Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion

7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion

1/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin

K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 1

May 30, 2011

DEFINITION OF POLITICAL LAW

It is a branch of public law that deals with the organization

and the relation of the different governmental lines and how

they relate with each other and the powers they are

supposed to exercise and the extent of exercise of the

powers as well as defining the relationship between thegovernment and the governed, or the states with other

sovereign states.

SCOPE OF POLITICAL LAW

So in terms of scope, it is broader than other laws that relates

to the government.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW is just a branch of political law. It

deals with how to balance with authority on one hand and

rights of individuals. Because this pertains to government

limiting the rights of individuals as recognized by bill of

rights and at the same time these rights put a limitation on

the powers of the state; then constitutional law must bepart of political law.

You have other braches like ADMINISTRATIVE LAW that deals

on how government officials run the government and the

extent of the exercise of the powers on how one branch or

one department, bureau or agency or instrumentality relates

with each other.

That is administrative law that is why after consti 1 and 2, you

will also be reviewing political law as part of political law

review.

You also have ELECTION LAWS which pertain to the election

of the representatives of the government by the people, thelimitation on the conduct of election. It has something to do

with the government because without election, there

cannot be a government or officials in the government.

You also have LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS, LAW ON PUBLIC

CORPORATIONS and PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

These are the different parts of political law.

We will be tackling on the study of the government,

particularly the REPUBLIC OF THE Philippines REPRESENTEDBY THE THREE BRANCHES OF THE GOVERNMENT. Executive,

legislative and judiciary, in the national and local

governments in relation to the national government.

We will also tackle on the study of the other agencies of the

government independent of the three braches such as the

CIVIL SERVICE CMMISSION, COA, COMELEC and OFFICE OF

THE OMBUDSMAN on the accountability of public officials.

Then we will be discussing on the BILL OF RIGHTS.

We have those topics.

SOURCES OF POLITICAL LAW

What are the sources of political law? What are the basis of

your understanding on the powers of the government and

the limitations on the exercise of the powers?

Primarily the source is the 1987 CONSTITUTION.

Aside from that, you also have the other laws. Because youwill always have to refer to the other laws which each

constitution has evolved. Or from which the constitution has

evolved, like 1987 Constitution, which makes reference to

the 1935 Constitution, which was promulgated pursuant to

the organic laws passed by congress, Tydings Mcduffi Law

Jones Law of 1960, Philippine Bill on 1902, McKinleys

instructions on school amendment.

All of these were passed because of Treaty of Paris, the

instrument that formally transferred the powers from Spain

to the US.

These are the sources of your political laws. So when yougo into the understanding of your provisions of the

constitution, it cannot be avoided that we make reference to

those laws to be able to fully understand why such a

decision of the SC had been reached.

Other than those laws passed by the US, we also make

reference on the DECISIONS OF THE SC, that may have

changed the implication or the meaning of the law.

Example. Thepatrimonyis limited only to natural resource

before. Now, because of the decision of SC, even a building

that is not belong to natural resources is considered as part

of national patrimony like Manila Hotel. So it is reserved

only to Filipino citizens. It cannot be sold to foreigners. Itheres any, priority should be given to Filipinos because it is

part of the patrimony where the provisions of the

constitution provided that it should be reserved or priority

should be given to Filipino citizen.

PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
http://www.docudesk.com/http://www.docudesk.com/


2/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


CONSTITUTION

Primary source of understanding of political law is the 1987

Constitution.

DEFINITION

What is a CONSTITUTION?

It is the highest fundamental law of the land, upon which

all powers are founded, that would limit, divide, assign theexercise f the powers.

DIFFERENT PARTS CONSTITUTION

1. constitution of government

2. constitution of liberty

3. constitution of sovereignty

Preamble does not form an integral part of the

constitution. We have it because we copied the preamble of

the US. But it is neither a source of obligation or a source of

rights of people.

CONSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT. This provides for the

structure and the powers of government and the limitations

of on the exercise of powers.

You have the Bill of Rights as provision on liberty. And then

we have sovereignty which refers to the power of the

people to amend or revise the constitution or the

representatives.

DIFFERENT KINDS OF CONSTITUTION

As to origin:

1. ENACTED/CONVENTIONAL CONSTITUTION

-enacted by a Constitutional Convention.

2. evolutionary / cumulative constitution-a product of history

3. fiat / granted constitution

-made by one sovereign for another

As to form:

1. WRITTEN CONSTITUTION

-not because it is in writing

-all other sources are found in one single instrument

-CHARACTERISTICS:

a. broad

b. brief

c. definite

2. not written constitution

-most sources are written are written but are scattered

-some parts are not written

-ex. customs and traditions

As to the manner of changing the constitution:

1. RIGID CONSTITUTION

-difficult to change. Not flexible

-must follow a certain procedure (STAGES):

a. proposal

b. submission

c. ratification

A. PROPOSOAL

-KINDS OF CHANGES

a. revision (overhaul/change philosophy or principles

which constitution is founded)

b. amendment (not change the whole philosophy)

Q: Is the change of government a revision or an

amendment? Ex. change from presidential to

parliamentary?

A: REVISION. Because you totally change the

philosophy to be adopted as basis of the enforcement of

the provisions of the constitution.

Q: If you change the term of office of the president, is

that a revision or an amendment?

A: AMENDMENT

-WHO MAY PROPOSE:

1. Congress

-WHAT KIND OF PROPOSAL:

a. revision

b. amendment

-HOW:

At its discretion, congress may:

a. act as ConCon Constituent Assembly for votesb. call for a Constitutional Convention for 2/3 votes

c. if they are undecided, refer the question to a

referendum for majority votes, separately (al

members of congress)

2. People

-WHAT KIND OF PROPOSAL

a. amendment ONLY

-HOW

a. initiative on amendments of the constitution

-VOTERS

You need 12% of the total registered voters

wherein each legislative district is represented by

at least 3% of its total registered voters.

These two must concur with each other OW the

proposal is invalid.

-SIGNATURE

The petition itself must be signed by the voters

IOW you cannot only attach a blank papers to the

petition. (Lambino vs Comelec).

This is the reason why the petition for the



3/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


change of system of government from presidential

to parliamentary was dismissed by SC and

confirmed by SC because it was improperly done.

So if you were to propose an amendment

imitated by the people, they must sign the petition

itself.

Q: Is the provision on the constitution authorizing

the people to propose amendments on the

constitution self executing as in the case ofSantiago

vs Ramos?

A: no. SC said RA 6735 is insufficient to provide for

mechanism or procedure on how people can

propose amendments to the constitution.

Since it is lacking in provision, it is presumed that

people, without legislation cannot propose

amendments to the constitution.

Q: What would be the justification, should they beallowed?

A: It boils down to their being sovereign. It

becomes a political question. It is up to them to

decide. (Lambino vs Comelec)

But the prevailing jurisdiction is people cannot

propose amendments to the constitution although it

is mandated but the provision is not self executory.

B. SUBMISSION

There is consultation among the people for a better

understanding of the proposed change.

PIECE MEAL SUBMISSION of proposed changes isprohibited. Should there be any submission, it has to be

the whole thing for the better understanding of the

relationship of the proposed changes to the constitution.

C. RATIFIATION

When does the amendment take effect?

Upon ratification by majority votes cast in a plebiscite

called for the purpose, not a referendum. This is based

on plurality. Not based on majority voters.

As to basis:1. EMOCRATIC REPUBLICAN

-depend on the form of government that is provided in the

constitution itself

PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION

-written

-enacted

-rigid

-democratic/republican

-presidential

CONSTITUTION VS STATUTE

Both provide for how government should be managed o

provide for powers or limitation or the exercise of he

powers or define relationship between the government and

governed.

The difference is that, the CONSTITUTION is the highest law

of the land. So if it is n conflict of the statute passed bycongress, it should always prevail as the statute is based on

the constitution.

The constitution provides for the basic principles.

The STATUTE provides for the details because the

constitution cannot be detailed that might result to the

misunderstanding of the meaning of the provisions. It has to

be able to cover everything from today and future needs of

the government and the people. Statue provides for the

details of the broad constitution for effective enforcement

or implementation.

