Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

USA College of Law

Arguelles 1-B

Case Name
16. Villahermosa vs. Commissioner of Immigration

Topic Citizenship

Case No. | G.R. No. L-1663. March 31, 1948


Date

Ponente BENGZON, J

Doctrine
A change in citizenship is only valid when a child reaches the age of
majority, nevertheless any change in status can not affect the legal actions
done against a violation.

RELEVANT FACTS

Paragraph 4, Section 1 of Article IV of the 1935 Constitution


● Purpose: To identify those who are eligible of the Philippine citizenship
● Target: Parents and children
● Means of implementation: Entry of a foreign national in an attempt to evade the
country’s immigration laws may result in his or her deportation.

● 18 years old Delfin Co, son of Chinese national Co Suy and Florentina Villahermosa left
the Philippines 6 years after his father died in 1940.
● In March 24, 1947, Delfin decided to come home to the PH due to financial challenges,
onboard S/S Cushman together with 69 Chinese nationals. They arrived secretly in Ilocos
Sur.
● Upon arrival he was apprehended by the Commission of Immigration, it was agreed in
the investigation that he should be deported.
● Florentina, after knowing, filed her oath of allegiance under Commonwealth Act No. 63
for the purpose of recovering her Philippine citizenship and of her son’s.
● She filed the writ of habeas corpus on behalf of Delfin, who is under detention.

ISSUE: W/N a foreign national is considered a Philippine citizen following his or


her mother’s re-acquisition of citizenship for the purpose of legalizing a
violation.
USA College of Law
Arguelles 1-B

RULING: NO. A foreign national cannot be automatically considered as a


Philippine citizen upon his mother’s repatriation.

Commonwealth Act No. 63 does not provide that her son acquires
Philippine citizenship. The son was a foreign national prior to his
detention, which does not fall under Paragraph 4, Section 1 of Article IV
of the 1935 Constitution.

The detainee is not a Filipino by the time of his apprehension and the
legality of his arrest for purposes of deportation is not affected by any
change of status, particularly citizenship.

RULING
AFFIRMED.

NOTES
·
Comparison with Tan Chong vs. Secretary of Labor
● Deals with issues on citizenship.
● Chong was born in the Philippines in 1915, brought by his Filipina mother and
Chinese father to China sometime in 1925.
● Got back to the PH in 1940 and was denied his admission by the Board of Special
Inquiry.
● He was granted the writ of habeas corpus because he was born in the Philippines
before the approval of the 1935 Constitution, of a Chinese father and a Filipino
mother. His travel to China did not affect his Philippine citizenship.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen