ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP

ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP

WHO ARE PHILIPPINE CITIZENS

Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
(3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of
majority; and
(4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

IN GENERAL
‣ What is citizenship?

‣ Citizenship — is personal and more or less permanent membership in a political community. It denotes possession
within that particular political community of full civil and political rights subject to special disqualifications such as
minority. Reciprocally, it imposes the duty of allegiance to the political community.

‣ What are the modes of acquiring citizenship?

1. By birth

a. Jus sanguinis — acquisition of citizenship on the basis of blood relationship;

b. Jus soli — acquisition of citizenship on the basis of place of birth

2. By naturalization — the legal act of adopting an alien and clothing him with the privilege of a native born citizen.

‣ NOTE — Philippine law follows the rule of jus sanguinis and provides for naturalization.

‣ Who are Filipino Citizens?

1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution

2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines

3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of
majority

4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law

‣ How should the citizenship of a person be challenged?

‣ Only through a direct attack, through direct proceeding brought for such purpose. It cannot be collaterally attacked.
(Vilando vs HREP 2011)

‣ How does the principle of Res Judicata apply in citizenship cases?

‣ Generally, res judicata does NOT set in citizenship cases. (Valles vs Comelec 2000)

‣ EXCEPT — When the following are present —

1. Person’s citizenship is resolved by a court or an administrative body as a material issue in the controversy,
after a full-blown hearing

2. With the active participation of the Solicitor-General or his representative

3. Finding of citizenship is affirmed by the Supreme Court (Fortuno vs Comelec 2005)

WHO ARE FILIPINO CITIZENS? (EXPOUNDED)

1. THOSE WHO ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
‣ This includes —

a. Those who are citizens under the Treaty of Paris

b. Those declared citizens by judicial declaration applying the jus soli principle (Tio Tiam vs Republic 1957)

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 97 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
c. Those naturalized under the law

d. Those citizens under the 1935 and 1973 Constitution

2. THOSE WHOSE FATHERS OR MOTHERS ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES

‣ This is the jus sanguinis rule

‣ This is the same rule as that under the 1973 Constitution. This means that if a child is born under the 1973 or 1987
Constitution and either his father or mother is a Filipino citizen at the time the child is born, the child is a Filipino
citizen no matter where he may be born.

‣ NOTE — Even if the child is illegitimate and his mother is an alien, but if his father is Filipino, he will still be considered
as a Filipino provided that paternity is clear, because of jus sanguinis, which makes no distinction between legitimate
and illegitimate children. (Tecson v. Comelec 2004)

3. THOSE BORN BEFORE JANUARY 17, 1973, OF FILIPINO MOTHERS, WHO ELECT PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP UPON REACHING THE
AGE OF MAJORITY

‣ This provision took effect only with the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution on January 17, 1973. Hence, children
similarly situated but born prior to January 17, 1973 are governed by Section 1(4) of Article IV of the 1935
Constitution.

‣ Thus, if a child was born of a Filipina mother and an alien father BEFORE the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution
(meaning during the 1935 Constitution), the the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions does NOT recognize such child as
Filipino unless upon reaching majority the child elects Philippine citizenship pursuant to the 1935 Constitution.

‣ BERNAS — this provision on election in the 1973 and 1987 Constitution are transitory provisions intended to take
care of those who under the 1935 Constitution could have elected Philippine citizenship upon reaching majority
but had not yet reached majority at the time of the effectivity of the 1973 or 1987 Constitution.

‣ Also, a child born under the 1973 or the 1987 Constitution of a Filipina mother and an alien father need NOT elect
Philippine citizenship.

‣ BUT — If the mother, however, had lost Philippine citizenship by the time of the birth of the child, the child has no
right of election and may acquire citizenship only by naturalization.

‣ When must the election be made?

‣ NACHURA — Within 3 years upon reaching the age of majority (Opinion, Secretary of Justice, s. 1948); except
when there is a justifiable reason for the delay.

‣ BERNAS — The election must be made within a reasonable period after reaching majority. However, may be
extended under certain circumstances as when the person concerned has always considered himself a Filipino
citizen.

‣ How must the election be made?

‣ Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 625, enacted on June 7, 1941, says that the election must be expressed in a
statement sworn before any officer authorized to administer oaths and filed with the nearest civil registry and
accompanied by an oath of allegiance to the Philippine Constitution. However, participating in elections and
campaigning for candidates, and similar acts done prior to June 7, 1941, have been recognized as sufficient to
show one's preference for Philippine citizenship. (In re Florencio Mallare 1974)
‣ What the person who elects Philippine citizenship fails to immediately file the documents of election with the
nearest civil registry?

‣ They can still be considered Filipinos.

‣ SEE — Cabiling Ma v. Commissioner, G.R. No. 183133, July 26, 2010

‣ This case involved children who had grown to adult years and for some reason failed to register their election
but had all along acted as citizens. Among the things which the Court noted was that the 1973 Constitution
had already corrected the chauvinistic provision of the 1935 Constitution by making those born of a Filipina
mother a citizen without need for election.

4. THOSE WHO ARE NATURALIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

‣ Naturalization — is the legal act of adopting a foreigner and clothing him with the privileges of a natural-born citizen. A
person may be naturalized either by complying with both the substantive and procedural requirements of a general
naturalization law or he may be naturalized by a special act of the legislature.

‣ What kind of naturalization laws and procedures have been used in the Philippines?

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 98 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
a. General law of naturalization applied through a judicial process. (Revised Naturalization Law, C.A. 473, June
17,1939)

‣ NOTE — This is still in effect

b. Special naturalization law, i.e., an act of the legislature making a named individual a citizen of the Philippines

‣ Such as — a law was passed to naturalize former NBA player Andray Blatche so that he could play for the
National Basketball Team

c. Mass naturalization law

‣ Such as — The Philippine Bill of 1902 made Filipino citizens of "all inhabitants of the Philippine Islands
continuing to reside in them who were Spanish subjects" on 11 April 1899 "and then resided in said islands

d. General law of naturalization applied through a combination of administrative process and presidential legislative
process

e. Administrative Naturalization Law, R.A. 9139, enacted in 2000

NATURAL-BORN PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP

Section 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act
to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3),
Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens.

‣ Who are considered Natural-Born Filipino Citizens?

1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their
Philippine citizenship.

2. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of
majority

‣ NOTE — A Filipino who is NOT a natural-born citizen is necessarily a naturalized citizen. There are only two kinds of
citizenship — natural born and naturalized. (Bengzon vs Cruz 2001)

‣ BERNAS — Jose was born a Chinese and married a natural born Filipina in 1932. Jose was eventually naturalized and
took his oath of allegiance in 1955. At that time Jose, Jr. was 9 years old. In 1987 Jose, Jr. was elected to the House of
Representatives.

‣ May the citizenship of Jose, Sr., already deceased, be attacked collaterally in this case?

‣ NO. An attack on one’s citizenship may be made only through a direct, not a collateral proceeding (Co v. HRET
1991)

‣ Did the minor Jose, Jr. become a Filipino citizen with his father?

‣ YES. Under the Naturalization Law.

‣ Did he have to elect Philippine citizenship when he came of age?

‣ NO. Because he already was one. It would be unnatural to expect him to. Election of Philippine citizenship
presupposes that you are not one. Moreover, jurisprudence recognizes both formal and informal election. (In re
Mallare 1974)

‣ Is he a natural born citizen?

‣ YES. He benefits from the curative nature of Sec. 2. He derives his status of being a natural born citizen not from
his father, who made election unnecessary for him, but from his mother who was a natural born Filipina. (Co v.
HRET 1991)

‣ Why is the classification of being a natural-born citizen important?

‣ It is a qualification which is often required for public office

‣ May the law treat natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens differently?

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 99 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
‣ NO. Except in the instances where the Constitution itself makes a distinction. Otherwise there would be a violation of
the equal protection clause. (Chen Teck Lao v. Republic 1974)

NATURALIZATION

GOVERNING LAWS ON NATURALIZATION

1. CA 473 — General law of naturalization applied through a judicial process. (Revised Naturalization Law, C.A. 473, June
17,1939)

2. RA 9139 — Administrative Naturalization Law, R.A. 9139, enacted in 2000

KINDS OF NATURALIZATION
1. Direct naturalization — when directly granted in favour of a certain individual or group of people

2. Derivative naturalization — when conferred upon the —

a. Wife of the naturalized husband

b. Minor children of naturalized parent

c. Alien woman upon marriage to a national

NATURALIZATION UNDER CA 473

‣ What are the substantive requirements for naturalization under CA 473?

‣ QUALIFICATIONS —

1. Not less than 21 years of age on the date of the hearing of the petition

2. Resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not less than 10 years

‣ BUT — This may be reduced to 5 years if he either—

a. Honorably held office in Government

b. Established a new industry or introduced a useful invention in the Philippines

c. Married to a Filipino woman

d. Been engaged as a teacher in the Philippines (in a public or private school not established for the exclusive
instruction of persons of a particular nationality or race) or in any of the branches of education or industry
for a period of not less than two years

e. Born in the Philippines

3. Good moral character; believes in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution; must have conducted
himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Philippines in his
relations with the constituted government as well as the community in which he is living

4. Own real estate in the Philippines worth not less than P5,000.00, or must have some known lucrative trade,
profession or lawful occupation

5. Speak and write English or Spanish and any of the principal Philippine languages

6. Enrolled his minor children of school age in any of the public or private schools recognized by the Government
where Philippine history, government and civics are taught as part of the school curriculum, during the entire
period of residence in the Philippines required of him prior to the hearing of his petition for naturalization.

‣ DISQUALIFICATIONS — When the person is either —

1. Opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or group of persons who uphold and teach
doctrines opposing all organized governments

2. Defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of violence, personal assault or assassination for the success or
predominance of their ideas

3. Polygamists or believers in polygamy

4. Convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 100 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
5. Suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious disease

6. Who, during the period of their residence in the Philippines, have not mingled socially with the Filipinos, or who
have not evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipinos

7. Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the Philippines is at war, during the period of such war

8. Citizens or subjects of a foreign country whose laws do not grant Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens
or subjects thereof.

‣ What are the procedural requirements for naturalization under CA 473?

1. Filing of declaration of intention one year prior to the filing of the petition with the Office of the Solicitor General.

‣ BUT — The following are exempt from filing declaration of intention —

a. Born in the Philippines and have received their primary and secondary education in public or private schools
recognized by the Government and not limited to any race or nationality

b. Resided in the Philippines for 30 years or more before the filing of the petition, and enrolled his children in
elementary and high schools recognized by the Government and not limited to any race or nationality

c. Widow and minor children of an alien who has declared his intention to become a citizen of the Philippines and
dies before he is actually naturalized.

