G.R. No.

221697 March 8, 2016 and April 5, 2016

MARY GRACE NATIVIDAD S. POE-LLAMANZARES, Petitioners,

vs.
COMELEC AND ESTRELLA C. ELAMPARO Respondents.

PEREZ, J.:

TOPIC AND PRINCIPLE:

Sources of International Law.

Foundlings are given natural-born status in the Philippines. The absence of express provision in
Article 4 does not mean they are meant to be excluded, especially when it is not the intention of
the Framers. The Constitution is anchored on social justice, and is not discriminatory of
foundlings.

FACTS:
Petitioner is Mary Grace Natividad Poe-Llamanzares, who, as a baby, was a foundling. She was
eventually adopted by the celebrity couple Fernando Poe Jr. and Susan Roces. She was a
naturalized US citizen. But she filed petition to re-acquire Philippine citizenship and took her
Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, pursuant to RA 9225 (Citizenship
Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003). The Bureau of Immigration granted her petition. She
filed her Certificate of Candidacy for Presidency for the May 2016 Elections. Cases GR 221697
& GR 221698-700 were filed before COMELEC to cancel her COC due to her lack of
qualifications with respect to both her citizenship and residency requirements. [Note: We will
only discuss the citizenship aspect] GR 221697: Estrella Elamparo filed petition to cancel Poe’s
COC due to material misrepresentation made by Poe when she stated that she was a natural-born
Filipino citizen and that she was domiciled in the Philippines. GR 221698-700: Francicso Tatad,
et al. filed for certiorari before COMELEC, seeking to disqualify Poe on the ground that she
lacked requisite residency and citizenship to qualify for Presidency. Tatad theorized that since
the Philippines adheres to jus sanguinis and that foundlings have unknown parentage, foundlings
cannot be considered natural-born Filipino citizens. The cases relied on the fact that Petitioner
was a foundling; that as a foundling, Petitioner could not reacquire Philippine citizenship under
RA 9225 because it applies only to natural-born Filipino citizens. Petitioner sought to annul the
decisions made by COMELEC granting the cases.

ISSUE:
Whether a foundling can be a natural-born Filipino citizen.

RULING:
Petition was granted, annulling the resolutions of COMELEC cancelling her certificate of
candidacy (COC). She was declared qualified to a candidate for President in the 2016 Elections.
High probability of Poe being a natural-born Filipino There is more than sufficient evidence that
petitioner has Filipino parents and is therefore a natural born Filipino. Parenthetically, the burden
of proof was on private respondents to show that petitioner is not a Filipino citizen… Her
admission that she is a foundling did not shift the burden to her because such status did not
exclude the possibility that her parents were Filipinos, especially as in this case where there is a
high probability, if not certainty, that her parents are Filipinos. SG offered official statistics from
the PSA that from 1965 to 1975, the total number of foreigners born in the Philippines was
15,986 while the total number of Filipinos born in the country was 10,558,278. The statistical
probability that any child born in the Philippines in that decade is natural-born Filipino was
99.83%. This is paired with other circumstantial evidence, such as the fact that she was
abandoned as an infant in a RC Church in Iloilo City, and that she also has typical Filipino
features: height, flat nasal bridge, straight black hair, almond shaped eyes and an oval face.

Natural-born Filipino under Domestic laws as a matter of law, foundlings are as a class, natural-
born citizens. Although the laws were silent as to the inclusion of foundlings, there is no
restrictive language which would definitely exclude foundlings either. Court held that the
framers of the constitution always had to intention to include them but just did not include them;
not because they were not citizens, but rather their numbers were not enough to merit specific
mention. Domestic laws on adoption also support the principle that foundlings are Filipinos.
These laws do not provide that adoption confers citizenship upon the adoptee. Recent legislation
is more direct. RA 8043 ("Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995"), RA 8552 (Domestic Adoption
Act of 1998), and this Court's AM 02-6-02-SC ("Rule on Adoption") all expressly refer to
"Filipino children" and include foundlings as among Filipino children who may be adopted.

Natural-born Filipino under GAAP’s and Conventions in International law Foundlings are
likewise citizens under international laws, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. The common thread of the UDHR, UNCRC and ICCPR is to obligate the
Philippines to grant nationality from birth and ensure that no child is stateless. This grant of
nationality must be at the time of birth, and it cannot be accomplished by the application of our
present naturalization laws, CA 473, as amended, and RA 9139, both of which require the
applicant to be at least eighteen (18) years old. The 1930 Hague Convention and the 1961
Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness support the same notion although the Philippines
is not a signatory to either, it does not mean that their principles are not binding.

Adopting these legal principles from the 1930 Hague Convention and the 1961 Convention on
Statelessness is rational and reasonable and consistent with the jus sanguinis regime in our
Constitution. The presumption of natural-born citizenship of foundlings stems from the
presumption that their parents are nationals of the Philippines.