cases on nationality

7/27/2019 Cases on Nationality

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cases-on-nationality 1/3

LAURETO A. TALAROC v. ALEJANDRO D. UY

G.R. No. L-5397, September 26, 1952

Facts:

Alejandro D. Uy was elected as municipal mayor of Manticao, Misamis Oriental onNovember 13, 1951. Laureto Talaroc, one of the defeated candidates filed a petition for

quo warranto against Uy on the ground that Uy was a Chinese citizen and therefore

ineligible. The lower court found the petition well- founded and declared the position in

question vacant. Respondent Uy’s contentions were that his father was a subject of

Spain and that his mother ipso facto reacquired her Filipino citizenship upon the death

of her husband. He thus followed his mother’s citizenship and is a citizen of the

Philippines by the mere fact of his birth.

Issue: Is the acquisition of citizenship under the jus soli doctrine nullified by the

subsequent abandonment of aforesaid doctrine in favor of jus sanguinis doctrine. NO.

Ratio:

Par. 1, Article 17 of the Civil Code affirms and recognizes the principle of

nationality by place of birth, jus soli. The decided weight of authority was to the effect

that the marriage of an American woman with an alien conferred his nationality upon her

during coverture; that upon the dissolution of the marriage by death of the husband, the

wife reverted, ipso facto, to her former status, unless her conduct or acts showed that

she elected to retain the nationality of her husband, and that the widowed mother

herself thus reacquired her former nationality, her children, she being their natural

guardian, should follow her nationality with the proviso that they may elect for

themselves upon reaching majority.

On the strength of the Roa doctrine, Alejandro Uy undoubtedly was considered a

full- fledged Philippine citizen on the date of the adoption of the constitution, when jus

soli had been the prevailing doctrine, i.e., a Filipino woman married to a Chinese ipso

facto reacquired her Filipino citizenship upon her husband’s demise and that thereafter

her minor children’s nationality automatically followed that of the mother’s. This rul e was

not changed by the adoption of the jus sanguinis doctrine, and was in force until C.A.

No. 63 went into effect in 1936, by which the legislature, for the first time, provided a

method for regaining Philippine citizenship by Filipino women in such cases. It is to be

noted that when C.A. No. 63 was passed, Ursula Diabo, mother of respondent Uy, had

been a widow for 19 years and Alejandro D. Uy had been of age three years, and that

the new law carries no provision giving it retroactive effect.



ANTONIO Y. CO v. ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL OF THE HOUSE OF

REPRESENTATIVES AND JOSE ONG, JR.

G.R. No. 92191-92, July 30, 1991

Facts:

The HRET declared that respondent Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born Filipino citizen anda resident of Laoang, Northern Samar for voting purposes. The congressional electionfor the second district of Northern Samar was held. Among the candidates who vied for the position of representative in the second legislative district are the petitioners, SixtoBalinquit and Antonio Co and the private respondent, Jose Ong, Jr. Respondent Ongwas proclaimed the duly elected representative of the second district of Northern Samar.

The petitioners filed election protests on the grounds that Jose Ong, Jr. is not a naturalborn citizen of the Philippines and not a resident of the second district of NorthernSamar.

Issue: Whether Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born citizen of the Philippines. Yes. Petitionsare dismissed.

Ratio:

In the year 1895, the private respondent’s grandfather, Ong Te, arrived in thePhilippines from China and established his residence in the municipality of Laoang,Samar. The father of the private respondent, Jose Ong Chuan was born in China in1905 but was brought by Ong Te to Samar in the year 1915, he filed with the court anapplication for naturalization and was declared a Filipino citizen.

In 1984, the private respondent married a Filipina named Desiree Lim. For theelections of 1984 and 1986, Jose Ong, Jr. registered himself as a voter of Laoang,Samar, and voted there during those elections.

Under the 1973 Constitution, those born of Filipino fathers and those born of Filipino mothers with an alien father were placed on equal footing. They were bothconsidered as natural born citizens. Besides, private respondent did more than merelyexercise his right of suffrage. He has established his life here in the Philippines.

On the issue of residence, it is not required that a person should have a house in

order to establish his residence and domicile. It is enough that he should live in themunicipality or in a rented house or in that of a friend or relative. To require him to ownproperty in order to be eligible to run for Congress would be tantamount to a propertyqualification. The Constitution only requires that the candidate meet the age, citizenship,voting and residence requirements.



TECSON v. COMELEC

G.R. No. 161434, March 3 2004

Facts:Respondent Ronald Allan Kelly Poe, also known as Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ) filed his

certificate of candidacy on 31 December 2003 for the position of President of theRepublic of the Philippines in the forthcoming national elections. In his certificate of candidacy, FPJ, representing himself to be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines,stated his name to be "Fernando Jr.," or "Ronald Allan" Poe, his date of birth to be 20

August 1939 and his place of birth to be Manila.

Petitioner Fornier filed before the COMELEC a petition to disqualify FPJ and cancel hiscertificate of candidacy by claiming that FPJ is not a natural-born Filipino citizen, hisparents were foreigners: his mother, Bessie Kelley Poe, was an American, and hisfather, Allan Poe, was a Spanish national, being the son of Lorenzo Pou, a Spanishsubject.

The COMELEC dismissed the petition for lack of merit.

Issue: Whether or not FPJ is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. YES.

Ratio:

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. Based on the

evidence presented which the Supreme consider as viable is the fact that the death

certificate of Lorenzo Poe, father of Allan Poe, who in turn was the father of private

respondent Fernando Poe, Jr. indicates that he died on September 11, 1954 at the age

of 84 years, in San Carlos, Pangasinan. Evidently, in such death certificate, the

residence of Lorenzo Poe was stated to be San Carlos, Pangansinan. In the absence of

any evidence to the contrary, it should be sound to conclude, or at least to presume,

that the place of residence of a person at the time of his death was also his residence

before death. Considering that the allegations of petitioners are not substantiated with

proof and since Lorenzo Poe may have been benefited from the “en masse

Filipinization” that the Philippine Bill had effected in 1902, there is no doubt that Allan

Poe father of private respondent Fernando Poe, Jr. was a Filipino citizen. And, since the

latter was born on August 20, 1939, governed under 1935 Constitution, which

constitution considers as citizens of the Philippines those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines, Fernando Poe, Jr. was in fact a natural-born citizen of the Philippines

regardless of whether or not he is legitimate or illegitimate.

cases on nationality

Documents