2. Filing of the petition, accompanied by the affidavit of two credible persons, citizens of the Philippines, who personally
know the petitioner, as character witnesses

3. Publication of the petition —

‣ Under Sec. 9, Revised Naturalization Law, in order that there be a valid publication, the following requisites must
concur: (a) the petition and notice of hearing must be published; (b) the publication must be made once a week for
three consecutive weeks; and (c) the publication must be in the Official Gazette and in a newspaper of general
circulation in the province where the applicant resides. In addition, copies of the petition and notice of hearing
must be posted in the office of the Clek of Court or in the building where the office is located (Republic v. Hamilton
Tan Keh 2004) The same notice must also indicate, among others, the names of the witnesses whom the petitioner
proposes to introduce at the trial (Republic v. Michael Hong 2006)

‣ Publication is a jurisdictional requirement. Noncompliance is fatal for it impairs the very root or foundation of the
authority to decide the case, regardless of whether the one to blame is the clerk of court or the petitioner or his
counsel

‣ The failure to state all the required details in the notice of hearing, like the names of applicant’s witnesses,
constitutes a fatal defect. The publication of the affidavit of such witnesses did not cure the omission of their
names in the notice of hearing. It is a settled rule that naturalization laws should be rigidly enforced and strictly
construed in favour of the government and against the applicant (Ong Chua v. Republic 2000)

4. Actual residence in the Philippines during the entire proceedings

5. Hearing of the petition

6. Promulgation of the decision

7. Hearing after two years

‣ At this hearing, the applicant shall show that during the two-year probation period, applicant has —

a. Not left the Philippines

b. Dedicated himself continuously to a lawful calling or profession

c. Not been convicted of any offense or violation of rules

d. Not committed an act prejudicial to the interest of the nation or contrary to any Government- announced
policies.

8. Oath taking and issuance of the Certificate of Naturalisation

‣ NOTE — The applicant becomes a Filipino citizen only after taking the oath provided by law after satisfactorily
passing the period of probation.

‣ What are the effects of Naturalization under CA 473?

1. The applicant is deemed a Naturalized Filipino

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 101 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
2. It vests citizenship on wife if she herself may be lawfully naturalized

‣ Thus, the alien wife of the naturalized Filipino need not go through the formal process of naturalization in order to
acquire Philippine citizenship. All she has to do is to file before the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation a
petition for the cancellation of her Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR). At the hearing on the petition, she does
not have to prove that she possesses all the qualifications for naturalization; she only has to show that she does
not labor under any of the disqualifications. Upon the grant of the petition for cancellation of the ACR, she may
then take the oath of the allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and thus, become a citizen of the
Philippines. (Moy Ya Lim Yao vs Commissioner of Immigration)

3. Minor children —

a. Born in the Philippines before the naturalization — considered citizens of the Philippines.

b. Born outside the Philippines —

i. Who was residing in the Philippines at the time of naturalization — considered a Filipino citizen.

ii. Before parent’s naturalization — considered Filipino citizens only during minority, unless he begins to reside
permanently in the Philippines.

iii. After parent’s naturalization — considered a Filipino, provided that he registers as such before any Philippine
consulate within one year after attaining majority age, and takes his oath of allegiance.

‣ What are the grounds for de-naturalization under CA 473?

1. Naturalization certificate is obtained fraudulently or illegally

‣ A certificate of naturalization may be cancelled if it is subsequently discovered that the applicant obtained it by
misleading the court upon any material fact. Availment of a tax amnesty does not have the effect of obliterating his
lack of good moral character. (Republic v. Li Yao)

2. If, within 5 years, he returns to his native country or to some foreign country and establishes residence there;
provided, that 1-year stay in native country, or 2-year stay in a foreign country shall be prima facie evidence of intent
to take up residence in the same.

3. Petition was made on an invalid declaration of intention.

4. Minor children failed to graduate through the fault of the parents either by neglecting to support them or by
transferring them to another school.

5. Allowed himself to be used as a dummy.

‣ NOTE — although the misconduct was committed after the two-year probationary period, conviction of perjury and
rape was held to be valid ground for denaturalization. (Republic vs Guy)
‣ What are the effects of de-naturalization under CA 473?

1. If the ground for denaturalization affects the intrinsic validity of the proceedings — the denaturalization shall divest
the wife and children of their derivative naturalization.

2. If the ground was personal to the denaturalized Filipino — his wife and children shall retain their Philippine
citizenship.

NATURALIZATION BY DIRECT LEGISLATIVE ACTION

‣ This is discretionary on Congress; usually conferred on an alien who has made outstanding contributions to the country.

ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION UNDER RA 9139

‣ Is RA 9139 (The Administrative Naturalization Law of 2000) different from CA 473? What are the differences

‣ YES. CA 473 and RA 9139 are separate and distinct laws.

1. CA 473 — former covers aliens regardless of class

2. RA 9139 — covers native-born aliens who lived in the Philippines all their lives, who never saw any other country
and all along thought that they were Filipinos, who have demonstrated love and loyalty to the Philippines and
affinity to Filipino customs and traditions.

‣ The intention of the legislature in enacting RA 9139 was to make the process of acquiring Philippine citizenship less
tedious, less technical, and more encouraging. There is nothing in the law from which it can be inferred that CA473 is

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 102 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
intended to be annexed to or repealed by RA 9139. What the legislature had in mind was merely to prescribe another
mode of acquiring Philippine citizenship which may be availed of by native-born aliens. The only implication is that a
native- born alien has the choice to apply for judicial or administrative naturalization, subject to the prescribed
qualifications and disqualifications.

‣ What are the substantive requirements for naturalization under RA 9139?

‣ QUALIFICATIONS — Applicant must —

1. Be born in the Philippines and residing therein since birth

2. Not be less than 18 years of age, at the time of filing of his/her petition

3. Be of good moral character and believes in the underlying principles of the Constitutioin and must have conducted
himself/ herself in a proper and irreproachable manner during his/her entire period of residence in the Philippines
in his relatioins with the duly constituted government as well as with the community in which he/she is living

4. Have received his/her primary and secondary education in any public school or private educational institution duly
recognized by the Department of Education, where Philippine history, government and civics are taught and
prescribed as part of the school curriculum and where enrolment is not limited to any race or nationality, provided
that should he/she have minor children of school age, he/she must have enrolled them in similar schools

5. Have a known trade, business, profession or lawful occupation, from which he/she derives income sufficient for
his/her support and that of his/her family; provided that this shall not apply to applicants who are college degree
holders but are unable to practice their profession because they are disqualified to do so by reason of their
citizenship

6. Be able to read, write and speak Filipino or any of the dialects of the Philippines

7. Have mingled with the Filipinos and evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs and traditions and
ideals of the Filipino people.

‣ DISQUALIFICATIONS — Same as those in CA 473

‣ What are the procedural requirements for naturalization under RA 9139?

1. Filing with the Special Committee on Naturalization of a petition (see Sec. 5, RA 9139, for contents of the petition)

2. Publication of pertinent portions of the petition once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general
circulation, with copies thereof posted in any public or conspicuous area

3. Copies of the petition should also be furnished to the Department of Foreign Affairs, Bureau of Immigration and
Deportation, the civil registrar of petitioner’s place of residence and the National Bureau of Investigation which shall
post copies of the petition in any public or conspicuous areas in their buildings offices and premises, and within 30
days submit to the Committee a report stating whether or not petitioner has any derogatory record on file or any such
relevant and material information which might be adverse to petitioner’s application for citizenship

4. The Committee shall, within 60 days from receipt of the report of the agencies, consider and review all information
received pertaining to the petition (if Committee receives any information adverse to the petition, the Committee shall
allow the petitioner to answer, explain or refute the information)

5. Committee shall then approve or deny the petition.

6. Within 30 days from approval of the petition, applicant shall pay to the Committee a fee of P100,000, then take the
oath of allegiance and a certificate of naturalization shall issue.

7. Within 5 days after the applicant has taken his oath of allegiance, the Bureau of Immigration shall forward a copy of
the oath to the proper local civil registrar, and thereafter, cancel petitioner’s alien certificate of registration.

‣ What are the effects of Naturalization under RA 9135?

‣ The applicant is deemed a Naturalized Filipino

‣ After the approval of the petition for administrative naturalization and cancellation of the applicant’s alien certificate of
registration, applicant’s alien lawful wife and minor children may file a petition for cancellation of their alien certificates
of registration with the Committee, subject to the payment of the required fees.

‣ BUT — If the applicant is a married woman, the approval of her petition for administrative naturalization shall not
benefit her alien husband, although her minor children may still avail of the right to seek the cancellation of their
alien certificate of registration.

‣ What are the grounds for cancellation of the Certificate of Naturalization under RA 9139?

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 103 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
‣ The Special Committee on Naturalization may cancel certificates of naturalization issued in the following cases —

1. If the naturalized person or his duly authorized representative made any false statement or misrepresentation, or
committed any violation of law, rules and regulations in connection with the petition, or if he obtains Philippine
citizenship fraudulently or illegally

2. If, within five years, he shall establish permanent residence in a foreign country, provided that remaining for more
than one year in his country of origin or two years in any foreign country shall be prima facie evidence of intent to
permanently reside therein

3. If allowed himself or his wife or child with acquired citizenship to be used as a dummy

4. If he, his wife or child with acquired citizenship commits any act inimical to national security

LOSS AND RE-ACQUISITION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP

Section 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law.

Section 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act or omission, they
are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.

LAW WHICH GOVERN LOSS AND REACQUISITION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP

1. CA No. 63, as amended

2. RA 965 and 2639

3. RA 8171 and P.D. 725 on repatriation

4. RA 9225 — Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003

LOSS OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP

‣ How is Philippine Citizenship lost?

1. By naturalization in a foreign country (Frivaldo vs COMELEC)

‣ BUT — this is modified by R.A. 9225, entitled An Act Making the Citizenship of Philippine Citizens Who Acquire
Foreign Cititzenship Permanent (which took effect September 17, 2003), which declares the policy of the State that
all Philippine citizens who become citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine
citizenship under the conditions of this Act. Under RA 9225, Natural-born citizens of the Philippines who have lost
their Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are deemed to have
reacquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the following oath of allegiance to the Republilc.

2. By express renunciation of citizenship

‣ Express renunciation means a renunciation that is made known distinctly and explicitly, and not left to inference or
implication. (Board of Immigration Commissioners v. Go Callano)

‣ SEE — Labo v. Comelec, 176 SCRA 1

‣ In this case, it was held that Labo lost Filipino citizenship because he expressly renounced allegiance to the
Philippines when he applied for Australian citizenship.

‣ SEE — Valles v. Comelec, G.R. No. 137000, August 9, 2000.

