Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

6. BENGSON III vs.

HRET ISSUES:
FACTS: Whether or not Teodoro Cruz, a natural-
 Teodoro C. Cruz was born in San born Filipino who became an American
Clemente, Tarlac, on April 27, 1960, of citizen, can still be considered a natural-
Filipino parents. born Filipino upon his reacquisition of
 On November 5, 1985, he was enlisted Philippines citizenship
in US Marine Corps and he took an oath RULINGS:
of allegiance to the United States YES. Teodoro Cruz reacquired his citizenship
without the consent of the Republic of through repatriation.
the Philippines. As a consequence, he Repatriation simply consists of the taking of
lost his Filipino citizenship under an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Commonwealth Act No. 63, Section Philippines and registering said oath in the
1(4), a Filipino citizen may lose his Local Civil Registry of the place where the
citizenship by, among others, person concerned resides or last resided.
"rendering service to or accepting Repatriation means that a naturalized
commission in the armed forces of a Filipino who lost his citizenship will be
foreign country”. restored to his prior status as a naturalized
 On March 17, 1994 , Cruz reacquired Filipino citizen. If he was originally a
his citizenship through repatriation natural-born citizen before he lost his
under RA2630. Philippine citizenship, he will be restored to
 On May 11, 1998, he ran for and was his former status as a natural-born Filipino.
elected as the Representative of the
Second District of Pangasinan. He won 7. MERCADO vs MANZANO
over petitioner Antonio Bengson III, FACTS:
who was running for re-election.  Eduardo Barrios Manzano was born in
 Subsequently, Bengson III filed a case San Francisco, California on September
for Quo Warranto Ad Cautelam with 4, 1955, of Filipino parents. He
respondent HRET, claiming that acquired US citizenship by operation of
respondent Cruz was not qualified to US Constitution and laws under the
become a member of the HOR because principle of “jus soli”. He was also a
he is not a natural-born citizen as natural born Filipino citizen by
required by the Article VI, Section 6 of operation of the 1935 Constitution, as
1987 Constitution. his father and mother were Filipinos at
 On March 2, 2000, the HRET rendered the time of his birth.
its decision dismissing the petition for  At the age of six, his parents brought
quo warranto and declaring respondent him to the Philippines using an
Cruz the duly elected Representative of American passport as travel document.
the Second District of Pangasinan in the His parents also registered him as an
May 1998 elections. alien with the Philippine Bureau of
 Petitioner filed for certiorari assailing Immigration. He was issued an alien
the HRET committed serious errors and certificate of registration. This,
grave abuse of discretion. however, did not result in the loss of
his Philippine citizenship, as he did not Whether or not Eduardo Barrios Manzano is
renounce Philippine citizenship and did qualified in running for any elective local
not take an oath of allegiance to the position because of dual citizenship
United States. RULINGS:
 When he attained the age of majority, YES. The Commission en banc declare
he registered himself as a voter and Manzano to be QUALIFIED as a candidate
voted in the elections of 1992, 1995, for the position of vice mayor in Makati
and 1998. City.
 Dual citizenship arises when, as a result of
On March 27,1998, Manzano filed his the concurrent application of the different
certificate of candidacy for vice mayor laws of two or more states, a person is
of Makati City. simultaneously considered a national by the
 On May 7, 1998, the Second Division of said states.
the COMELEC granted the petition of When Manzano registered himself as a
Mamaril and ordered the cancellation voter, and voted in the elections of 1992,
of the certificate of candidacy of 1995 and 1998, it effectively renounces his
private respondent on the ground that US citizenship under American Law. And
he is a dual citizen and, under under Philippine Law, he no longer had the
Section40(d) of the Local Government US citizenship.
Code, persons with dual citizenship are
disqualified from running for any 8. Co vs HRET
elective position. FACTS:
 On May 8, 1998, private respondent  In 1895, Jose Ong Jr.’s grandfather, Ong
filed a motion for reconsideration.The Te arrived in the Philippines from
motion remained pending even until China. He established his residence in
after the election held on May 11, the municipality of Laoang , Samar on
1998. land which he bought from fruits of his
 On May 19, 1998, Mercado sought to work. As a resident of Laoang, Ong Te
intervene in the case for was able to obtain a certificate of
disqualification of Manzano. residence from the then Spanish
 Manzano won over his opponents colonial administration.
