PALOMERA, JOSHUA CARL L.

CONSTI2 - 1D

CH 24. CITIZENSHIP
D. REACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP (REPATRIATION)

(8) PEOPLE V. AVENGOZA

Go Gam alias Luistro Sancho a Chinese, his wife Anselina Avengoza and the latter's mother
Gavina Avengoza, were charged with violation of Commonwealth Act No. 108, which bars
aliens from acquiring private agricultural lands in the Philippines, when they utilized as a
dummy their co-accused Gavina Avengoza, a Filipino citizen, who in turn deliberately allowed
and permitted herself to be used as such dummy in the acquisition and sale of private
agricultural land in the municipalities of Sipocot and Libmanan, province of Camarines Sur,
Philippines.

In another criminal case, Anselina Avengoza was charged together with Rafaela Alfante for the
transfer by way of deed of sale said property of the latter to the accused of a parcel of land in
the municipality of Sipocot.

Respondent filed a motion to quash, alleging that the accused has reacquired her Philippine
citizenship by repatriation, by reason whereof the criminal liability in the issue had thus been
rendered moot and academic.

The trial court admitted the motion to quash and dismissed the two criminal cases. The reason
for the dismissal is principally predicated on the trial court's opinion that defendant
Anselina Avengoza has validly reacquired her Philippine citizenship.

ISSUE: Whether or not respondent has been validly repatriated.

HELD:

No. Respondent’s mere taking of an oath of allegiance is not sufficient for reacquisition
fo Filipino citizenship. A would-be repatriate should show by conclusive evidence that he or
she has the qualifications to be so repatriated, as provided in the Rules and Regulations issued
by The Department of Justice on July 1, 1937, pursuant to Section 5 of Commonwealth Act No.
63 governing the reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. No evidence has been presented by
the respondent to show conclusively that she has the right to be repatriated.

Defendant Anselina Avengoza became an alien by reason of her lawful marriage to a Chinese
citizen; however, this does not necessarily mean that she was a Filipino citizen previous to such
marriage. Thus, she should first prove her citizenship prior to her marriage and as there is
no conclusive proof of this matter on record, this question must be judicially determined before
she can be legally repatriated.