‣ In this case, it was held that the fact that private respondent was born in Australia does not mean that she is
not a Filipino. If Australia follows the principle of jus soli, then at most she can also claim Australian citizenship,
resulting in her having dual citizenship. That she was a holder of an Australian passport and had an alien
certificate of registration do not constitute effective renunciation, and do not militate against her claim, of
Filipino citizenship. For renunciation to effectively result in the loss of citizenship, it must be express.

‣ SEE — Willie Yu v. Defensor-Santiago, 169 SCRA 364

‣ In this case, the obtention of a Portuguese passport and signing of commercial documents as a Portuguese
were construed as renunciation of Philippine citizenship.

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 104 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
3. Bv subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution or laws of a foreign country upon attaining
21 years of age

‣ NACHURA — However, a Filipino may not divest himself of Philippine citizenship in any manner while the Republic
of the Philippines is at war with any country. This may be considered as an application of the principle of indelible
allegiance.

4. By rendering service to or accepting commission in the armed forces of a foreign country

‣ NACHURA — However, the rendering of service to, or acceptance of such commission in, the armed forces of a
foreign country and the taking of an oath of allegiance incident thereto, with consent of the Republic of the
Philippines, shall NOT divest a Filipino of his citizenship if either of the following circumstances is present —

a. The Republic of the Philippines has a defensive and/or offensive pact of alliance with the said foreign country

b. The said foreign country maintains armed forces in Philippine territory with the consent of the Republic of the
Philippines.

5. By cancellation of the certificate of naturalisation

6. By having been declared by competent authority a deserter of the Philippine armed forces in time of war

‣ EXCEPT — When subsequently, a plenary pardon or amnesty has been granted.

7. In case of a woman, upon her marriage to a foreigner, if by virtue of the laws in force of her husband’s country,
she acquires his nationality

REACQUISITION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP

‣ How may lost Philippine citizenship be reacquired?

‣ Either by —

1. Naturalization — a former Filipino may be naturalized to re-acquire Philippine citizenship, provided that the
applicant possesses none of the disqualifications prescribed for naturalization.

2. Repatriation — This is the recovery of original citizenship.

3. By taking an oath of allegiance — This applies to former natural-born Philippine citizens who may have lost
their Philippine citizenship by reason of their acquisition of the citizenship of a foreign country. (Under R.A. 9225)

4. By direct act of Congress

REPATRIATION
‣ What laws govern repatriation of Philippine citizenship?

‣ RA 8171 — governs the repatriation of Filipino women who may have lost Filipino citizenship by reason of marriage to
aliens, as well as the repatriation of former natural-born Filipino citizens who lost Filipino citizenship on account of
political or economic necessity

‣ P.D. 725 — allows repatriation of former natural-born Filipino citizens who lost Filipino citizenship. (But seems moot
due to RA 9225)

‣ Who may be repatriated under RA 8171?

‣ Either of the following —

1. Women who lost citizenship by marriage; or

2. Those who lost citizenship for political or economic reasons may be repatriated.

‣ DISQUALIFICATIONS (Under RA 8171) — Applicant must NOT be

1. Opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or group of persons who uphold and teach
doctrines opposing organized government

2. Defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of violence, personal assault or assassination for the
predominance of his ideas

3. Convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude

4. Suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious disease.

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 105 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
‣ May a person, who lost his Philippine citizenship due to derivative naturalization during his minority when his
Father became a citizen of a foreign country, claim repatriation under RA 8171?
‣ NO. SEE — Tabasa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125793, August 29, 2006

‣ The privilege of RA 8171 is available only to natural-born Filipinos who lost their citizenship on account of political
or economic necessity and to their minor children. This means that if a parent who had renounced his Philippine
citizenship due to political or economic reasons later decides to repatriate under RA8171, his repatriatioin will also
benefit his minor children. Thus, to claim the benefit of RA 8171, the children must be of minor age at the time the
petition for repatriation is filed by the parent. This is so because a child does not have the legal capacity to
undertake a political act like the election of citizenship. On their own, the minor children cannot apply for
repatriation or naturalization separately from the parents.
‣ How is repatriation accomplished under RA 8171?

‣ Repatriation is effected by taking the necessary oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and registration in
the proper civil registry and in the Bureau of Immigration. The Bureau of Immigration shall thereupon cancel the
pertinent alien certificate of registration and issue the certificate of identification as Filipino citizen to the repatriated
citizen. (Sec. 2, RA 8171)

‣ NOTE — the registration of petitioner's repatriation with the proper civil registry and with the Bureau of Immigration is
a prerequisite in effecting repatriation. (Altarejos v. Comelec 2004)
‣ What are the effects of repatriation?

‣ The act of repatriation allows the person to recover, or return to, his original status before he lost his Philippine
citizenship.

‣ Thus, if what was lost was naturalized citizenship, that is what will be reacquired. If what was lost was natural born
citizenship, that will be reacquired. (Bengzon v. Cruz 2001)
‣ When does repatriation take effect?
‣ The grant of repatriation retroacts to the date of the filing of the application for repatriation.The effective date is the
date of application for repatriation not the date when repatriation was approved. (Frivaldo vs Comelec)

RE-ACQUISITION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP UNDER RA 9225

‣ What is the policy of the State with regard to Natural-Born Philippine citizens who become citizens of a foreign
country?

