Facts:
The petitioner is a natural-born Filipino citizen having been born of
Filipino parents on August 8, 1944. On December 13, 1984, she became a
naturalized Australian citizen owing to her marriage to a certain Kevin Thomas
Condon.
On December 2, 2005, she filed an application to re-acquire Philippine
citizenship before the Philippine Embassy in Canberra, Australia pursuant to
Section 3 of R.A. No. 9225 otherwise known as the "Citizenship Retention
and Re-Acquisition Act of 2003."5 The application was approved and the
petitioner took her oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines on
December 5, 2005.
On September 18, 2006, the petitioner filed an unsworn Declaration of
Renunciation of Australian Citizenship before the Department of Immigration and
Indigenous Affairs, Canberra, Australia, which in turn issued the Order dated
September 27, 2006 certifying that she has ceased to be an Australian citizen.6
The petitioner ran for Mayor in her hometown of Caba, La Union in the
2007 elections. She lost in her bid. She again sought elective office during
the May 10, 2010 elections this time for the position of Vice-Mayor. She
obtained the highest numbers of votes and was proclaimed as the winning
candidate. She took her oath of office on May 13, 2010.
Soon thereafter, private respondents Robelito V. Picar, Wilma P.
Pagaduan7 and Luis M. Bautista,8 (private respondents) all registered
voters of Caba, La Union, filed separate petitions for quo warranto questioning
the petitioner’s eligibility before the RTC. The petitions similarly sought the
petitioner’s disqualification from holding her elective post on the ground that
she is a dual citizen and that she failed to execute a "personal and sworn
renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any public officer
authorized to administer an oath" as imposed by Section 5(2) of R.A. No.
9225.
The petitioner denied being a dual citizen and averred that since
September 27, 2006, she ceased to be an Australian citizen. She claimed that
the Declaration of Renunciation of Australian Citizenship she executed in
Australia sufficiently complied with Section 5(2), R.A. No. 9225 and that her
act of running for public office is a clear abandonment of her Australian
citizenship.
The trial decision ordered by the trial court declaring
Condon disqualified and ineligible to hold office of vice mayor of Caba La
union and nullified her proclamation as the winning candidate.
After that the decision was appealed to the comelec, but the
appeal was dismissed y the second division and affirmed the decision of the
trial court.
The
petitioner contends that since she ceased to be an Australian citizen on
September 27, 2006, she no longer held dual citizenship and was only a Filipino
citizen when she filed her certificate of candidacy as early as the 2007
elections. Hence, the "personal and sworn renunciation of foreign
citizenship" imposed by Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 9225 to dual citizens
seeking elective office does not apply to her.
Issue:
W/N petitioner disqualified from running for elective office due to failure to
renounce her Australian Citizenship in accordance with Sec. 5 (2) of R.A 9225
Ruling:
R.A.
No. 9225 allows the retention and re-acquisition of Filipino citizenship for
natural-born citizens who have lost their Philippine citizenship18 by taking an oath of allegiance to the Republic.
Natural-born citizens of the Philippines who, after the effectivity of
this Act, become citizens of a foreign country shall retain their Philippine
citizenship upon taking the aforesaid oath.
The oath is an abbreviated repatriation process that restores one’s
Filipino citizenship and all civil and political rights and obligations
concomitant therewith, subject to certain conditions imposed in Section 5.
Section 5, paragraph 2 provides:
(2)
Those seeking elective public office in the Philippines shall meet the
qualification for holding such public office as required by the Constitution
and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of the certificate of
candidacy, make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath.
On
September 18, 2006, or a year before she initially sought elective public
office, she filed a renunciation of Australian citizenship in Canberra,
Australia. Admittedly, however, the same was not under oath contrary to the
exact mandate of Section 5(2) that the renunciation of foreign citizenship must
be sworn before an officer authorized to administer oath.
The
supreme court said that, the renunciation of her Australian citizenship was
invalid due to it was not oath before any public officer authorized to
administer it rendering the act of Condon void.
WHEREFORE, in view of all the
foregoing, the petition is hereby DISMISSED. The Resolution dated September 6, 2011
of the Commission on Elections en bane in EAC (AE).
No comments:
Post a Comment