The constitution is the direct act of the people because

without their ratification, the constitution does not take

effect.

Whereas the statute is being only assed by the

representatives of the people through congress.

CONSTUTION VS ORGANIC LAWS

Remember you have organic laws passed during the

American occupation like Philippine Bill of 1902, Jones Law

of 1916 and Tydings McDuffy Law.

They are similar in a sense that organic laws also provide fo

the structure, organization and operation of the governmen

at the time. It even provided for the bill of rights and a

definition of citizenship.

A difference between these laws is that while the constitution

a direct act of the people, organic laws are passed by the

representatives of the people. During that time, the US

congress.



4/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


1987 CONSTITUTION

Going back to the kinds of laws used s basis in the

understanding of government and the relationship between

the government and governed, we also go into a particular

law that we will use in understanding the government.

EFFECTIVITY

When did the 1987 Constitution take effect?You have learned that it is prepared by a Constitutional

Commission pursuant to Proclamation number 9 by then

President Aquino under the Revolutionary Government

consisting of 50 non elected by appointed members, from

the different sectors of society.

After they have drafted, it was ratified by the people on Feb

2, 1987. It was declared to have been validly ratified in Feb

11, 1987 by the Exec Order 50 by President Aquino.

Because there are provisions in 1987 constitution that were

inconsistent with 1973, and therefore they are deemed

repealed.For example, death penalty. 1973 does not prohibit death

penalty. But the 1973 has expressly prohibited death penalty

except when congress by compelling reason, congress will

pass a law for heinous crimes and impose death penalty.

Therefore there was a law passed defining heinous crimes

and providing death penalty bit was repealed lately.

Is death penalty abolished in 1987 constitution? Yes. That is

the GR. The exception is when there is reservation by

congress to pass a law defining what heinous crimes are and

imposing death penalty.

If 1973 does not prohibit but 1987 prohibits, assuming that

there is no law yet, here is on convicted in 1985 to be

executed in 1988, should he be executed?If the constitution took effect on Feb 2, 1987 and he is to be

executed on Feb 5, 1987, then the execution is against the

constitution.

But if the constitution took effect on Feb 11, the execution

will still be in accordance with the law because what will

govern is the 1973 constitution.

This was the issue in the case ofDe Leon vs Esguerra. There

was an appointment of he OIC because under the Freedom

Constitution, the term of office of local officials then actually

already expired but they were asked to hold over until they

will be replaced by OICs through the Ministry of the

Government.

And then there was the 1987 Constitution, saying that they

will not be replaced anymore because they have to hold on

until elections will be called.

The Barangay Captain was replaced on Feb 9.

If the constitution took effect on Feb 2, the replacement is

illegal because the transitory provision of the constitution

says that they have to hold office until election is called.

But if the constitution took effect on Feb 11, then the

replacement is valid.

SC said THE CONSTITUTION TOK EFFECT ON THE DATE OF

RATIFICATION FEB 2, 1987.

What is the constitutional basis? Sec 27 Art 18 of the

Constitution.

Section 27. This Constitution shall take effect immediately upon its

ratification by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite held for the purposeand shall supersede all previous Constitutions.

ELEMENTS OF A STATE

As you have learned in your first year, the study of politica

law basically a study about the state and when you study the

state, you have to go about its elements.

From the POV of Political law, there are only four elements:

1. people

2. territory

3. government

4. sovereignty

From the POV of International law, for a state to be

considered as such, two other elements must be present:

5. degree of civilization acceptable by the Family of Nations

6. recognition of the Family of Nations

PREAMBLEWe, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in

order to build a just and humane society, and establish a Government thatshall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common goodconserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and ouposterity, the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule olaw and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace, doordain and promulgate this Constitution.

It is an introduction only. It is not part of the constitution, it is

not even necessary. To a certain extent, it has its practica

use which is to indicate the source of sovereignty.

The provisions in the preamble will help or guide the

members of congress and SC and other courts in construing

the provisions of the constitution because the constitution is

founded on the purposes as enumerated in the preamble.

IMPLORING THE AID OF ALMIGHTY GOD

Does this violate the separation of church and state?

Because this is just an assertion of the kind of people that

we are. This is not a conferment of rights. This does not

impose religion but only a declaration that we believe ingod.

So you cannot go to court and use preamble for you assertion

on you freedom of religion because, like art 2 is not sel

executing. It is not a source of rights or obligations.



5/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


PURPOSES

1. to build a just AND humane society

2. to establish a Government that shall embody our ideals

and aspirations

3. to promote the common good (not general welfare)

4. to conserve and develop our patrimony

5. to secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of

independence and democracy under the rule of law and aregime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace

1. TERRITORY ART 1ARTICLE I - NATIONAL TERRITORYThe national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the

islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which thePhilippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial,fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, thesubsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around,between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of theirbreadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

NATIONAL TERRITORY COMPOSITION

1. Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters

embraced therein

2. all other territories over which the Philippines has

sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its:

a. terrestrial domains

b. fluvial domains

c. aerial domains

including its

d. territorial sea

e. seabed

f. subsoil

g. insular shelves

h. other submarine areas3. waters

-around, between, and connecting the islands of the

archipelago,

-regardless of their breadth and dimensions

ARCHIPELAGO

The kind of territory you have is archipelago. So you have to

understand what an archipelago is.

Two definitions:

1. a body of water studded with several islands

2. a group of islands surrounded or separated by sea waters

What do we follow under UNCLOS UN Convention Law of

the Seas?

An archipelago is a body of water studded with several

islands.

AFTER BREAK

ACQUISITION OF THE ISLANDS

How did we acquire the islands comprising the Philippine

archipelago?

Primarily we acquire them by cession, except for the

Batanes islands which we have acquired through long

occupation and possession.

How was the transfer made?Through the Treaty of Paris which was entered into by

Spain and US on Dec 10, 1898 which was amended by two

more treaties in 1900 transferring the Turtle Islands and

Mangsi Islands. And then you have the Great Britain and US

treaty, the Treaty of Washington, which also ceded two

more islands.

TN that basically, these islands that consists of the Philippine

archipelago was acquired by us through transfer.

The only islands not part of those islands is the Batanes

Islands in fact they were apparently excluded in the Treaty

of Paris. That is the reason why we need to define thenational territory under the 1935 Constitution to include the

Batanes Islands which has the phrase all those belonging

to the Philippines by historic right or by legal title.

TN that these Philippine archipelago, if you are asked what

provisions in the national territory hat expressly provide for

the adoption of the archipelagic doctrine, and that is one of

those that states or defines what comprises the Philippine

territory which says - the Philippine archipelago, with all the islandand waters embraced therein.

IOW it does not consist only of the islands. It also includes the

waters embraced in the archipelago.

TERRITORIES NOT FOUND I NTE ARCHIPELAGO

What are these territories? - all other territories over which thePhilippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction.

TN that the conjunctive word is OR, not and.

JURISDICTION is when you put up a government and you have

the laws enforced by the government.

But there are instances when we are claiming certain

territories where we have not established Philippine

government there but we are claiming as part of our

national territory. The legal basis for that is SOVEREIGNTY.

Sovereignty could either be:

1. Emperium

2. Dominium

EMPERIUM meaning acts of sovereignty, meaning exercise

of governmental powers.

So if we claim a property under the principle of emporium

it belongs to the state in its sovereign capacity. It is not

subject to tax and any suit against the property that belongs

to the state in its sovereign capacity, the state canot be



6/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


sued.

Under he principle of DOMINIUM where the property is

being owned by the government in it proprietary capacity.

IOW it refers to the legal title.

We might not have established a government there but as

far as we are concerned, it belongs to us by either historic

right or legal title.

So on jurisdiction, it is obvious that there has to be a

government established. Like the one we established in

Kalayaan Islands which is part of Palawan. Or the

government in Scarborough Shoal which is part of Zambales.

These are examples of territories being part if he Philippines

over which the Philippines has jurisdiction.

