Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COMELEC
FACTS
Antecedent Case Settings
Respondent Ronald Allan Kelly Poe aka Fernando Poe Jr. vs. Petitioner Victorino Fornier
12/31/03 respondent filed certificate of candidacy for the position of President
o under Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) Party representing himself to be a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines, date of birth 8/20/39, place of birth Manila.
Consolidated Cases
1st Case
2nd Case
RATIO
1. SC has the power to review the COMELEC’s decision to deny Fornier’s petition to disqualify the candidacy of FPJ for alleged misrepresentation of
material fact 2
Decisions of COMELEC on disqualification cases may be reviewed by the SC in action for certiorari 3
Constitution4 also allows decisions of Commissions to be brought to the SC by certiorari.
SC can also determine Whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion by any branch of the government. 5
2. COMELEC has jurisdiction, petitions of Tecson and Velez are dismissed. SC’s jurisdiction as the judge of all contests relating to the election,
returns and qualifications relates to the PRESIDENT or VP. Not the Candidates.
SC en banc: sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of the President and VP 6,
BUT jurisdiction of Supreme Court, does not include cases questioning the qualifications of a candidate for the presidency or vice-presidency before
the elections are held.
3. FPJ is a natural born citizen. He is therefor a qualified candidate. 1935 Constitution, during which regime respondent FPJ was born, confers
citizenship to all persons whose fathers are Filipino citizens regardless of whether such children are legitimate or illegitimate.
In whether grave abuse of discretion has been committed by the COMELEC, it is necessary to take on the matter of whether or not respondent FPJ
is a natural-born citizen,
depended on whether or not the father of respondent, Allan F. Poe, would have himself been a Filipino citizen
if in affirmative, whether or not the alleged illegitimacy of respondent prevents him from taking after the Filipino citizenship of his putative
father.
Summary : Parents of FPJ were Allan F. Poe and Bessie Kelley. FPJ was born to them on 20 August 1939; Allan F. Poe and Bessie
Kelley were married to each other on 16 September, 1940; The father of Allan F. Poe was Lorenzo Poe; and At the time of his death on 11
September 1954, Lorenzo Poe was 84 years old.
FPJ’s GRANDPARENTS
2 Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code Petition to deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy. --- A verified petition seeking to deny due course or to cancel a certificate
of candidacy may be filed by any person exclusively on the ground that any material representation contained therein as required under Section 74 hereof is false”
Any conclusion on Filipino citizenship of Lolo Lorenzo Pou (dad of Allan Poe) could only be drawn from the presumption that having died
in 1954 at 84 years old, Lorenzo would have been born sometime in the year 1870, when the Philippines was under Spanish rule,
San Carlos, Pangasinan, place of residence upon his death in 1954, in the absence of any other evidence, could have well been his place
of residence before death
Lorenzo Pou would have benefited from the “en masse Filipinization” that the Philippine Bill had effected in 1902.
Lolo Lorenzo’s Filipinization if acquired would have extended to his son Allan Poe, which would make Allan’s son Filipino
1935 Constitution, during which regime respondent FPJ was born, confers citizenship to all persons whose fathers are Filipino citizens regardless of
whether such children are legitimate or illegitimate.
argument of Fornier since birth to unmarried parents would make FPJ an illegitimate, he would then follow the citizenship of his mother
(illegitimate child of a Filipino father) WRONG
To disqualify an illegitimate child from holding an important public office is to punish him for the indiscretion of his parents. There is
neither justice nor rationality in that. And if there is neither justice nor rationality in the distinction, then the distinction transgresses the
equal protection clause and must be reprobated.”
totality of evidence may not establish conclusively that respondent FPJ is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, the evidence on hand
still would preponderate in FPJ’s favor enough to hold that he cannot be held guilty of having made a material misrepresentation in his
certificate
Novisima Recopilacion, - Experts had differing views whether the law was extended to the Philippines
Three Royal Decrees made applicable to Spaniards in the Philippines
Spanish Constitution 1876 - never extended to Philippine Islands by express mandate of Article 89 – Philippines would be governed by special
laws.
Civil Code of Spain Dec. 8 1889 - 1st categorical enumeration of Spanish Citizens
Treaty of Paris December 10 1898 : Native inhabitants of the Philippines ceased to be Spanish Subjects
a native-born inhabitant of the Philippines was deemed to be a citizen of the Philippines as of 11 April 1899 if he was
o 1) a subject of Spain on 11 April 1899,
o 2) residing in the Philippines on said date, and,
o 3) since that date, not a citizen of some other country.
8 “Section 1, Article III, 1935 Constitution. The following are citizens of the Philippines –
o “(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this Constitution
o “(2) Those born in the Philippines Islands of foreign parents who, before the adoption of this Constitution, had been elected to public office in the Philippine
Islands.
o “(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines.
o “(4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and upon reaching the age of majority, elect Philippine citizenship.
o “(5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.”
“Section 1, Article III The following are citizens of the Philippines –
o (3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines.
taken together with existing civil law provisions at the time, women would automatically lose Filipino citizenship and acquire that of their
foreign husbands
o resulted in discriminatory situations
o effectively incapacitated women from transmitting their Filipino citizenship to their legitimate children
o required illegitimate children of Filipino mothers to still elect Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
main change (2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines
Section 2 of the same article also further provided that –
o "A female citizen of the Philippines who marries an alien retains her Philippine citizenship, unless by her act or omission she is
deemed, under the law to have renounced her citizenship."
1987 Constitution
naturalization
jus soli
res judicata
jus sanguinis
o Onlyjus soli and jus sanguinis, qualifies a person as natural born.
Constitution10 provides that a President must be a natural born citizen of the Philippines.
o "those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine
citizenship
9 Section 1, Article III, 1973 Constitution - The following are citizens of the Philippines:
o “(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution.
o “(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines.
o “(3) Those who elect Philippine citizenship pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution of nineteen hundred and thirty-five.
o “(4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.”
10 Section 2, Article VII, of the 1987 Constitution"No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, able to read and write,
at least forty years of age on the day of the election, and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such election."