‣ It is the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their
Philippine citizenship under the conditions of RA 9225. (Sec. 2, RA 9225)

‣ BERNAS — What R.A. 9225, the Dual Citizenship Law, has done is to liberalize the reacquisition and retention of
natural born Philippine citizenship. The law deals with two classes of persons: (1) Filipinos who lost their citizenship
prior to the enactment of RA 9225 and (2) Filipinos who become citizens of another country after the effectivity of R.A.
9225.

‣ How do Natural Born citizens who lose their Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a
foreign country reacquire Philippine citizenship?

‣ By taking an oath of allegiance as spelled out by Sec. 3, RA 9225

‣ NOTE — Natural born citizens of the Philippines who, after the effectivity of RA 9225, become citizens of a foreign
country shall retain their Philippine citizenship upon taking the aforesaid oath.

‣ What is the effect of taking such oath of allegiance?

1. The former Natural Born citizen re-acquires his Philippine citizenship

2. The unmarried child, whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted, below 18 years of age, of those who reacquire
Philippine citizenship upon the effectivity of this Act shall be deemed citizens of the Philippines (Derivative Citizenship)

3. Those who retain or reacquire Phiilippine citizenship under RA 9225 enjoys full civil and political rights and be subject
to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines and the following conditions —

a. Those intending to exercise their right of suffrage must meet the requirements under Sec. 1, Art. V of the
Constitution, R.A. 9189, otherwise known as “The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003” and other existing laws

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 106 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
b. Those seeking elective public office in the Philippines shall meet the qualifications for holding such public office as
required by the Constitution and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy, make a
personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any public officer authorized to
administer an oath

c. Those appointed to any public office shall subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to their assumption of office; Provided, That they renounce
their oath of allegiance to the country where they took that oath

d. Those intending to practice their profession in the Philippines shall apply with the proper authority for a license or
permit to engage in such practice;

e. The right to vote or be elected or appointed to any public office in the Philippines cannot be exercised by, or
extended to, those who: —

i. Are candidates for or are occupying any public office in the country of which they are naturalized citizens

ii. Are in active service as commissioned or non-commissioned officers in the armed forces of the country which
they are naturalized citizens

DUAL ALLEGIANCE AND DUAL CITIZENSHIP

Section 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.

‣ Does the Constitution allow dual or multiple citizenship?

‣ BERNAS — YES. Because Philippine law has no control over citizenship laws of other countries, dual citizenship can
be unavoidable under the present Constitution.

‣ Instances of Dual Citizenship —

1. A child of a Filipina mother is a Filipino and might also have his alien father's citizenship

2. A Filipina married to an alien remains a Philippine citizen but might also acquire her alien husband's citizenship

3. A person with Filipino parents born in a country which observes the jus soli rule.

‣ Does not Section 5 in effect prohibit dual citizenship?

‣ NO. Dual citizenship and dual allegiance are different. The specific target of this new provision is not dual citizenship
but dual allegiance arising from e.g., mixed marriages or birth in foreign soil. This was seen as more insidious than
dual citizenship. To the extent, however, that dual citizenship also imports dual allegiance, then it must also be "dealt
with by law." In other words, the Constitution leaves the disposition of the problem of dual citizenship and dual
allegiance to ordinary legislation.

‣ Can dual citizens run for public office?

‣ YES. Provided they renounce their foreign citizenship

‣ SEE — Maquiling vs Comelec, G.R. No. 195649, July 2, 2013

‣ Only those who are exclusively Filipinos are qualified to run for public office. If we allow dual citizens who wish to
run for public office to renounce their foreign citizenship and afterwards continue using their foreign passports, we
are creating a special privilege for these dual citizens, thereby effectively junking the prohibition in Section 40(d) of
the Local Government Code.

‣ SEE — Mercado v. Manzano, 307 SCRA 630 as reiterated in Valles v. Comelec, G.R. No. 137000, August 9, 2000.

‣ In this case, the Court clarified the “dual citizenship” disqualification in Sec. 40, Local Government Code, and
reconciled the same with Sec. 5, Art. IV of the Constitution on “dual allegiance”. Recognizing situations in which a
Filipino citizen may, without performing any act and as an involuntary consequence of the conflicting laws of
different countries, be also a citizen of another state, the Court explained that “dual citizenship” as a disqualification
must refer to citizens with “dual allegiance”. Consequently, persons with mere dual citizenship do not fall under the
disqualification.

‣ Furthermore, for candidates with dual citizenship, it is enough that they elect Philippine citizenship upon the filing
of their certificate of candidacy to terminate their status as persons with dual citizenship. The filing of a certificate

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 107 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 4 — CITIZENSHIP
of candidacy suffices to renounce foreign citizenship, effectively removing any disqualification as dual citizen. This
is so because in the certificate of candidacy one declares that he/she is a Filipino citizen and that he/she will
support and defend the Constitution and will maintain true faith and allegiance to the same. Such declaration
under oath operates as an effective renunciation of foreign citizenship

‣ BUT — this doctrine in Valles and Mercado that the filing of a certificate of candidacy suffices to renounce foreign
citizenship does not apply to one who, after having reacquired Philippine citizenship under R.A. 9225, runs for
public office. To comply with the provisions of Sec. 5 (2) of R.A. 9225, it is necessary that the candidate for public
office must state in clear and unequivocal terms that he is renouncing all foreign citizenship. (Lopez vs Comelec
2008)

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 108 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
 ARTICLE 5 — SUFFRAGE

ARTICLE 5 — SUFFRAGE

THE RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE

Section 1. Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at least
eighteen years of age, and who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year, and in the place wherein they
propose to vote, for at least six months immediately preceding the election. No literacy, property, or other substantive
requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of suffrage.

‣ What is “suffrage”?

‣ It is the right to vote in elections.

‣ What are the recognized theories on suffrage?

1. Natural right theory — Suffrage is a natural and inherent right of every citizen who is not disqualified by reason of his
own reprehensible conduct or unfitness.

2. Social expediency — Suffrage is a public office or function conferred upon the citizen for reasons of social
expediency; conferred upon those who are fit and capable of discharging it.

3. Tribal theory — It is a necessary attribute of membership in the State.

4. Feudal theory — It is an adjunct of a particular status, generally tenurial in character, i.e., a vested privilege usually
accompanying ownership of land.

5. Ethical theory — It is a necessary and essential means for the development of society.

‣ NOTE — In the Philippines, Suffrage is both a privilege and an obligation.

‣ What is “election”?

‣ It is the means by which the people choose their officials for a definite and fixed period and to whom they entrust for
the time being the exercise of the powers of government

‣ Kinds of elections —

1. Regular — one provided by law for the election of officers either nation- wide or in certain subdivisions thereof,
after the expiration of the full term of the former officers.

2. Special — one held to fill a vacancy in office before the expiration of the full term for which the incumbent was
elected.

‣ Is suffrage limited to elections?

‣ NO. Suffrage covers the following—

1. Referendum— It is the power of the electorate to approve or reject legislation through an election called for the
purpose

2. Recall — It is the termination of official relationship of a local elective official for loss of confidence prior to the
expiration of his term through the will of the electorate.

3. Initiative — It is the power of the people to propose amendments to the Constitution or to propose and enact
legislations through an election called for the purpose. It is the “people-power” feature of the Constitution.

4. Plebiscite — It is the electoral process by which an initiative on the Constitution is approved or rejected by the
people. It is also the means by which the voters in affected areas consent or object to the change in the form of
local government.

5. Election — It is the choice or selection of candidates to public office by popular vote through the use of the ballot.
Specifically, it may refer to the conduct of the polls, including the listing of votes, the holding of the electoral
campaign; and the casting and counting of ballots and canvassing of returns.

‣ Who may exercise suffrage?

‣ It may be exercised by a person having the following requirements —

1. Filipino citizen

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 109 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW
 ARTICLE 5 — SUFFRAGE
2. At least eighteen years of age

3. Has resided —

a. In the Philippines for at least one year; and

b. In the place wherein they propose to vote for at least six months immediately preceding the election.

3. Not otherwise disqualified by law

4. Compliance with procedural requirements (such as registration, etc.)

‣ What does “residence” mean?

‣ The term "residence" as used in the election law has two meanings.

1. In the requirement of “residence in the Philippines” — residence is synonymous with "domicile," which
imports not only intention to reside in a fixed place but also personal presence in that place, coupled with conduct
indicative of such intention. In order to acquire a domicile by choice, there must concur —

a. Residence or bodily presence in the new locality

b. An intention to remain there

c. An intention to abandon the old domicile.

‣ In other words, there must be an animus non revertendi and an animus manendi. The purpose to remain in or at
the domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period of time. The acts of the person must conform with his
purpose. The change of residence must be voluntary; the residence at the place chosen for the domicile must
be actual; and to the fact of residence there must be added the animus manendi. (Gallego v. Verra 1941)

2. In the requirement of “residence in the place where one is to vote” — residence can mean either domicile, as
described above, or temporary residence.

‣ BERNAS — Thus, one domiciled in a municipality in Camarines Sur but is assigned by his company to Quezon
City has a choice of either voting in Camarines Sur or in Quezon City if he has been "residing" in Quezon City
for at least six months.

‣ Who prescribes disqualifications?

‣ The Congress has been given the discretion to create disqualifications.

‣ BUT — It is prohibited from prescribing any literacy, property, or other substantive requirements.

‣ Under the Election Code, the following are disqualified to vote —

1. Any person who has been sentenced by final judgment to suffer an imprisonment of not less than one year, such
disability not having been removed by plenary pardon

‣ BUT — any person disqualified to vote under this paragraph shall automatically reacquire the right to vote
upon expiration of five years after service of sentence.

2. Any person who has been adjudged by final judgment by competent court of having violated his allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines.

3. Insane or feeble-minded persons.

‣ BERNAS — It will be noted that the disqualifications found in the Election Code are "substantive," in that they touch
on the "quality" of the voter, as distinct from the procedural requirement of, e.g., registration. However, unlike literacy
or property qualifications, they are not "neutral" by themselves but have a direct bearing on the "moral" or "mental"
worth of the individual. It is submitted therefore that these disqualifications are compatible with the constitutional
prohibition. The substantive requirements prohibited by the Constitution are those which equivalently impose a
penalty for faultless disadvantage such as illiteracy or poverty.

‣ What does “procedural requirements” to exercise the right of suffrage mean?

‣ The right of a citizen to vote is necessarily conditioned upon certain procedural requirements he must undergo: among
others, the process of registration. Specifically, a citizen in order to be qualified to exercise his right to vote, in addition
to the minimum requirements set by the fundamental charter, is obliged by law to register, at present, under the
provisions of Republic Act No. 8189, otherwise known as the "Voter's Registration Act of 1996.'' The State, in the
exercise of its inherent police power, may enact laws to safeguard and regulate the act of voter's registration for the
ultimate purpose of conducting honest, orderly and peaceful election, to the incidental yet generally important end,
that even preelection activities could be performed by the duly constituted authorities in a realistic and orderly manner.
(Kahayan vs Comelec 2001)

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 110 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW
 ARTICLE 5 — SUFFRAGE

CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATES ON CONGRESS REGARDING SUFFRAGE

Section 2. The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot as well as a system for
absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.

The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterates to vote without the assistance of other
persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws and such rules as the Commission on Elections may
promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.

‣ What are the Constitutional mandates for Congress in Sec. 2?

1. To provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot, and for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos
abroad.

2. To design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterate to vote without the assistance of other persons.

‣ What are the laws which provide for Absentee Voting?

1. For Filipinos abroad — RA 9189 (The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003) now allows citizens residing abroad to
vote even if they are recognized as immigrants by the country of their residence

‣ Under such law, all citizens of the Philippines abroad, who are not otherwise disqualified by law, at least eighteen
(18) years of age on the day of elections, may vote for —

a. President

b. Vice-president

c. Senators

d. Party-list representatives

2. For members of the AFP, PNP, and other government officers and employees who may temporarily be
assigned in connection with the performance of election duties to places where they are not registered voters
— RA 7166 provides for absentee voting, for members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine
National Police and other government officers and employees who are duly registered voters and who, on election
day, may temporarily be assigned in connection with the performance of election duties to places where they are not
registered voters. They may vote for (1) President (2) Vice-president (3) Senators

‣ How do Filipino citizens residing abroad exercise their right of suffrage?

‣ Under RA 9189, they are required to file an affidavit prepared for the purpose by the COMELEC declaring that he/she
shall resume actual physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later than three (3) years from approval of his/
her registration under this Act.

‣ The affidavit is meant to be a statement the he or she never intended to abandon his or her domicile in the Philippines.
If no affidavit is filed, the person is deemed disqualified. But if after filing such affidavit the person does not reestablish
physical residence within three years, the person is likewise disqualified.

‣ Does the rule in RA 9189 dispense with the residence requirement?

‣ NO. The privilege under RA 9189 applies to those who have not lost their domicile in the Philippines that is why the
affidavit “to resume actual physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later than three (3) years” is required as
a prerequisite to voter registration.

‣ Can Filipino immigrants abroad also vote?

‣ YES. Under RA 9189, an immigrant or a permanent resident who is recognized as such in the host country may
exercise the right to vote. Provided also that he/she executes, upon registration, an affidavit prepared for the purpose
by the Commission declaring that he/she shall resume actual physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later
than three (3) years from approval of his/her registration under this Act.

‣ Such affidavit shall also state that he/she has not applied for citizenship in another country.

‣ Failure to return shall be the cause for the removal of the name of the immigrant or permanent resident from the
National Registry of Absentee Voters and his/her permanent disqualification to vote in absentia.

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 111 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW
 ARTICLE 5 — SUFFRAGE
‣ But isn’t it being an immigrant abroad mean that one has lost Philippine domicile?

‣ NO. Not necessarily. Loss of domicile is evidentiary matter. The presumption is that being an immigrant according to
the laws of another country may not necessarily mean loss of domicile. The required declaration of intent to return is
meant to be an assertion that one has not abandoned Philippine domicile. However, proof of loss of domicile may be
shown in a exclusion proceeding under the Election Law.

‣ Will those who have reacquired their citizenship through R.A. 9225 and have dual citizenship have to reacquire
Philippine domicile in order to vote?

‣ NO. They can vote even if they are non-residents.

‣ NOTE — “RA 9225 provides that those who retain or reacquire Phiilippine citizenship under RA 9225 enjoys full civil
and political rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines
and the following conditions —

a. Those intending to exercise their right of suffrage must meet the requirements under Sec. 1, Art. V of the
Constitution, R.A. 9189, otherwise known as “The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003” and other existing laws”

‣ SEE — Nicolas-Lewis v. Comelec, G.R. No. 162759, August 4,2006.

‣ Section 1 of Article 5 prescribes residency requirement as a general eligibility factor for the right to vote. On the
other hand, Section 2 authorizes Congress to devise a system wherein an absentee may vote, implying, that a
nonresident may, as an exception to the residency prescription in the Section 1, be allowed to vote.There is no
provision in the dual citizenship law — R.A. 9225 — requiring “dual citizens” to actually establish residence and
physically stay in the Philippines first before they can exercise their right to vote.

‣ On the contrary, R.A. 9225, in implicit acknowledgment that "duals" are most likely non-residents, grants under its
Section 5(1) the same right of suffrage as that granted an absentee voter under RA. 9189. It cannot be
overemphasized that R.A. 9189 aims, in essence, to enfranchise as much as possible all overseas Filipinos who,
save for the residency requirements exacted of an ordinary voter under ordinary conditions, are qualified to vote.

‣ BERNAS (Doesn’t seem to agree with this case ) — The Court seems to have recognized a novel way of amending
the Constitution, that is, by silence! Because the new citizens under R.A. 9225 are not specifically required to
establish residence in the Philippines, the conclusion is drawn that residence is not required. To bolster the
conclusion the Court assimilates the new citizens to absentee voters under R.A. 9189 who, incidentally, are
required to file an affidavit as indication that they had not abandoned their Philippine domicile.

CLARENCE TIU CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2

ATENEO LAW 4B 2017 112 OF 131 POLITICAL LAW