Remember that we also have claims over Sabah and North

Borneo. To some jurists, they would say that we have both

emperium and dominium over the territory. The basis of

which is historic right as well as legal title.It was allegedly owned by a Sultan of Solo and then it was

even to the Datu of North Borneo and it was leased to the

Britished Indies Company which is a British owned

corporation of the government. They turned over the

territory to the Malaysian Government and that is the

reason why Malaysia is claiming it.

But as far as Philippines is concerened, the sultan of Solo has

transferred the rights to the Philippine government so that

they can make a legal claim over the property.

It became more of a controversy by reason of the Jabadah

Massacre that compelled us to drop our claim over Sabah.

To remove the irritant of the relationship between Malaysia

and the Philippines, we rephrased the provision on thedefinition of the national territory and instead of adopting

by historic right or by legal title, we change it to and all

other territories which the Philippines has jurisdiction or

sovereignty.

Always remember that this does not preclude us from

claiming properties which we have not established a

government, however we have sovereignty over them by

reason of historic right or legal title.

Likewise, we are not precluded from claiming future

properties. For as long as the mode of acquisition is

acceptable by international standards, and not by invasion.

It could be by purchase.

So far we are claiming the Spratley Islands against other

countries. Also certain portions of Kalayaan Islands.

Remember that these islands like Kalayaan and Scarborough

Shoal are found outside the archipelago. If we are to

consider the territorial seas as part or belonging to these

territories of which the Philippines has jurisdiction or

sovereignty, we do not follow the normal baseline method

because ours is an archipelago. What we have adopted is

the ARCHIPELAGIC DOCTRINE.

ARCHIPELAGIC DOCTRINE

The waters around the islands, between or connecting

regardless of the deepness and the wideness belong to the

internal waters of the Philippines.

How do you determine the internal waters of these islands

considering the Kalayaan Group of Islands and Scarborough

Shoal?

We adopt the straight baseline method. You determine the

outermost islands of the archipelago. You imagine an

archipelago that looks like a rectangle if we are to conside

all the islands in the archipelago.

You have to connect the outermost points of the

outermost islands by a straight line.

Because of this, it is considered that all islands inside are

considered internal waters. They are considered like riverslakes and swamps, regardless of deepness and wideness

separating the islands.

They are not even considered maritime domain. They are

simply internal waters.

This had been objected to b the members of the UN when the

had the UNCLOS because they are saying that it is not fai

because while the Philippines has internal waters, they have

a claim over territorial seas or the maritime domain which is

12 NM from the normal baseline.

So they wanted us to redraw our internal waters in order hat

they would be able to determine the extent of our interna

waters.And so this prompted congress in May 2009 that there should

be proper determination of internal waters or archipelagic

doctrine. They had RA 9522.

RA 9522

The law withdrew the baseline to comply with the UNCLOS

requirements for archipelagic state, in the process excluding

the Kalayaan Group of Islands and the Scarborough Shoal.

So what looks like rectangular becomes triangular now

because they were excluded.

So how are these islands now treated if they are excluded

from the main archipelago in the determination of interna

waters or the archipelagic waters?

They will be simply be treated as regime of islands.

So you will determine its terrestrial domain following the

normal baseline, around the islands will be the basis of the

determination of the extent of jurisdiction over the sea

waters. They are just simply considered as outside of the

main archipelago.

So when you connect the outermost islands, you do not



7/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


include the Kalayaan Group of Islands and the Scarborough

Shoal. So you will just focus on the main archipelago.

ARCHIPELAGIC WATERS

Then you go by the archipelagic waters. It would be from the

normal baseline to the outermost islands, 12 NM.

So inside are considered as internal waters.

MARITIME DOMAIN OR TERRITORIAL SEAS

Now you go by the determination of the maritime domain or

territorial seas.

You have 12 NM from the normal baseline of the outermost

islands.

INTERNATIONAL WATERS

Beyond that, that is considered as international waters.

CONTINENTAL SHELF AND INSULAR SHELF

TN you also have as part of our territory, continental shelf

and insular shelf.This could be the continent that is submerged under the

water. While it is low tide, it is dry. So you will know that it is

still an extension of the island.

But while it is high tide, it is covered by the sea water, and it

could go beyond 12 NM from the normal baseline of the

outermost island.

PRINCIPLE OF CONTIGUOUS ZONE

Would that still be part of the national territory?

No. beyond the 12 NM from the normal baseline of the

outermost islands, it is no longer part of the national

territory.

The Philippines however has jurisdiction up to 24 NM from

the normal baseline. IOW 2 more NM from the end of 12

miles of the territorial seas.

Again, that is not part of the national territory as it is beyond

the 12 NM. But for purposes of implementing or protecting

our:

1. fiscal laws

2. sanitary laws

3. immigration laws

4. customs laws

We can run after these people up to 24 NM from the normal

baseline or 12 NM from the end of the territorial seas

consisting of 12 NM from the normal baseline.

This is the PRINCIPLE OF CONTIGUOUS ZONE. It extends only

up to 12NM from territorial seas. Although not part of the

territory, the coastal state may exercise jurisdiction to

prevent infringement or violation of customs, fiscal,

immigration and sanitary laws.

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

For purposes of enforcing the laws I have enumerated, you

can go beyond up to 12 more NM if it is within the

contiguous zone but it does not belong to the Philippine

territory but you can explore the natural resources beyond

the 12 NM up to 200 NM.

That is EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE. It is not part of the

territory where we have exclusive sovereign right to exploreexploit, conserve, and manage the natural resources which

may consist of the establishment and use of artificial islands

installations and structures for marine and scientific

research and the protection and preservation of marine

environment.

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF RA 9522

So what must be emphasized as to its constitutionality is RA

9522. It is the definition of the archipelagic baseline.

It is questioned because it will in effect change the definition

of the national territory.

The basis of the definition in the delineation of theboundaries, latitudes and longitudes, or the extent of ou

jurisdiction in the archipelago is the Treaty of Paris.

With the adoption of RA 9522, this has practically changed

because of the reduction of our claim over the interna

waters by excluding the Kalayaan Group of Islands and the

Scarborough Shoal from the main archipelago in the

determination of the internal waters.

Territorial seas refer to maritime domain, 12 NM.

The seabed is the portion under the sea which could be rich

in oil and other resources.

Talking about subsoil, to what extent do we have jurisdiction?

There is no limitation on that under the international laws.Then you have the insular shelves and other submarine areas

which include the trench.

WATERS CONNECTING THE ISLANDS

The other definition of the adoption of the internationa

doctrine is one that says the waters around, between and

connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of the

breadth and dimension. They are considered as part of

internal waters.

FOREIGN EMBASSIES

How about foreign embassies in the country as part of the

national territory?

Yes. But we do not exercise jurisdiction in these premises

because by and agreement, treaty or customs o

international law that embassies are treated as extensions

of the country that it represents.

Here, we are not exercising the acts of sovereignty. But

definitely, it is part of the national territory (Reagan vs CIR)



8/112


9/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


DEFINITION OF CITIZEN

Until there was that definition in Jul 1, 1902 by virtue of the

Philippine Bill of 1902 referring to all inhabitants, subjects of

Spain as of April 11, 1899 and the children of these

inhabitants.

USE OD JUS SOLI

Between Dec 10, 1988 to July 1, 1902, the jus soli wasrecognized. In fact this was enunciated in the case ofRoa vs

Collector of customs, then it was corrected when the SC said

we do not recognize jus soli principle. What we recognize in

the Philippines is only jus sanguinis.

But because even if the judgment of the court may be

erroneous, but because the judgment of the court has

become final and executory, the principle of res judicata

applies.

But we have never really recognized jus soli. It was only for

practical reason because of the absence of definition of

citizens during the American occupations first period.

ACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP THROUGH NATURALIZATION

Of course this refers to foreigners who wants to become

Filipino citizens.

How about stateless individuals? Can they be naturalized?

For as long as they have the qualifications required by the

law and none of the disqualifications, then they may qualify.

ACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP BY MARRIAGE not adopted

Then you have by marriage.

If a Filipina marries a foreigner and the law of the husband

foreigner will consider her as a citizen of the country, thenshe will have the citizenship of her husband, at the same

time retain her Philippine citizenship.

In the Philippines, do we adopt the principle that one may

become a Filipino by marriage?

NO. if you are a foreigner, wife has to go through

ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION. She has to prove that

she does not suffer any of the disqualification, IOW, it is not

automatic.

ACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP BY ADOPTION not adopted

We do not also recognize adoption as a mode of adopting

citizenship in the Philippines OW what is the use of

naturalization if we recognize adoption.

IMPORTANCE OF CITIZENSHIP

Why is it important why we have to know who are the

citizens of the Philippines?

Because there are certain rights that can only be enjoyed

by the citizens of the country and enjoyed by the citizens of

the country or reserved only for the citizens of the country.

KINDS OF CITIZENS

1. JURIDICAL CITIZENS

2. NATURAL PERSONS

FILIPINO CORPORATION

Who are considered Filipino corporation?

Hen the capital o9f that corporation is at least owned by

60% of Filipino citizens, natural persons.

RIGHTS FOR NATURAL FILIPINO CITIZENS

Examples are to run for public office and to be employed in

the government.

Sec 18, art 11 of the constitution requires that all public

officers and employees must be loyal to the Republic of the

Philippines and its laws.

So that any change of citizenship from a Filipino to immigrant

should be dealt with by law. That would be a ground for

dismissal from the service.

ART 4 SEC 1Section 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.

ART 4 SEC 1 PAR 1[1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of

this Constitution;

When did the Philippine constitution take effect?

Feb 2, 1987

Who is covered by this?This covers all those who are already citizens of the

Philippines when 1987 Constitution was adopted in Feb 2.

Meaning those who are citizens under 1973 constitution

which says:

a. those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the

adoption of the 1973 Constitution which was adopted in Jan

17, 1973.

b. those whose fathers and mothers are citizens of the

Philippines

c. those who are born of Filipino mothers and elected

Filipino citizenship

b. those naturalized in accordance with law

In the first paragraph of 1973 Constitution, we refer to the

1935 Constitution, which says:

a. those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the

adoption of the 1935 Constitution, May 14, 1935

b. those who were born in the Philippines of foreigne

parents who before the adoption of 1935 constitution was

elected to office

c. those whose fathers were citizens of the Philippines

d. those whose mothers are Filipinos and upon reaching the



10/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


age of majority and upon reasonable time elected Filipino

citizenship

e. those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

First paragraph of 1935 Constitution, who are covered

there?

Those who are defined as citizens under the Philippine Bill

of 1902 pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty of Paris, asamended b Jones Law of 1916.

Who are the citizens of the Philippines under the Philippine

Bill of 1902?

It refers to all inhabitants subject of Spain of the Philippine

islands as of April 11, 1899 (exchange of

instruments/treaties bet Spain and US).

Who are the INHABITANTS?

a. native born, the indios of the Philippine islands

b. residents or inhabitants coming from the Spanish

Peninsulares who as of April 1899 were residing in thePhilippine islands and had chosen to remain in the Philippine

islands

c. those who were inhabitants of the islands of Spanish

papers n or before April 11, 1988

Tecson vs Comelec

Lorenzo Poe died somewhere n 1954. They were

wondering what was the citizenship of Fernado Poe Jr

because the father declared himself as a Spaniard as

indicated in his marriage certificate with his first marriage.

The grandfather, Lorenzo was an inhabitant of the

Philippines presumably because he died in the Philippines at

the age of 0s in 1954. So he must have resided in thePhilippines as of 1899.

Under the Philippine Bill of 1902, the subsequent children

of the inhabitants are considered Filipino citizens as well.

Because the father of Fernando was the son of Lorenzo,

then he must be a Filipino citizen even if he declares himself

as a Spaniard.

How could FPJ be a Filipino citizen when the father was not

married to the mother? If he is illegitimate, he must follow

the legally known parent and the legally known parent is the

mother, who is a US citizen.

According to opinion of the friends of the SC, FPJ was

recognized by his father. The 1935 constitution provides that

citizens are those whose fathers are citizens of the

Philippines. It does not qualify whether the father was

legitimate or illegitimate.

The child who follows the name of the father is presumed

to be recognized by the father. In the case, it is presumed

that FPJ was recognized by the father because of the fact

that after his birth, there is an affidavit of the sister of his

father that his father continued to cohabit with the mother.

So presumably he was recognized.

Because the father is Filipino, then FPJ is a Filipino citizen.

Case: Vallez vs Comelec

The father del Rosario was a Filipino when he migrated to

Australia. He got married to an Australian citizen and had his

daughter.

The daughter went to Davao and ran for public office unti

she ran for a higher position as governor when her

citizenship was questioned because not only was she

registered an Australian citizen, she was also carrying anAustralian passport. She was born in Australia. The mother

was an Australian citizen, and the father was already an

Australian citizen.

Then it was discovered that the father was the son of an

inhabitant of the Philippine territory as of April 11, 1899.

Being one, he must be Filipino citizen. If he acquires

another citizenship, it is not conclusive that he has lost his

Philippine citizenship. And because he had lost it at the time

of birth of his daughter, by jus sanguinis, she must also be a

Filipino citizen. In fact, a natural born citizen of the

Philippines.

TN the provision in the 1935 Constitution with respect to

foreigners who were born in the Philippines. Meaning those

of foreign parents. However despite being a foreigner

elected to a public office.

Chong Bian

The father was elected as an officer in Misamis. When Chong

Bian acquired a shipping business, his citizenship was

questioned because then he was already born when the

father was elected to a public office.

The father of course became Filipino citizen. how come that

he too became a Filipino citizen?

Because at the time, he was still a minor. By DERIVATIVECITIZENSHIP, he too became a Filipino citizen and thus he is

qualified to engage in a business which is only reserved for

Filipino citizens.

In fact, the children subsequent thereto are considered

natural born citizen.

FATHERS ARE CITIZEN

At the time, only those who are born to Filipino fathers can

adopt the citizenship.

MOTHERS ARE CITIZEN

What about if he is born to a Filipina?

He is still also a Filipino citizen for as long as she is not

married to a foreigner.

Meaning, if father and mother is Filipino, no choice, child is

Filipino. Not because the mother is Filipino but because the

father is Filipino.



11/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


FILIPINA MARRIED TO A FOREIGNER - 1935 CONSTITUTION

But if the mother is Filipina, and there is a foreigner, under

the 1935 Constitution, she loses her citizenship because

there is a presumption that she acquires her citizenship of

her foreigner husband.

Thats the reason why the child during his minority has no

choice. He is considered a foreigner.

But he is given the option to elect Philippine citizenship.The requirement however is that the mother must be a

Filipino citizen at least at the time of marriage to foreigner

father. And the child was born before Jan 17, 1973.

But if the Filipina is not married to the foreigner, the child

follows the citizenship of the legally known parent.

As far as the child is concerned, the legally known parent is

the mother.

ADOPTED CHILD OF FILIPINO FATHER

If father is a Filipino and the child is adopted, can the child

become a Filipino citizen?No. In this jurisdiction, what we follow is the principle of jus

sanguinis. You cannot acquire Filipino citizenship by

adoption. There is naturalization for the child to acquire

Philippine citizenship.

The only exception to this is RA 9225 which is the DERIVATIVE

CITIZENSHIP under DUAL CITIZENSHIP ACT that even the

adopted children of a former natural born citizen be

patriated under this provision will become a natural born

citizen being a minor child, although adopted.

Again, adoption is not a mode of acquiring Filipino citizenship.

ART 4 SEC 1 PAR 2[2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;

FILIPINA MARRIED TO A FOREIGNER - 1973 & 1985

CONSTITUTION

Relating that provision to 1973 and 1985, here, the female

counterpart of the Filipino citizen is put to a level equal to

the male counterpart so that of the mother is Filipino

citizen, regardless who the husband is for as long as she did

not lose her Filipino citizenship at the time of forth of the

child, child is Filipino citizen.