Ernesto Mercado and Gabriel Daza III.  His father, Jose Ong Chuan was born in
But the proclamation of Manzano was China in 1905 and he was brought by
suspended in view of a pending Ong Te in Samar by 1915 where he
petition for disqualification filed by a spent his childhood and establish an
certain Ernesto Mamaril who alleged enduring relationship with his
that private respondent was not a neighbors.
citizen of the Philippines but of the  As the years passed, Jose Ong Chuan
United States. met Agripina Lao, a natural-born
 On August 31, 1998, the COMELEC en Filipino. They fell inlove with each
banc rendered its resolution. other and thereafter they got married
ISSUES: in 1932. They bore eight children and
one of them in Jose Ong Jr. who was ISSUES:
born in 1948.  Whether or not Jose Ong Jr. is a
 On February 15, 1954, Jose Ong Chuan natural-born citizen;
filed his application for naturalization  Whether or not Jose Ong Jr. is a
with the Court of First Instance of resident of Laoang, Northern Samar
Samar. On April 28, 1955, the CFI of RULINGS:
Samar declared Jose Ong Chuan a YES. Jose Ong Jr. is a natural-born citizen of
Filipino citizen. the Philippines and a resident of Laoang,
 On May 15, 1957, the Court of First Norther Samar.
Instance of Samar issued an order When Mr. Ong was nine years old, his
declaring the decision of April 28, 1955 father Jose Ong Chuan became a
as final and executory and that Jose naturalized Filipino.
Ong Chuan may already take his Oath Section 15 of the Revised Naturalization Act
of Allegiance. He took his Oath of squarely applies its benefit to him for he
Allegiance and a Certificate of was then a minor residing in this country. It
Naturalization was issued to him. was the law itself that had already elected
 And at the time Jose Ong Chuan took Philippine citizenship for Mr. Ong by
his oath of allegiance, Jose Ong Jr. was declaring him as such.
already nine years old and finishing his The domicile of a natural person is the place
elementary education. After of his habitual residence; once established
completing his elementary education, is considered to continue and will not be
Jose Ong Jr. went to Manila to acquire deemed lost until new one is established.
his high school and college education. Mr. Ong went to Manila for his studies and
He took and passed the CPA board thereafter to manage their family business
exam after he graduated from college. but he had the intention to return to his
He found a job in Central Bank of the residence in Northern Samar.
Philippines as an examiner and later on
he worked in the hardware business of 9. MOY YA LIM YAO vs COMMISSIONER OF
family. IMMIGRATION
 After several years in managing their FACTS:
family business, he decided to run for  On February 8, 1961, Lau Yuen Yeung
public office in his province. In 1987, he applied for a passport visa to enter the
ran in the elections for representative Philippines as a non-immigrant. She
in the second district of Samar. He was was a Chinese residing at Kowloon,
overwhelmingly voted by the people of Hongkong and she desired to take a
the Northern Samar as their pleasure trip in the Philippines to visit
representative in the Congress. her great grand uncle Lau Ching Ping
 Sixto Balinquit and Antonio Co filed for a period of one month.
election protest against Jose Ong Jr.on  On March 13, 1961, she was permitted
the grounds that he is not a natural- to come in the Philippines and stay for
born citizen and a resident of the a period of one month which would
Northern Samar. expire on April 13, 1961.
