Aznar v.

Commission on Elections
G.R. No. 83820 – May 25, 1990 J.
Paras

Digest Author: Betina Fortes

Topic: People - Citizenship

Complete Title: JOSE B. AZNAR (as Provincial Chairman of PDP Laban in Cebu), petitioner,
vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EMILIO MARIO RENNER OSMEÑA, respondents.

FACTS:
● On Nov. 19, 1987, Emilio “Lito” Osmeña filed his certificate of candidacy with the COMELEC for
the position of Provincial Governor of Cebu Province.

● On Jan. 22, 1988, Jose B. Aznar, representing Cebu PDP-Laban Provincial Council, filed a petition for
the disqualification of Osmeña on the ground that the latter is an American citizen and not a Filipino
citizen.

● On Jan. 27, 1988, Aznar filed a Formal Manifestation submitting a Certificate issued by then Immigration
and Deportation Commissioner Miriam Defensor Santiago certifying that Osmeña is an American and a
holder of the following certificates:
o Alien Certificate of Registration o
Immigrant Certificate of Residence

● Aznar also filed a Supplemental Urgent Ex-parte Motion for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining
Order to temporarily enjoin the Cebu Provincial Board of Canvassers from tabulating and canvassing votes
cast in favor of Osmeña.

● COMELEC, nevertheless, ordered the Board to continue canvassing but to suspend the proclamation.

● On March 3, 1988, COMELEC directed the Board of Canvassers to proclaim the winning candidates, of
which Osmeña was proclaimed as Provincial Governor of Cebu.

● On June 11, 1988, COMELEC dismissed Aznar’s petition for disqualification on the following grounds:
o For not being timely filed o For lack of sufficient proof that Osmeña
is not a Filipino citizen

● Aznar filed a petition of certiorari before the Supreme Court.

ISSUES + HELD:
1. W/N the petition was filed in time - NO
● The petition for disqualification was not filed within the filing period required in the
Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881):
○ The petition for disqualification was filed beyond the 25-day period prescribed under Sec. 78
 of the Code. Certificate of Candidacy was filed on Nov. 19, 1987, while the petition on Jan. 22,
1988.
○ The petition cannot also be treated as a petition for quo warranto as it is premature. (Osmeña
was proclaimed Governor only on March 3, 1988).
● Nevertheless, the Court decided to still rule on the case as the issues raised were a matter of public
interest and there were also enough basis for the Court to rule.

2. W/N Osmeña still remains as a Filipino - YES

● Aznar failed to present direct proof that Osmeña had lost his Filipino citizenship.
○ Petitioner merely assumed that the issuance of alien certificate registration and clearance and
permit to re-enter the Philippines are tantamount to having sworn to the Oath of Allegiance
required by US Naturalization laws.
○ W/N Osmeña is American is not the concern of the Court. It is only allowed to
determine W/N Osmeña is still a Filipino citizen.
● Osmeña remains as a Filipino by virtue of being the son of a Filipino father.

3. W/N The Court has been inconsistent with its previous rulings on Frivaldo vs COMELEC and Labo vs
COMELEC - NO
● The Frivaldo and Labo cases are not applicable to the current one.
○ In both cases, both Frivaldo and Labo admitted that they were aliens who have no
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines.
○ In the current case, Osmeña denies having taken the oath of allegiance to the United
States.

4. W/N Osmeña renounced Philippine citizenship in obtaining Certificates of Alien Registration as an

American citizen - NO
● The Certificates stating Osmeña is an American does not necessarily mean that he is not still a
Filipino.
● Osmeña is possessed of both nationalities or citizenship.
● There was also no implied or expressed renunciation of Philippine citizenship.

5. W/N dual citizenship or allegiance is allowed in the Philippines - YES

● Sec. 5 Art. IV of the 1987 Constitution has no retroactive effect.
○ The provision says: “dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall
be dealt with by law”
● Moreover, no law has been enacted to enable the said provision.

FULL DISPOSITIVE TEXT: WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is hereby DISMISSED and the
Resolution of the COMELEC is hereby AFFIRMED.
DISSENT:

1. J. Melencio-Herrera
 ● The Alien Certificates of Registration is a clear declaration that one is not a citizen.
● Osmeña could have asked for the cancellation of the certificates and abandoned his allegiance to the
United States, but he did not do so.
● Sec. 5 Art. IV of the 1987 Constitution is a reaffirmation of the conviction against dual citizenship or
allegiance. Its force and effect is not grounded upon the need for a law

2. J. Cruz
● Osmeña’s act of registration as an alien with the Philippine government is a voluntary.
○ This means that he categorically asked the Republic of the Philippines to treat him as an
American, and not a Filipino.
○ Renunciation may be made independently of naturalization proceedings.
○ Since Osmeña’s repudiation is categorical enough, his Philippine citizenship is lost.

3. J. Padilla
● Osmeña’s sworn application for alien registration was an express renunciation of his Philippine
citizenship.
● The following submitted documents are grounded on the proposition that Osmeña is an alien under
Philippine laws:
○ Cebu City Native Born Certificate
○ Application for Re-entry Permit signed under oath
■ If Osmeña believed that he is a Filipino citizen, he would not have asked for the
permit since he has the right of every Filipino citizen to return to his country.
● Osmeña registered himself as an alien twice.
○ This is a clear manifestation and declaration that he was an alien residing in the
Philippines and under its laws.
○ He chose in favor of his US citizenship at the age of 20 in 1958.
● The Court should be consistent with its ruling on Labo vs COMELEC.