A. Determine the citizenship of the child with the following conditions.

Explain your
answer.
(3 points each)
1. The child was born inside the Philippine Airlines of American parents under the US
national space.
 The child’s citizenship will also be US citizenship. It is under Jus Sanguinis
principle. The children will follow the citizenship of the parents. We should follow
Jus Sanguinis principle because the child was born in the Philippines and this
principle prevails in the Philippines.
2. The parents are both Chinese and were naturalized as Filipino citizens and their child
was born in the Philippines
 The Child’s citizenship will be Filipino. Because his parents are both Filipino
citizens even though they are Chinese blood and they also live in the Philippines.
3. The child was born in Illinois of an Italian mother and Filipino father.
 The child is in US citizenship. Illinois is under the country of United State
therefore US law should be follow. The principle in the said country is Jus Soli
which means citizenship in accordance of the place of birth regardless on what is
the parent’s citizenship.
4. The father is a former American citizen and was naturalized as Filipino and the
mother is American citizen.

5. The child was born in a cruise ship that was docked in Japan of a Japanese father
and Filipino mother.

 
B. Analyze the scenario below and answer the questions (5 points each)
 
1. Mr. Santos is engaged in the business of restaurant business. In the year 2018, the
Regional Director of the Bureau of Internal Revenue issued a letter of authority to the
BIR District Officer in order to assess, review and to examine the books of accounts of
Mr. Santos. Without any preliminary assessment notice or any final demand issued to
Mr. Santos, the BIR immediately ordered the closure his. Is the BIR correct in
immediately ordering the closure of the business of Mr. Santos? Why?
 The BIR is definitely in wrong process of closing the business of Mr. Santos. This
is under the bill of rights Article 3 Section 1 it as said here that no person shall be
 deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any
person denied the equal protection of the law. It was all clearly mentioned here.
2. Can hotels give out / release the names of their guests or other information to
someone? Why or why not? What law protects the guests from this situation
 No. It was under Article 3 Section 3. The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court or when
public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by the law. It was clearly
said in the Privacy of letters which correspondence made in writing is treated with
confidentiality.
3. Round the World Travel Services were engaged by AAA University to tour their
students in South Korea on April 15, 2020. However, the national government  issued a
travel ban in and out of the country due to Covid-19. Some students are insisting to
pursue the tour as all tour inclusions are paid already. But, because of the travel ban,
the tour was suspended. Was the impairment of the Right to Travel unconstitutional?
Why?
 According on Right to travel, travelling from one place to another is also a
guaranteed right. However, there is cases wherein this right can be impaired or
restricted by the government. And we are in the midst of pandemic therefore, the
students should follow the government law regarding on the tour. Maybe the
university should issue a refund for the student’s paid payments.
4. What are the 4 areas that covers maritime territory? What is the difference between
Right of Innocent Passage from Right of Involuntary Entrance?
 4 areas of maritime territory; Contiguous Zone, Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ),
Continental Shelf and the United Nations Convention on the law of the Sea.
 The innocent passage is a concept in the law of the sea that allows for the
vessel to pass through the territorial waters of another state, subject to certain
restriction. While the Right of Voluntary entrance is the right of any foreign
merchant vessel to enter the territorial waters of a state in case of emergency
such as lack of provision, unseaworthiness of the vessel, inclement weather,
pursuit of pirates, or other force majeure.
5. - 10 points
The 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff was one of the factors that prompted the
Philippines to file a case against China. Tensions between the two countries escalated
when Chinese surveillance ships prevented Philippine authorities from apprehending
Chinese vessels found poaching endangered Philippine marine species at the
shoal. Philippines brought the case before the tribunal to dispute China’s claim of
“indisputable sovereignty” over almost the entire South China sea through its “nine-dash
line” claim. The Arbitral Tribunal decides in favor of the Philippines vs. China case over
South China Sea.
Why do you think that the Philippines won the case? What is the importance of
UNCLOS to the West Philippine Sea dispute?
 Philippines will confidently won the case. Chinese nine-dash-line has no legal
basis and only china claims it. Nine-dash-line is just their hallucination. According
to UNCLOS it should be 200 nautical miles away from land so it can definitely
recognized as the country’s maritime territory. The mischief reef is 124 nautical
miles away from Palawan, the Reed bank was 84 nautical miles away from
Palawan and lastly, the Scarborough Shoal is also measured 124 nautical miles
away from Zambales, Philippines. It is crystal clear that they are all in the
Territory of the Philippine and no other country has right on those. Philippines
has a legal basis under UNLOS.