 After repeated extenstion, Lau Yuen 5. Persons suffering from mental
Yung was allowed to stay in the alienation or incurable contagious
Philippines until February 13, 1962. disease;
 On January 25, 1962, she contracted 6. Persons who, during the period of
marriage with Moy Ya Lim Yao alias their residence in the Philippines,
Edilberto Aguinaldo Lim an alleged have not mingled socially with
Filipino citizen. Filipinos, or who have not evinced a
 Because of the contemplated action of sincere desire to learn and embrace
Commissioner of Immigration to the customs, traditions, and ideals of
confiscate her bond and order her the Filipinos;
arrest and immediate deportation, 7. Citizens or subjects of nations with
after the expiration of her authorized whom the Philippines are at war,
stay, she brought this action for during the period of such war;
injunction with preliminary injunction. 8. Citizens or subjects of foreign country
ISSUES: other than United States, whose laws
Whether or not Lau Yen Yeung became ipso does not grant Filipinos the right to
facto a Filipino citizen upon her marriage to become naturalized citizens or
Moy Ya Lim Yao (a.k.a Edilberto Aguinaldo subject thereof.
Lim) a Filipino citizen
RULINGS: 10. REPUBLIC vs DELA ROSA
YES. An alien woman upon her marriage to FACTS:
a Filipino citizen, become lawfully  On September 20, 1991, Juan G.
naturalized ipso facto, provided that she Frivaldo filed a petition for
does not possess all of the disqualifications. naturalization under Commonwealth
(Section 15 of the Commonwealth Act No. Act No. 63.
473)  On October 7, 1991, Judge Dela Rosa
These are the disqualification from being a set the petition for hearing on March
naturalized citizen of the Philippines: 16,1992, and directed the publication
1. Persons opposed to organized of the said order and petition in the
government or affiliated with any Official Gazette and a newspaper of
association or group of person who general circulation , for three
uphold and teach doctrines opposing consecutive weeks, the last publication
all organized governments; of which should be at least six months
2. Persons defending or teaching the before the said date of hearing. The
necessity or propriety of violence, order further required the posting of a
personal assault, or assassination for copy and the petition in a conspicuous
the success and predominance of place in the Office of the Clerk of Court
their ideas; of the RTC, Manila.
3. Polygamists or believers in the  On January 14, 1992, filed a “Motion to
practice of polygamy; Set the Hearing Ahead of Schedule”,
4. Persons convicted of crimes involving where he manifested his intention to
moral turpitude; run for public office in May 1992
elections. He alleged that the deadline ISSUES:
for filing the Certificated of Candidacy  Whether or not Juan Frivaldo was duly
was March 15, a day before the re-admitted as a Filipino citizen
hearing. He asked that the hearing set through naturalization
on March 16 be cancelled and moved RULINGS:
to January 24. NO. Juan Frivaldo was declared by the
 On January 24, 1992, the motion was Supreme Court as NOT a citizen. The
granted and the hearing was moved to proceeding of the trial courts was marred
February 21, 1992. The said order was by the following irregularities:
not published nor a copy thereof 1. The hearing of the petition was set
posted. ahead of the scheduled date of
 On February 21, 1992, the hearing hearing, without a publication of the
proceeded . Mr. Frivaldo submitted the order of advancing the date of
required documentary evidence. Six hearing, and the petition itself;
days later on, February 27, Judge Dela 2. The petition was heard with six
Rosa granted the petition and Mr. months from the last publication of
Frivaldo was re-admitted as a citizen of the petition;
the Republic of the Philippines by 3. The petitioner was allowed to take
naturalization. On the same day, Mr. his oath of allegiance before the
Frivaldo also took his Oath of finality of judgment; and
Allegiance before Judge Dela Rosa. 4. The petitioner took his oath of
 On March 16, a "Motion for Leave of allegiance without observing the two-
Court to Intervene and to Admit year waiting period.
Motion for Reconsideration" was filed
by Quiterio H. Hermo. He alleged that
the proceedings were tainted with
jurisdictional defects, and prayed for a
new trial to conform with the
requirements of the Naturalization
Law.
 After receiving a copy of the Decision
on March 18, 1992, the Solicitor
General interposed a timely appeal
directly with the Supreme
 The Republic of the Philippines filed a
petition for certiorari under Rule 45 of
the Revised Rules of Court in relation to
R.A. No. 5440 and Section 25 of Interim
Rules, to annual the decision made on
February 27, 1992 and to nullify the
oath of allegiance taken by Frivaldo on
the same date.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen