Upload
ferdinandopoe
View
231
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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/7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
2/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 2
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
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
3/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 3
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
4/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 4
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
5/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 5
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
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
6/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 6
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
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
7/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 7
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)
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
8/112
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
9/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 9
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
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
10/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 10
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
11/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 11
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
12/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 12
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
13/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 13
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
Philippine citizenship.
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
14/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 14
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
15/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 15
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
16/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 16
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
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
17/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 17
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
18/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 18
-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
Philippine citizenship.
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
19/112
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
20/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 20
-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
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 Kwin Transcripts - Consti - Until June 27 Discussion
21/112
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
KwinKwinKwinKwin
K w i n t r a n s c r i p t s Page 21
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.
PDF Created with deskPDF TS PDF Writer - DEMO :: http://www.docudesk.com
7/28/2019 K