Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Footnotes
1
Per Presiding Commissioner Ralph C. Lantion and concurred in by Commissioners Mehol K. Sadain and Florentino
A. Tuazon, Jr.
2
The records do not disclose when petitioner became a U.S. citizen.
3
Records, pp. 167-169.
4
Petitioner’s U.S. passport for 1998-2008 shows the following dates of arrival in the Philippines and dates of
departure for the United States: arrival - October 15, 1998, departure - November 3, 1998; arrival - December 20,
1998 (with no record of corresponding departure); arrival - October 16, 1999, departure - November 1, 1999; arrival
- June 23, 2000, departure - July 6, 2000; arrival - August 5, 2000 (Records, pp. 227-228).
5
This law, entitled AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE REPATRIATION OF FILIPINO WOMEN WHO HAVE LOST THEIR
PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP BY MARRIAGE TO ALIENS AND NATURAL-BORN FILIPINOS, applies to former natural-born
Filipinos who have lost their Philippine citizenship on account of economic or political necessity. It would appear
that petitioner was repatriated under this law on the ground that he lost his Philippine citizenship on account of
economic necessity.
6
Petition, Annex O, p. 56.
7
Id., Annex C, p. 34.
8
Id., Annex H, p. 46.
9
Resolution, p. 7-8; Rollo, pp. 30-31 (emphasis added).
10
Bulaong v. COMELEC, 220 SCRA 745 (1993).
11
Order, pp. 1-2; Rollo, pp. 32-33.
12
Siy v. Court of Appeals, 138 SCRA 536 (1985); Continental Cement Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 184 SCRA 728
(1990).
13
Guerra Enterprises Company, Inc. v. Court of First Instance of Lanao del Sur, 32 SCRA 314, 317 (1970).
14
Manila Trading v. Enriquez, 1 SCRA 1056 (1961); City of Cebu v. Mendoza, 62 SCRA 440 (1975); Debuque v. Climaco,
99 SCRA 353 (1980); Garcia v. Echiverri, 132 SCRA 631 (1984); Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Island Garment
Manufacturing Corporation, 153 SCRA 665 (1987); Vda. de Espina v. Abaya, 196 SCRA 312 (1991).
15
A similar rule is found in Rule 19, §3 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure.
16
Villarica v. Court of Appeals, 57 SCRA 24 (1974).
17
Jessena v. Hervas, 83 SCRA 799 (1978); Marikina Valley Development Corporation v. Flojo, 251 SCRA 87 (1995);
Nieto v. De los Angeles, 109 SCRA 229 (1981).
18
Sembrano v. Ramirez, 166 SCRA 30 (1988); Pojas v. Gozo-Dadole, 192 SCRA 575 (1990); Bank of the Philippine
Islands v. Far East Molasses Corporation, 198 SCRA 689 (1991).
19
201 SCRA 253 (1991).
20
312 SCRA 447 (1999).
21
Uytengsu v. Republic, 95 Phil. 890, 894 (1954).
22
Nuval v. Guray, 52 Phil. 645 (1928); Gallego v. Verra, 73 Phil. 453 (1941); Romualdez v. RTC, Br. 7, Tacloban City,
226 SCRA 408 (1993).
23
Aquino v. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 400, 420 (1995).
24
25 Am. Jur. 2d, §11.
25
191 SCRA 229 (1990).
26
Petition, p. 6; Rollo, p. 8.
27
Id., pp. 9-11; id., pp. 11-13.
28
This provision states:
"Under the conditions set forth in this Act, there may be admitted in the Philippines immigrants, termed "quota
immigrants" not in excess of fifty (50) of any one nationality or without nationality for any one calendar year, except
that the following immigrants, termed "nonquota immigrants," may be admitted without regard to such numerical
limitations.
The corresponding Philippine Consular representative abroad shall investigate and certify the eligibility of a quota
immigrant previous to his admission into the Philippines. Qualified and desirable aliens who are in the Philippines
under temporary stay may be admitted within the quota, subject to the provisions of the last paragraph of section
9 of this Act.
(a) The wife or the husband or the unmarried child under twenty-one years of age of a Philippine citizen, if
accompanying or following to join such citizen;
(b) A child of alien parents born during the temporary visit abroad of the mother, the mother having been previously
lawfully admitted into the Philippine for permanent residence, if the child is accompanying or coming to join a parent
and applies for admission within five years from the date of its birth;
(c) A child born subsequent to the issuance of the immigration visa of the accompanying parent, the visa not having
expired;
(d) A woman who was citizen of the Philippines and who lost her citizenship because of her marriage to an alien or
by reason of the loss of Philippine citizenship by her husband, and her unmarried child under twenty-one years of
age, if accompanying or following to join her;
(e) A person previously lawfully admitted into the Philippines for permanent residence, who is returning from a
temporary visit abroad to an unrelinquished residence in the Philippines, (As amended by Sec. 5, Rep. Act No. 503.)
(f) The wife or the husband or the unmarried child under twenty-one years of age, of an alien lawfully admitted into
the Philippines for permanent residence prior to the date on which this Act becomes effective and who is resident
therein, if such wife, husband, or child applies for admission within a period of two years following the date on which
this Act becomes effective;
(g) A natural born citizen of the Philippines, who has been naturalized in a foreign country, and is returning to the
Philippines for permanent residence, including the spouse and minor children, shall be considered a non-quota
immigrant for purposes of entering the Philippines (As amended by Rep. Act No. 4376, approved June 19, 1965)."
29
See R. Ledesma, An Outline of Philippine Immigration and Citizenship Laws 135 (1999).
30
C.A. No. 63, §2.
31
Records, pp. 227-228.
32
The COMELEC considered November 10, 2000 as the date of petitioner’s repatriation. Section 2 of R.A. No. 8171
provides, however, "Repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and registration in the proper civil registry and in the Bureau of Immigration. The Bureau of Immigration
shall thereupon cancel the pertinent alien certificate of registration and issue the certificate of identification as
Filipino citizen to the repatriated citizen."
33
257 SCRA 727 (1996).
34
G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001.
35
54 Phil. 645 (1928).
36
248 SCRA 400, 429 (1995).
37
Abella v. Larazabal, 180 SCRA 509 (1989); Abella v. COMELEC, 201 SCRA 253 (1991).
38
Labo, Jr. v. COMELEC, 211 SCRA 297 (1992).
39
312 SCRA 447 (1999).