But TN of the cut off period. The child has to be born at least

on Jan 17, 1973 or thereafter to apply that provision. The

mother at the time of the birth must be a Filipino citizen for

that child to be considered a Filipino.

If the mother was married under 1935 constitution, even if

the child was born after 1973 Constitution was adopted, the

child is not a Filipino. At the time of birth, the mother has

already lost her Filipino citizenship by virtue of her marriage

to a foreigner husband under the 1935 Constitution.

When the Filipina under the 1935 constitution, she is

presumed to have acquired the citizenship of her foreigne

husband. And thus automatically, she loses her Philippine

citizenship.

IOW the burden of proof lies with her that she never lost her

citizenship because she never acquired the citizenship of he

husband.

But the law presumes that by their marriage, she acquiredthe citizenship of her husband and thus she loses Philippine

citizenship.

The citizenship of the child if born B4 Jan 17, 1973 is the

fathers citizenship. He has no choice. Because now the

mother is foreigner just like the father.

But the child, only during his minority is considered a

foreigner. The child is given the chance to become a Filipino

citizen upon reaching the age of majority (21) or within

reasonable period of time (3 years), he elects Philippine

citizenship, then he becomes a Filipino citizen.

If he does not elect Filipino citizenship, then he remains aforeigner.

If the parents married in 1965 and child was born in 1974

what is the citizenship of the child during his minority? Does

he need to elect Filipino citizenship in order to become

Filipino citizen?

The child is a foreigner. He cannot elect Philippine

citizenship.

Mother lost her Filipino citizenship at the time of marriage

So at 1974, at the time of birth of the child, the mother is

already a foreign unless she acquired her Filipino citizenship

at the time of birth of the child.

He cannot elect Philippine citizenship. Because from birththe mother is already a foreigner.

REQUIREMENTS TO ELECT FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP

1. the mother, must have been married under 1935

Constitution who is a Filipino citizen at the time of marriage

2. the child must be born before Jan 17, 1973

MARRIAGE AFTER 1973

Would it make any difference if the mother is married to the

father at 1973 Constitution?

Yes. Because when the Filipina marries the husband

foreigner, she does not lose her citizenship unless by her act

or omission she is deemed by the law to have renounced her

citizenship.

In which case, because she is presumed to have remained

Filipino citizen, at the time of birth the child is a Filipino

citizen because the law says those whose fathers and

mothers are citizens

Does he need to elect?

No need. Because he is already a Filipino citizen.



12/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


EFFECT OF ELECTION OF FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP NATURAL

BORN

If he a natural born citizen if he elects Philippine citizenship

assuming that the mother was married to the father before

1973 Constitution and he is born under 1935 Constitution.

He elected Filipino citizenship before 1973 Constitution was

enacted, is he a natural born Filipino citizen?

Yes. He is presumed to be natural born. There is nodefinition then.

Under 1973, there is a clear definition those who are

citizens from birth without having to perform any act in

order to acquire Filipino citizenship is a natural born.

To elect Filipino citizenship is perfecting or acquiring Filipino

citizenship.

Under that definition, a citizenship by election is not a natural

born.

So that if this person was born under 1935 Constitution,

elected Filipino citizenship under 1973 Constitution, he is aFilipino citizen but not a natural born.

However, it is anomalous because while these two persons

are situated under the same circumstances, the only

difference is the date of election, one is considered a Filipino

citizen and the other is not.

Precisely this was corrected under the 1973 constitution. That

even those who are elected as Filipino citizenship are now

considered as natural born citizens. Apply retroactively.

So there is no more problem in determining whether he is

natural born or not. Even if he elected Filipino citizenship, he

is a natural born citizen, therefore qualified to run for office

that requires only natural born citizens.

MANNER OF ELECTION

How is election be made in order to be considered a citizen?

1. taking of oath of allegiance

2. participating in election by

a. running for public office

b. voting

c. actively campaigning for a candidate

3. declares under oath as a Filipino citizen

APPLICATION UNTIL 1997

Citizen by election applies only until 1997. Because if the child

was born after 1973, there is no need to elect Filipino

citizenship because he is already considered a Filipino

citizen.

So the cut off is 1973. Plus 21, that means 1994. Plus 3 years

1997 (3 years after reaching the age of majority).

He has to elect by the age of 21 or within reasonable period

of time.

June 6, 2011

ART 4 SEC 1 PAR 2[2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;

RETAINING CITIZENSHIP

This refers only to children born in 1973 or thereafter

because upon effectivity of 1973 Constitution, if a Filipinamarries a foreigner, she does not automatically lose her

citizenship.

She retains her Filipino citizenship unless by her act or

omission she is deemed under the t5he law to have

renounces her citizenship.

So at the time of the birth of the child, as long as the mother

although married to the father has remained a Filipino

citizen, the child is a Filipino citizen, regardless of the

citizenship of the father who is marries to the father.

MARRIED BEFORE 1935, BORN AFTER 1987

But if the mother was married under the 1935 Constitution

under which he is considered to have lost her Filipino

citizenship by virtue of the marriage to the foreigner and the

child is born only after the 1987 Constitution, what would be

the citizenship of the child?

It depends at the citizenship of the mother at the time o

birth.

If at the time of birth, the e mother has not reacquired her

Philippine citizenship, then she remains a foreigner. In which

case, the child has no choice. Both parents are foreigners

And even if he elects Philippine citizenship, he cannot

acquire Philippine citizenship.

REQUIREMENTS OF CITIZENSHIP BY ELECTIONBecause here to avail of CITIZENSHIP BY ELECTION pursuant

to the provisions of 1935 Constitution, TN of the

requirements:

1. born before Jan 17, 1973

2. mother is Filipino at least at the time of the marriage to the

foreigner husband

Even if the mother has become a foreigner at the time of

the birth of the child, the child has a chance of becoming a

Filipino by election upon reaching the age of majority o

within a reasonable period of time.

ART 4 SEC 1 PAR 3[3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect

Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and

We have discussed this already.

The is only temporary and transitional in a sense that by 1994

to 1997, there will be no more children by election because

the presumption is the child must have either elected

Filipino citizenship or the time has passed for him to elect

Filipino citizenship.



13/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


CITIZENS BY ELECTION ARE ATURAL BORN CITIZENS

Even those who elected Filipino citizens are now considered

as NATURAL BORN CITIZENS under the 1987 Constitution.

So regardless whether he has elected Filipino citizenship

either before or after Jan 17, 1973, the child is definitely a

natural born Filipino citizen.

You go back to the definition of the natural born citizens in

the 1987 Constitution, it includes those who elected


ART 4 SEC 1 PAR 4[4] Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

COMMONWEALTH ACT 473

This is the original provision on naturalization.

If you are a foreigner and you want to become a Filipino

citizen, then you have to apply for naturalization.

NATURALIZATION BY A FOREIGNER

Naturalization by a foreigner by a foreigner is not a matter of

right, it s a privilege, an act of grace granted by a sovereign

state to a foreigner.

Therefore it is discretionary upon the state WON to confer

Filipino citizenship to a foreigner.

And in connection therewith, there are certain qualifications

that an applicant foreigner must possess and must also

avoid suffering any of the disqualifications provided by the

law.

And the law is very strict. You have to have all the

qualifications and none of the disqualifications.

NATURALIZATION BY A STATELESS INDIVIDUAL

How about if one is a stateless individual? Can he apply for

naturalization?

The law is silent regarding on that, for as long as he has all

the qualifications and none of the disqualifications.

QUALIFICATIONS

1. 21 years of age

2. of good moral character

3. resident of the Philippines continuously for 10 years

4. property of not less than 5k

5. children of school ages must be in public schools

6. able to read and write English and any of the Philippine

dialects

DISQUALIFICATIONS

1. believer in bigamy or polygamy

2. suffering from incurable and contagious disease

3. believer in the use of violence in asserting your principles

RECENT RULING OF QUALIFICATIONS AND

DISQUALIFICATIONS

Now, for as long as perhaps you do not have all the

qualification but you do not suffer any disqualification, you

may apply for naturalization which could either be judicial o

administrative or by legislation.

JUDICIAL NATURALIZATIONInsofar as judicial process, it is very tedious. You follow a

particular procedure:

1. make a declaration of intent to become a Filipino citizen

2. file intent with the OSG

3. wait for 1 year as SolGen investigates whether you have al

the qualification

4. issuance of certification by SolGen that you are qualified

5. file a petition with RTC

6. RTC to acquire jurisdiction will order the publication of the

petition in a newspaper of general circulation and the officia

gazette

7. hearing and reception of evidence8. judgment and grant of petition

9. waiting period of 2 years

10. court schedules taking of oath of allegiance

REVOCABLE - JUDGEMENT ON NATURALIZATION

TN the judgment in the naturalization case will never become

final. Anytime it will be subject to revocation upon motion

by the SolGEn.

QUESTION ON VALIDITY OF NATURAZATION PROCEEDINGS

If there is any question on the validity of the naturalization

proceedings, in the case of Limkaichong vs Comelec, that

only the SolGen or the government can question the validityof a naturalization proceedings in a DIRECT ACTION and not

in a collateral proceedings such as a petition fo

disqualification of a candidate in an election case

Case: Limkaichong vs Comelec

There was a question on the qualification of the candidate

because Limkaichong who is now a congresswoman was the

child of a former Chinese citizen who applied for

naturalization.

According to the petitioner, the fathers naturalization is

invalid and therefore the father never became a Filipino

citizen. Naturally, the children are not considered Filipino

citizen. thus they ask for the disqualification of Limkaichong.

COMELEC dismissed the petition and SC reviewed by SC and

SC said that only the government or the SolGen can question

thevalidity of the naturalization proceedings.



14/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


CONSEQUENCES OF THE GRANT OF NATURALIZATION TO A

FOREIGNER

1. foreigner becomes a citizen of the Philippines

2. wife may become a Filipino citizen through

ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION

-there is no acquisition of Filipino citizenship by marriage

-by asking for the cancellation of ACR and by proving thatshe suffers none of the disqualifications provided by law

-it is not automatic

3. as to children:

a. those who are already born at the time of the approval of

naturalization of the father, consider whether he is a minor

or of age at the time

a.1. if he is already of age, he does not become a Filipino

citizen. if he wants to, e has to apply for naturalization

a.2. if he is a minor, he by DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP

becomes a Filipino citizen

a.3. if at the time of the approval, he is outside thePhilippines, he is only Filipino during minority. Upon

reaching the age of majority, he is given the choice either

to remain a Filipino citizen or revert back to original

citizenship of the father

-those who have become Filipino citizen by derivative

citizenship, they are considered NATURALIZED Filipino

CITIZENS.

b. those who are born after the father becomes a Filipino by

naturalization, they are citizens

-they are considered NATURAL BORN.

-you go back to the definition, those who are citizensfrom birth. Because the father at the time of birth is a

Filipino citizen, then the children are Filipino citizens

Declaration of an administrative body or a certification does

not change a judicial judgment

-Case: Kilos Bayan vs Ong

This is the appointment of Ong as Justice of SC where these

was a question on his citizenship. He was a Sandigan Bayan

Justice.

Somebody asked for an injunction not to issue the

appointment considering that there was a question on his

appointment.

He was born to a father who is naturalized and a Filipina

mother. The mother was a daughter of his grandfather who

is naturalized, originally Chinese married to a Filipina.

Grandfather became naturalized. The mother at the time

was still a minor, and by derivative citizenship, the mother

became a Filipino citizen.

The mother got married to a Chinese who at the time was

still applying for naturalization. At the time of marriage, the

husband was still a Chinese citizen. During the 1935

Constitution, the mother automatically lost her citizenship.

Eventually the father became a Filipino by naturalization.

But the birth certificate of Ong says that he is a Filipino

citizen by virtue of derivative citizenship.

When he took the bar exam, there was a question on his

citizenship because his family name is foreign sounding.

A declaration made, a certification of DOJ through the

bureau of immigration declaring him as a natural born

citizen. And this was his basis in the application for judgeshipand justiceship in SB where it requires natural born citizen.

When this was questioned in the application for justiceship

in SC, SC looked into the matter.

In fact Ong was asking why now look at the application

when there was never a question on his application when

was not questioned in the qualification for SB.

SC said that it is a CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE OF SIGNIFICANT

MATTER considering that it goes into the qualifications of an

SC justice required by the constitution. The constitution

requires that in order for one to become a natural born

citizen, he has to be a natural born citizen.

SC declared that a declaration of an administrative body or

a certification does not change a judicial judgment that

states the father was naturalized citizen and therefore by

derivative citizenship, the child who was then a mino

cannot be natural born.

Ong was banking on the fact that the mother was a Filipina

and that she never lost her citizenship upon marries and at

the time of his birth, he was a Filipino citizen.

SC said, if you are to CHANGE your BIRTH CERTIFICATE, you

cannot do that by a certification of an administrative body

like the Bureau of Immigration. That requires judicial changeor declaration.

For you to claim that you re natural born, you have to go to

court and make necessary changes in your birth certificate

and not by simply a declaration of an administrative body.

There was a petition to DECLARE ALL JUDGMENTS

RENDERED VOID because at the time he rendered the

judgment, he was disqualified supposedly to sit as justice o

SC for lack of the requisite citizenship of a natural born.

SC said that it is VALID having been rendered by a DE

FACTO OFFICER. The appointment was in good faith on the

assumption that he was qualified.

Ultimately there was a decision of SC declaring him as

natural born after his birth certificate has been corrected.



15/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


REVOCATIONOF NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS

Another point you should TN in naturalization is the

revocation. It is never final and executory, res judicata

principle does not apply.

EFFECT ON DEATH OF GRANTEE PENDING QUESTION ON

VALIDITY OF NATURALIZATION

What if the grantee of the citizenship has died already whenthere is the revocation of the naturalization? Is it deemed

mooted upon the death of the grantee?

That depends on the grounds of the revocation:

a. If the ground for revocation is that the JUDGMENT IS VOID

on the ground that he has disqualified, then it shall

CONTINUE because of the citizenship that has been also

extended to his minor children and to the wife.

Because when citizenship is granted, he becomes a Filipino.

The minor children and the wife will have some basis to

apply for naturalization before they can become Filipinos.

If revoked, naturally premised on the judgment being void,then there has never been any citizenship enjoyed or can be

transferred by the grantee.

So even after the death of the grantee, the action for

revocation on the decree of naturalization may still posper

b. If the ground for revocation is that the grantee has

VIOLATED THE CONDITIONS OF NATURALIZATION or he

LOST HIS QUALIFICATIONS THEREAFTER, (ex. convicted of

crime involving for moral turpitude), it will not prejudice

those who derived their citizenship from their father.

If the applicant grantee dies, then the case will have to be

dismissed as the case has become MOOT AND ACADEMIC.

MODES OF ACQUIRING CITIZENSHIP

1. from birth by blood relationship/ jus sanguinis

2. naturalization

You cannot acquire Filipino citizenship either by marriage or

by naturalization.

MODES OF LOSING CITIZENSHIPAccording to the modes provided for by law:

1. applying for a foreign citizenship/ naturalization of foreign

citizenship

Case: Labo vs Comelec

Faith healer who got married to an Australian citizen and

thereafter applied for naturalization in Australia. He

voluntarily and expressly renounced his Philippine

citizenship to become an Australian citizen.

By that act, he is deemed to have lost his Philippine

citizenship.

2. expatriationExpatriation has to be done expressly. It is not just a mere

declaration. It could be like:

a. taking an oath of allegiance to support and defend the

foreign government in applying for naturalization

b. taking an oath of allegiance to support the constitution of

the foreign country

Effect on carrying of foreign passport

In relation to this, the mere carrying of a foreign passport is

not considered as express renunciation of foreign

citizenship.

Effect on registration in Bureau of Immigration as aforeigner

A registration in the Bureau of Immigration that you are a

foreigner is not considered as an express renunciation of

foreign citizenship. It is only an ASSERTION OF A FOREIGN

CITIZENSHIP. But not express renunciation.

-Case: Aznar vs Comelec and Banez vs Comelec

-Case: Osmena

When he ran as governor, there was a question on the

citizenship because in the Bureau of Immigration, he

declared himself as a US citizen as well.

That is not considered loss of citizenship by expatriation. I

is a mere assertion of foreign citizenship but not conclusive

as to having renounced his Philippine citizenship, unless

there is proof that he has expressly renounced his foreign

citizenship.

3. serving the armed forces of a foreign country

Except where we have signed a mutual defense agreement

Unless by their act or omission, they have deemed to have

renounced their foreign citizenship, like applying fo

naturalization of US.



16/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


4. by marriage of Filipina to a foreigner, and by their actor

omission they are deemed to have renounced her

citizenship

But GR Filipinas marrying foreigners remain Filipinos.

5. deserter of the Armed Forces, convicted by final judgment

Especially during war time.

MODES OF REACQUIRING CITIZENSHIP AND REQUIREMENTS

1. naturalization

2. repatriation

1. NATURALIZATION

Naturalization could be:

a. judicial

b. administrative

c. through act of congress

1.A. JUDICIAL NATURALIZATIONJudicial, you have

1. Commonwealth Act 63 - for those who have lost and want

to reacquire

2. Commonwealth Act 473 - Original application for

naturalization by a foreigner

2. REPATRIATION

For purposes of reacquisition of Philippine citizenship, there

are several laws on repatriation:

a. RA 8171

b. RA 725

c. RA 9225

If you have lost you citizenship because you are married to a

foreigner and you want to reacquire your citizenship, you

can reacquire it by RA 8171, 725 or other laws on

repatriation.

2.A. RA 8171

If you have lost your citizenship because you have served

the allied forces during WW2, you can reacquire it by RA

8171.

Other grounds for RA 8171 are for reasons of economic and

political necessity.

REQUIREMENTS1. apply for repatriation with the Bureau of Immigration in

their Special Committee on Naturalization

2. take oath of allegiance

3. register oath of allegiance with the civil registry where you

last resided or presently residing at

4. furnish copy to the Bureau of Immigration through Specia

Committee on Naturalization

REQUIRMENT OF REGISTRATION IN CIVIL REGISTRY

It is not enough that you take your oath of allegiance. It has

to be registered.

Case: Frivaldo vs ComelecHe was disqualified.

He insisted that the moment he filed a certificate of

candidacy where he took his allegiance and made a

declaration that he is a Filipino citizen, in effect, he has

renounced his US citizenship. But he failed however to

register that he is a Filipino citizen in the nearest civi

registry where he was residing which is required under

8171.

RETROACTIVE FROM TIME OF FILING OF PETITION

You reacquire your citizenship from the time he filed his

petition for repatriation.

Which means that for as long as he complied with all therequirements for someone to run for an elective office

before he assumed office, he completed his requirements

and it was approved, then he is considered qualified for the

position.

Case:

He filed his petition for repatriation in 1997. In Mar 2004

he filed his certificate of candidacy. It was only on the date

of election when he completed his papers and registered his

oath of allegiance to he civil registry. Assumption of office is

on the 30th

day of June. Is he qualified to assume office?

Yes. While the approval was only on May, the effectivity

retroacts from the filing of the petition in 1997.

CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENT IS ONLY ON ASSUMPTION OF

OFFICE

The statute does not require that you have to be a citizen

on the day of election or on the day of appointment. The law

only requires age, residency, and other qualification but

never on citizenship.

For as long as upon assumption of office, you are a Filipino

citizen, you are qualified, because after all, the effectivity of



17/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


repatriation and the reacquisition of citizenship shall be

reckoned from the filing of the petition.

STATUS

Upon repatriation, he reacquires his original status as a

NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

2.C. RA 9225 DUAL PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP ACT

This took effect on August 29, 2010.

Who can apply? Any former natural born citizen who lost

their Philippine citizenship. There is no specific grounds on

the loss of citizenship.

WAYS ON BECOMING A DUAL CITIZEN

There are two ways on becoming a dual citizen.

1. loss by political and economic necessity

For one who have lost it already for reasons of political and

economic necessity; if he reacquires Filipino citizenship,does he lose his foreign citizenship?

The law is silent on that. By the opinion of SC, it says that

he has impliedly renounced his citizenship. But impliedly

only.

But whether he is still recognized as a citizen of that foreign

country, that is not a concern of the Philippine government.

as far as Philippine government is concerned, he is now a

Philippine citizen.

It is possible that he may not automatically lose his foreign

citizenship. So as a result of which, he becomes a Filipino

citizen and a citizen of the country where he was naturalized

as such.

2. application for naturalization in a foreign country

Another way of becoming a dual citizen is one who is now

Filipino citizen but applied for naturalization in a foreign

country.

Notwithstanding his application for naturalization in foreign

country, he retains his Filipino citizenship. The Philippines

doesnt care if he applied for a foreign citizenship in another

country. As far as the Philippines is concerned, you are a

Filipino citizen.

TN this takes effect only on August 29, 2003.

HOW TO APPLY FOR 9225 NOT RUN FOR OFFICE

That is not a problem at all if you do not run for public

office. All that you need to do is to:

1. take an oath of allegiance

2. pay the necessary fees

3. sign the form

CONSEQUENCES

1. you become again a natural born citizen.

2. minor children by derivative citizens also become natura

born citizens

-legitimate or illegitimate or adopted

-not married

-under 18 years old

3. wife has to prove that she suffers none of thedisqualification

4. grantee may vote under RA 9189, even if he continues to

reside in the foreign country where he is also a citizen

-Case: Lewis vs Comelec

Lewis became a citizen by virtue of RA 9225. When he

wanted to vote, he was refused by the consular office

saying that he has not complied with the requirement of

residency (6 months in place to vote, 1 year in the

Philippines)

The issue is whether they can vote under 9189 as

specifically authorized under 9225.

They are treated like OFWs and as such they areexpected to establish a residence here in the Philippines

They can vote but within a period of 3 years.

After all, what is important on residency is that you

have the intention to return to the country after you

have declared the specific residence in the Philippines.

5. may run for public office

6. may practice profession

ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FOR RUNNING IN PUBLIC

OFFICE

1. take oath of allegiance as required by law

2. expressly renounce all foreign citizenships (in writing)

This requirement does not apply for those who areconsidered as dual citizens because or birth.

NON APPLICATION TO DUAL CITIZENS NOT BY 9225

-Case: Mercado vs Manzano

-Case: Valles vs Comelec

Manzano had dual citizenship because he was born in

America, by principle of Jus soli, he is a foreign citizen

because both parents are Filipinos, he is also considered a

Filipino citizen.

When he ran as a vice mayor of Makati, there was a

question on ownership because he was carrying at the same

time a US passport.

As explained earlier, the carrying of passport is not a

conclusive proof of renunciation.

SC declared, THE MOMENT HE FILED THE CERTIFICATE OF

CANDIDACY, HE IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE ELECTED

PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP AS HIS SOLE CITIZENSHIP AND

RENOUNCED ALL OTHER FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP.

This principle will apply only to Filipinos who became dua

citizens not by virtue of RA 9225. Only those involuntary

acquisition of foreign citizenships such as because of the

application of jus soli.



18/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


-Case: Lopez vs Comelec

If he became a dual citizen because of his reacquiring

Philippine citizenship by virtue of 9225, for him to run for

public office, to qualify, he has to expressly renounce his

foreign citizenship.

EXCEPTION- WHEN CARRYING OF FOREIGN PASSPOSRT IS

CONSIDERED RENUNCIATION OF PHILPPINE CITIZENSHIP-Case: Yu

He became a naturalized Filipino citizen and

notwithstanding, continued to carry his Portuguese passport

and declared himself as a Portuguese citizen, this is an

exception to the principle that the mere carrying of a

passport is not a conclusive proof of renunciation of

Philippine citizenship, but in this case, it was considered an

exception where he is considered to have renounced his


EFFECT OF REPATRIATION ON NON MINOR CHILDREN

-Case: TabasaIf the kids are already of age, they cannot avail of the

privilege of Philippine citizenship through derivative

citizenship.

OTHER CASES

-Coroboro vs Comelec Feb 19, 2009

Tambunting, an owner of pawnshops in Mali, was enjoying

dual citizenship because he was born in US of Filipino

parents.

When he ran for election, his citizenship was questioned.

He said, by the mere filing of his certificate of candidacy, he

had renounced his foreign citizenship.He was right. Being a dual citizenship is not a result of 9225

but a result of an involuntary acquisition because of the

circumstances of his birth.

So he need not comply with the requirement of express

renunciation of foreign citizenship. The etwin requirement

does not apply.

-Lopez vs Comelec, July 23, 2008

-Hapson vs Comelec, Jan 18, 2009

-Roselier de Guzman vs Comelec Jun 19, 2009

2 requisites to run for public office:

1. taking of oath of allegiance

2. express renunciation of foreign citizenship before any

public officer authorized to administer an oath

ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FOR PRACTICE OF

PROFESSION (LAW)

-Case: Dacanay Dec 17, 2007

Dual citizens may practice law in the Philippines by

1. leave of Sc (permission)

2. compliance of requirements to restore the good standing

as members of Philippine bar

a. payment of annual duesb. compliance of MCLE

2.B. ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION

RA 9139

This is with reference to foreigners who were born in the

Philippines. In order to give them some form of amnesty

(especially smuggled Chinese)

Accepting the reality that eventually some children of these

foreign smuggled persons into the country had children born

into the Philippines without clear status as to thei

citizenship, this law was passed for them to have the option

either to:1. apply for naturalization by administrative process

2. apply for naturalization by judicial process

Under this provision, it grants Philippine citizenship by

administrative proceedings to aliens born and residing in the

Philippines. They have the choice to apply for judicial o

administrative naturalization subject to the prescribed

qualifications or disqualification provided by law.

DUAL ALLEGIANCE

What is prohibited under the constitution for it is INIMICAL

TO PUBLIC INTEREST is dual allegiance, not dual citizenship.

Until now, there is no definition on what would constitutedual allegiance.

Case: Kalilong vs Datumanong May 11, 2007

SC said that if the legislature has not defined it, it is not for

the Court to make a definition on what would constitute

dual allegiance.

Definitely, RA 9225 does not constitute dual allegiance but

mere dual citizenship.

So there is no question as to the constitutionality of RA 9225.



19/112


20/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


-Case: Aquino vs Comelec

Aquino ran as congressman in Makati after he transferred

residence from Conception Tarlac after he has exhausted

the three terms as congressman.

He was disqualified upon petition of another candidate.

SC declared that there was no effective transfer of residence

because the records would show that he was still a

registered voter of Conception Tarlac. He only has acondominium in Makati.

His acts do not correspond to his intention of changing his

residence.

RESIDENCE AND DOMICILE

TN of these cases because insofar as in public office running

and voting, they are of the same n the POV of political law.

EXCEPTION TO REQUIREMENT OF RESIDENCY ON EXERCISE

OF RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE

As an exception to the requirement of residence, forpurposes of enjoying the right of suffrage TN of the case of

Lewis vs Comelec, Dual Citizens, RA 9225, and Absentee

Voting, RA 9189.

ABSENTEE VOTING RA 9189

1. local absentee voters

2. foreign absentee voters

1. LOCAL ABSENTEE VOTERS

Those because of their jobs, require them to vote in

another place, although they are not residents of that place.

Examples: military, teacher, OFW.

JURISDICTION ON ISSUES RELATING ON THE RIGHT TO VOTE

Who has jurisdiction relating to the right to vote?

MTC. It is a judicial issue.

COMELEC is only on the matter of registration. But on the

right to vote, it is he court that determines any issue

pertaining to the right to vote such as disqualification.

SUBSTANTIAL QUALIFICATIONS PROVIDED BY THE

CONSTITUTION CANNOT BE EXPANDED

Substantial qualifications provided by the constitution cannot

be expanded. Only procedural requirements may be

expanded by congress through laws.

So you cannot require that you have to have some properties

or be able to read or right. If you do that, you will be

amending the constitution by ordinary legislation.

JURISDICTION PROMULGATION OF RULES ON MATTERS OF

SECRECY OF CASTING VOTES

Promulgation of rules on matters of election on secrecy of

your casting of your ballots. Who has jurisdiction to

promulgate the rules?

Congress.

JURISDICTION ON PORCEDURE FOR VOTINGOn the matter of providing for procedures on how a voter can

vote, who has that power to do?

COMELEC

DISQUALIFIED VOTERS

If you are a permanent disabled voter who cannot prepare his

own ballot, are you allowed to vote?

He is disqualified.

Who are disqualified?

1. convicted by final judgment of a criminal case where the

penalty is more than 1 year of imprisonment2. deserter of armed forces

3. insane person

JURISDICTION ON:

PROMULGATION OF RULES RELATING TO ELECTION LAWS

-Comelec (exclusively on quasi legislative function)

PROMULGATING LAWS RELATING TO GOVERNING

PROCEDURE

-Congress

AFTER BREAK



21/112

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

KwinKwinKwinKwin


4. SOVEREIGNTY

SOVEREIGNTY is the highest ruling authority, it is the

uncontrollable power by which the state is governed.

Without which, the state cannot be considered a s state.

MANIFESTATIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY

A. supreme power to rule within and outside as manifested

by:1. peoples obedience to the laws

2. enjoyment of independence or freedom from

independent control of a state

CHARACTERISTICS OF SOVEREIGNTY

1. indivisible

-it cannot be shared because there is only one highest

ruling OW it could mean the destroyment of sovereignty

2. imprescriptible

3. absolute

-no body can question the exercise of the power and the

laws passed by the sovereign4. uncontrollable

5. virtually no limitations

-if there is any limitations, its because we decide to have

limit as provided in the constitution

6. not subject to any statute of limitations

7. non transferable

-it cannot be alienated. The moment you transfer, the

one who was exercising seizes to be sovereign and the

transferee becomes the new sovereign

8. comprehensive

-covers practically everything and every person within its

boundaries and authority

9. exclusive

MANIFESTATIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY WITHIN THE STATE

1. enactment or passage of law where everybody and

everything is subject to

This is manifested by the states jurisdiction over persons

and things found within its boundaries and even outside its

territory

KINDS OF JURISDICTIONa. territorial jurisdiction

b. personal jurisdiction

c. extraterritorial jurisdiction

A. TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION

All things and persons found within the state are subject to

the laws of that state.

However there are some exceptions to this, such as:

a. extraterritoriality principle

b. persons exempt from the jurisdiction of the state

1. heads of state

-they are considered as extension of the personality othe state that is sovereign; that these heads of state

are representing

2. things and persons in certain areas like embassies

ambassadors and consular officials

-to a certain extent they are not subject to the laws o

the countries where they are found

-an EMBASSY is an extension of the country that it

represents.

3. where an agreement was entered into by two parties

-like what we had in US Military Bases agreement. The

military personnel were not subject to the local laws

c. foreign vessels that docked in our ports

-if foreign military vessel, we do not have jurisdictioneven if they are in our waters because it is like as

extension of the country it represents.

-if merchant vessels, we follow the principle of French

and English principle

-NATIONALITY PRINCIPLE goes by what flag is being

flown by the vessel

-FRENCH RULE - anything that happens inside the

vessel, even if it is docked in our ports, as long as it

doesnt affect the peace and order or nation a

security of our country, it is within the jurisdiction of

the country whose flag is flown by the vessel.

-ENGLISH RULE anything that happens in the

vessel, for as long as it affects only the persona and

crew in the vessel, the Philippines has no

jurisdiction. Only when it affects our security tha

the Philippines has jurisdiction. Virtually, the effects

are the same.


7/28/2019 K

Documents

Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion