CO vs.

HRET

Facts:
The HRET declared that respondent Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born Filipino citizen and a resident of Laoang,
Northern Samar for voting purposes. The congressional election for the second district of Northern Samar was
held. Among the candidates who vied for the position of representative in the second legislative district are
the petitioners, Sixto Balinquit and Antonio Co and the private respondent, Jose Ong, Jr. Respondent Ong was
proclaimed the duly elected representative of the second district of Northern Samar. The petitioners filed
election protests on the grounds that Jose Ong, Jr. is not a natural born citizen of the Philippines and not a
resident of the second district of Northern Samar.

Issue: Whether or not Jose Ong, Jr. is a citizen of the Philippines.

Held:
Yes. In the year 1895, the private respondent’s grandfather, Ong Te, arrived in the Philippines from China and
established his residence in the municipality of Laoang, Samar. The father of the private respondent, Jose Ong
Chuan was born in China in 1905 but was brought by Ong Te to Samar in the year 1915, he filed with the court
an application for naturalization and was declared a Filipino citizen. In 1984, the private respondent married a
Filipina named Desiree Lim. For the elections of 1984 and 1986, Jose Ong, Jr. registered himself as a voter of
Laoang, Samar, and voted there during those elections. Under the 1973 Constitution, those born of Filipino
fathers and those born of Filipino mothers with an alien father were placed on equal footing. They were both
considered as natural born citizens. Besides, private respondent did more than merely exercise his right of
suffrage. He has established his life here in the Philippines. On the issue of residence, it is not required that a
person should have a house in order to establish his residence and domicile. It is enough that he should live in
the municipality or in a rented house or in that of a friend or relative. To require him to own property in order
to be eligible to run for Congress would be tantamount to a property qualification. The Constitution only
requires that the candidate meet the age, citizenship, voting and residence requirements.

Co v. HRET: Can the spring soar higher than its source?

            In the case of Co vs. Electoral Tribunal[1] the major issue was whether Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural-born

Filipino citizen in contemplation of Section 6, Article VI in relation to Sections 2 and 1(3), Article IV of the

1987 Constitution.

            Records show that Ong Te, the grandfather of Jose Ong, Jr., arrived in the Philippines in 1895. He

established his residence in Laoang, Samar. As such, he was able to obtain a certificate of residence from the

Spanish colonial administration.

            Jose Ong Chuan, Jose Ong Jr.’s father, was born in China in 1905. In 1915, he was brought by Ong Te

to Samar where he grew up. He was baptized into Christianity. He married a natural-born Filipina, Agripina

Lao. He also established his residence in Laoang, Samar. In 15 February 1954, he filed with the Court of First

Instance of Samar an application for naturalization. He was declared a Filipino citizen on 28 April 1955; the
declaration was made final and executory on 15 May 1957. He took his Oath of Allegiance and was issued a

corresponding certificate of Naturalization.

            Jose Ong, Jr. was then a minor, nine years of age, and still finishing his elementary education

in Samar when his father took his oath.  After completing his elementary education, he went to Manila to

complete his higher education and eventually found employment there. He, however, frequently went home

to Samar where he grew up.

            In 1971, his elder brother was elected a delegate of the 1971 Constitutional Convention. Emil’s status as

a natural-born citizen was challenged. The Convention, however, declared Emil as a natural-born Filipino.

            In 1984 and 1986, Jose Jr. registered and voted in Samar. He ran and won in the 1987 elections for

representative in the second district of Northern Samar. His opponents protested his election to the post on the

grounds that he is not a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. The Court affirmed the decision of the House of

Representatives Electoral Tribunal declaring Jose Ong, Jr. a natural-born Filipino citizen.

            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

citizenship,”[2] as well as “those born before 17 January 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine

citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.”[3]

            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. 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, whereby under earlier laws, he was not a natural-born citizen.[4]

            The Court’s based its resolution of the issue by tracing Jose Ong, Jr. citizenship to his mother who was a

natural-born Filipina. 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. Under the 1987 Constitution, natural-born status can only be accorded to individuals

who elected citizenship upon reaching majority. In the opinion of the Court it is not necessary for Ong, Jr. 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.[5]

            Furthermore, election can be both formal and informal. 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. 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. Entering a profession open only to Filipinos, serving in public office where citizenship is a

qualification, voting during election, running for public office, and other categorical acts of similar nature are

themselves formal manifestations of choice. These, according to the court, cannot be less binding than the filing

of a sworn statement or formal declaration.[6]