the adoptive
parents. Roces then submitted an affidavit and in 2006,
a Certificate of Live Birth in the name of Mary Grace
Poe was released by the Civil Registry of Iloilo.
 At the age of 18, Poe was registered as a voter of San
Juan. In 1988, she was issued a Philippine passport. In
1991, Poe married Teodoro Llamanzares and flew to
the US right after the wedding. She then gave birth to
her eldest child in the US. In 2001, Poe became a
naturalized American Citizen and she obtained a US
Passport that same year.
 In April 2004, Poe came back to the Philippines in order
to support her father’s candidacy. It was at this time that
she gave birth to her youngest daughter. She then
returned to the US in July 2004 with her two daughters.
Poe returned in December 2004 after learning of her
father’s deteriorating condition. The latter died and Poe
stayed until February 2005 to take care of the funeral
arrangements.
 Poe stated that she wanted to be with her grieving
mother hence, she and her husband decided to move
and reside permanently in the Philippines sometime first
quarter of 2005. They prepared for resettlement
including notification of their children’s schools,
coordination with property movers and inquiry with
Philippine authorities as to how they can bring their pet
dog. According to Poe, as early as 2004, she already
quit her job in the US.
 Poe came home on May 24, 2005 and immediately
secured a TIN while her husband stayed in the US. She
and her family stayed with her mother until she and
husband was able to purchase a condominium in San
Juan sometime February 2006. On February 14, 2006,
Poe returned to the US to dispose the other family
belongings. She travelled back in March 2006. In early
2006, Poe and husband acquired a property in
Corinthian Hills in Quezon City where they built their
family home.
 On July 7, 2006, Poe took her Oath of Allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines pursuant to R.A. 9225. On
July 10, 2006, she filed a sworn petition to reacquire
Philippine citizenship together with petitions for
derivative citizenship on behalf of her three children.
The Bureau of Immigration acted in favor of the petition
on July 18, 2006. She and her children were then
considered dual citizens. Poe then registered as voter in
August 2006 and secured a Philippine passport
thereafter.
 On October 6, 2010, she was appointed as Chairperson
of the MTRCB. Before assuming her post, she executed
an Affidavit of Renunciation of Allegiance to the US
before a notary public in Pasig City on October 20,
2010. The following day, she submitted the Affidavit to
the Bureau of Immigration and took her oath as MTRCB
Chairperson. According to Poe, she stopped using her
American passport from then on.
 On July 12, 2011, Poe executed an Oath/Affirmation of
Renunciation of Nationality of the US before the Vice
Consul of the US Embassy in Manila. On December 9,
2011, the US Vice Consul issued a Certificate of Loss of
Nationality of the US effective October 21, 2010.
 On October 2, 2012, Poe filed with COMELEC her
Certificate of Candidacy for Senator stating that she
was a resident of the Philippines for a period of 6 years
and 6 months before May 13, 2013. She was then
proclaimed a Senator on May 16, 2013.
 On October 15, 2015, Poe filed her COC for the
Presidency for the May 2016 elections. She declared
that she is a natural born and her residence in the
Philippine up to the day before election would be 10
years and 11 months counted from May 24, 2005.
 Several petitions were filed against Poe alleging that (1)
she committed material misrepresentation in her COC
when she stated that she is a resident of the Philippines
for at least 10 years 11 months up to the day before
May 9, 2016 Elections, (2) she is not natural born
considering that Poe is a foundling. It was argued that
international law does not confer natural born status and
Filipino citizenship to foundlings hence, she is not
qualified to apply for reacquisition of Filipino citizenship
under R.A.9225 as she is not a natural citizen to begin
with. Assuming that Poe was a natural born citizen, she
lost it when she became a US Citizen.
 In addition, one of the petitioners, Francisco Tatad,
theorized that:
1. Philippines adhere to the principle of jus sanguinis
and hence persons of unknown parentage,
particularly foundlings, are not natural born Filipino
citizens.
2. Using statutory construction, considering that
foundlings were not expressly included in the
categories of citizens in the 1935 Constitution, the
framers are said to have the intention to exclude
them
3. International conventions are not self-executory
hence, local legislations are necessary to give
effect to obligations assumed by the Philippines.
4. There is no standard practice that automatically
confers natural born status to foundlings.
 Petitioner Valdez alleged that Poe’s repatriation under
R.A 9225 did not bestow upon her the status of a
natural born citizen as those who repatriates only
acquires Philippine citizenship and not their original
status as natural born citizens.
 Poe countered these petitions by alleging that:
 1. The grounds invoked by the petitioners were not
proper grounds for a disqualification case as
enumerated under Section 12 and 68 of the
Omnibus Election Code.
2. What the petitioners filed focus on establishing her
ineligibility, hence, they fall within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal,
not the COMELEC.
3. The July 18, 2006 Order of the Bureau of
Immigration declaring her as natural born, her
appointment as MTRCB Chair and the issuance of
the decree of adoption reinforced her position as a
natural born citizen
4. As early as first quarter of 2005, she started to
reestablish her domicile in the Philippines and that
she can reestablish her domicile of choice even
before she renounced her American citizenship.
5. The period of residency as stated in her COC for
senator was a mistake in good faith.
 COMELEC ruled against the petitioner resolving that
she is not a natural born citizen and that she failed to
complete the 10-year residency requirement. Hence,
the present petition for certiorari before the Supreme
Court.
ISSUES AND RATIO:
1) Whether the COMELEC has jurisdiction to disqualify
POE
The procedure and the conclusions from which the
Resolutions of the COMELEC emanated are tainted with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
The issue before the COMELEC is whether the COC
should be denied due course ‘on the exclusive ground’ that
she made in the certificate a false material representation.
COMELEC should restrain itself from going into the issue of
qualifications of the candidate. It cannot, in the same
cancellation case, decide the qualification or lack thereof of
a candidate. Not one of the enumerated powers of the
COMELEC as stated in Article IX C, Sec. 2 of the
Constitution grants the commission the power to determine
the qualifications of a candidate. Such powers are granted
to the Electoral Tribunal as stated in Article VI Section 17
and the Supreme Court under Article VII, Section 4 of the
Constitution.
Insofar as the qualification of a candidate is concerned,
Rule 25 and Rule 23 of the COMELEC rules do not allow,
are not authorization and are not vestment of jurisdiction for
the COMELEC to determine the qualification of a candidate.
The facts of qualification must first be established in a prior
proceeding before an authority vested with jurisdiction. Prior
determination of qualification may be by statute, by an
executive order or by a judgment of a competent court or
tribunal.
Lacking this prior determination, the certificate of candidacy
cannot be cancelled or denied due course on ground of
false representations regarding a candidate’s qualifications
except if there exists self-evident facts of unquestioned or
unquestionable veracity and judicial confessions. In this
light the COMELEC cannot cancel Poe’s certificate of
candidacy lacking prior determination of her qualifications
by a competent body.
2) Whether as a foundling, Poe is a natural born Citizen
Foundlings are as a class, natural born citizens. While the
1935 Constitution is silent as to foundlings, there is no
restrictive language that would exclude them either.
Because of silence and ambiguity in the enumeration, there
is a need to examine the intent of the framers.
The amendment to the Constitution proposed by
constitutionalist Rafols to include foundlings as natural born
citizens was not carried out, not because there was any
objection to the notion that persons of unknown parentage
are not citizens, but only because their number was not
enough to merit specific mention. There was no intent or
language that would permit discrimination against
foundlings. On the contrary, all three Constitution’s
guarantee the basic right to equal protection of the laws.
Likewise, domestic laws on adoption support the principle
that foundlings are Filipinos. These laws do not provide that
adoption confers citizenship upon the adoptee, rather, the
adoptee must be Filipino in the first place to be adopted.
Recent legislation all expressly refer to “Filipino children”
and include foundlings as among Filipino children who may
be adopted.
The argument that the process to determine that the child is
a foundling leading to the issuance of a foundling certificate
are acts to acquire or perfect Philippine citizenship is
without merit. Hence, the argument that as a foundling, Poe
underwent a process in order to acquire or perfect her
Philippine citizenship, is untenable.
“Having to perform an act” means that the act must be
personally done by the citizen. In this case, the
determination of foundling status was done by authorities,
not by Poe. Second, the object of the process is to
determine the whereabouts of the parents, not the
citizenship of the child and lastly, the process is not
analogous to naturalization proceedings.
Under international law, foundlings are citizens. Generally
accepted principles of international law which include
international customs form part of the laws of the land. The
common thread of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the
International Convent on Civil and Political Rights obligates
the Philippines to grant nationality from birth and to ensure
that no child is stateless. The principles stated in the:
Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relation to the
Conflict of Nationality laws (that a foundling is presumed to
have the nationality of the country of birth)
Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (foundling is
presumed born of citizens of the country where he is found)
bind the Philippines although we are not signatory to these
conventions.
Although we are not a signatory to theHague Convention,
we are a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR) which affirms Article 14 of the Hague
Convention. Likewise, the Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness affirms Article 15 of the UDHR. By analogy,
although the Philippines has not signed the International
Convention for the Protection of Persons from Enforced
Disappearance, we (the Supreme Court) ruled that the
proscription against enforced disappearance was
nonetheless binding as a generally accepted principle of American until July 7, 2006 on the basis of previous cases
international law. ruled upon by the Supreme Court.

Poe’s evidence shows that at least 60 countries in Asia,
North and South America and Europe have passed
legislation recognizing foundlings as its citizens. 166 out of
189 countries accept that foundlings are recognized as
citizens. Hence, there is a generally accepted principle of
international law to presume foundlings as having been
born and a national of the country in which it is found.
Hence, as a foundling, Poe is a natural born Filipino citizen.
SC held that the other cases previously decided by the
court wherein residence was counted only from the
acquisition of permanent residence were decided as such
because there is sparse evidence on establishment of
residence. These cases cannot be applied in the present
case. In the case at bar, there is overwhelming evidence
that leads to no to other conclusion that Poe decided to
permanently abandon her US residence and reside in the
Philippines as early as May 24, 2005.

3) Whether Poe’s repatriation resulted to reacquisition
of natural born citizenship.
The COMELEC arrogantly disregarded jurisprudence on
the matter of repatriation which states that repatriation
results in the recovery of the original nationality. A natural
born citizen before he lost his Philippine nationality will be
restored to his former status as natural born Filipino after
repatriation (Benson v. HRET, Pareno v. Commission on
Audit etc). In passing R.A. 9225, Congress saw it fit to
decree that natural born citizenship may be reacquired
even if it has been lost. It is not for the COMELEC to
disagree with the Congress’ determination.
Neither is repatriation an act to ‘acquire or perfect’ one’s
citizenship. In the case of Bengson, the Court pointed out
that there are only two types of citizens under the 1987
constitution: natural born and naturalized. There is no third
category for repatriated citizens. The COMELEC cannot
reverse a judicial precedent. Hence, COMELEC’s decision
is wrapped with grave abuse of discretion.
These evidence, coupled with her eventual application to
reacquire Philippine citizenship is clear that when she
returned in May 2005, it was for good.
The stamp in her passport as a balikbayan does not make
Poe an ordinary transient.
Poe was able to prove that her statement in her 2012 COC
was only a mistake in good faith. Such a mistake could be
given in evidence against her but it was by no means
conclusive considering the overwhelming evidence
submitted by Poe. Considering that the COMELEC failed to
take into consideration these overwhelming evidence, its
decision is tainted with grave abuse of discretion. The
decision of the COMELEC is hereby annulled and set
aside. Poe is thus declared qualified to be a candidate for
President in the National and Local Election on May 9,
2016.

4) Whether Poe is a resident of the Philippine for 10

years
Poe alleged that her residency should be counted from May
24, 2005 when she returned for good from the US. There
are three requisites to acquire a new domicile 1. Residence
or bodily presence in a new locality 2. Intention to remain
(animus manendi) and 3. Intention to abandon the old
domicile (animus non-revertendi). The purpose to remain in
or at the domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period
of time, the change of residence must be voluntary and the
residence at the place chosen for the new domicile must be
actual.

Poe presented voluminous evidence showing that she and

her family abandoned their US domicile and relocated to
the Philippines for good. These evidence include former US
passport showing her arrival on May 24, 2005 and her
return to the Philippines every time she travelled abroad,
email correspondences with freight company to arrange for
the shipment of household items as well as with the pet
Bureau; school records of her children showing enrolment
in the Philippine to the Philippine schools starting on June
2005 etc.

COMELEC refused to consider the petitioner’s domicile has

been timely changed as of May 24, 2005 and maintained
that although there is physical presence and animus
manendi, there is no animus revertendi. Respondents
contend that the stay of an alien former Filipino cannot be
counted until he/she obtains a permanent resident visa or
reacquired Philippine citizenship since she is still an