Anda di halaman 1dari 5

TECSON V. COMELEC FACTS Antecedent Case Settings Respondent Ronald Allan Kelly Poe aka Fernando Poe Jr.

r. vs. Petitioner Victorino Fornier 12/31/03 respondent filed certificate of candidacy for the position of President o under Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) Partyrepresenting himself to be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, date of birth 8/20/39, place of birth Manila. Consolidated Cases st 1 Case Fornier filed a petition with the COMELEC to o disqualify FPJ o deny due course or o cancel his certificate of candidacy Reason material misrepresentation in FPJs certificate of candidacy o Fornier says FPJ is claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen when in truth FPJS parents were foreigners Mother Bessie Kelley Poe American, Father Allan Poe Spanish national son of Lorenzo Pou, a Spanish subject. o Granting that father (Allan)of FPJ was Filipino, Allan could not have transmitted Filipino citizenship to FPJ Reason: FPJ was an illegitimate child of an alien mother. Allan F. Poe contracted a prior marriage to a certain Paulita Gomez before his marriage to the mother of FPJ, Bessie Kelley even if no such prior marriage had existed, Allan F. Poe, married Bessie Kelly only a year after birth of FPJ. rd COMELEC 3 Division hearing 1/19/04 (Dismissed for lack of Merit) Fornier filed Motion for Reconsideration. Denied by COMELEC en banc Fornier assailed decision with SC. o TRO o Writ of preliminary injunction o Any other resolution that would stay the finality or execution of the COMELEC Resolution nd 2 Case Tecson, Desiderio and Velez filed a case against the COMELEC Challenging COMELECs jurisdiction. Asserting that only the SC has original and exclusive jurisdiction over the citizenship of FPJ1.

ISSUES 1.Does SC have the power to review COMELEC en banc decisions? YES 2. Does COMELEC havejurisdiction over the case? YES 2. Is FPJ a natural born Filipino Citizen? YES. RATIO 1. SC has the power to review the COMELECs decision to deny Forniers petition to disqualify the candidacy of FPJ for allege d misrepresentation of material fact 2 Decisions of COMELEC on disqualification cases may be reviewed by the SC in action for certiorari3 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
1Article VII, Section 4, paragraph 7, of the 1987 Constitution 2Section 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 3under Rule 65of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure. 4Section 7, Article IX, of the 1987 Constitution "Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members any case or matter brought before it within sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution. A case or matter is deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum, required by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself. Unless otherwise provided by this Constitution or by law, any decision, order, or ruling of each Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty days from receipt of a copy thereof." 5Section 1, Article VIII, - judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law which power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave

2. COMELEC has jurisdiction, petitions of Tecson and Velez are dismissed. SCs 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, Election contests7 consist of either o election protest only a registered candidate who would have received second or third highest number of votes could file an election protest. o quo warranto action against a person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office o 2 distinct remedies but both have one objective in view dislodge winning candidate from office. BUT jurisdiction of Supreme Court, does not include cases questioning the qualifications of a candidate for the presidency or vicepresidency before the elections are held. term contest refers to a post- election scenario. 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. FPJs GRANDPARENTS o Lorenzo Pou Death certificate identified him to be Filipino Residence was Pangasinan 84 yrs old, Sept 11 1954 o Marta Reyes FPJs FATHER Allan Poe o certificate of birth born on 17 May 1915 father : Lorenzo Pou Espanol (but death certificate says he was Filipino) mother: Marta Reyes mestiza Espaol o uncertified copy of supposed certificate of alleged marriage Allan F. Poe and Paulita Gomez 05 July 1936. o marriage certificate Allan F. Poe and Bessie Kelley Allan F. Poe twenty-five years old, unmarried, and a Filipino citizen, Bessie Kelley to be twenty-two years old, unmarried, and an American citizen. 16 September 1940. FPJ o birth of FPJ (8/20/39) was during the regime of the 1935 Constitution. o birth certificate of FPJ 20 August 1939 to Father: Allan F. Poe, a Filipino, twenty-four years old, Mother: Bessie Kelly, an American citizen, twenty-one years old and married.
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government. 6Article VII, Section 4, paragraph 7, of the 1987 Constitution 7Election contests consist of either o an election protest or o quo warranto o two distinct remedies one objective in view to dislodge the winning candidate from office.

Lorenzo Poe was probably Filipino by en Masse Filipinization 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 Lorenzos Filipinization if acquired would have extended to his son Allan Poe, which would make Allans 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. Fornier failed to substantiate his case. 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 FPJs favor enough to h old that he cannot be held guilty of having made a material misrepresentation in his certificate LEGAL HISTORY RE PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP Initially No Philippine Citizens during the Spanish Regime "subjects of Spain" or "Spanish subjects." natives were called 'indios', Not all citizenship laws of Spain were applied, Only explicitly extended by Royal Decrees. Novisima Recopilacion, - Experts had differing views whether the law was extended to the Philippines Three Royal Decrees made applicable to Spaniards in the Philippines Order de la Regencia Aug 14 1841 Royal Decree of August 23 1868 o Defined the political status of children born in the Philippines Ley extranjera de Ultramar July 4 1870 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 - 1 categorical enumeration of Spanish Citizens Persons born in Spanish territory, Children of a Spanish father or mother, even if they were born outside of Spain, Foreigners who have obtained naturalization papers, Those who, without such papers, may have become domiciled inhabitants of any town of the Monarchy. Treaty of Paris December 10 1898 : Native inhabitants of the Philippines ceased to be Spanish Subjects 1898 Spain was forced to so cede Philippines to United States. principle of international law - change in sovereignity would have no effect on civil laws Article IX of treaty - civil rights and political status of native inhabitants would be determined by its Congress Upon ratification of treaty, and pending legislation by United States Congress, native inhabitants of Philippines ceased to be Spanish subjects. o did not become American citizens, o ceased to be "aliens" under American laws o issued passports describing them to be citizens of the Philippines entitled to the protection of the United States. Philippine Bill of 1902 or Philippine Organic Act of 19022 citizen of the Philippines o one who was an inhabitant of the Philippines, o native-born inhabitant, o inhabitant who was a native of Peninsular Spain, o inhabitant who obtained Spanish papers on or before 11 April 1899 th o and a Spanish subject on the 11 day of April 1899. Controversy as status of children born in the Philippines from 11 April 1899 to 01 July

no citizenship law was extant principle of jus soli governed Amendment of the Philippine Bill of 1902 23 March 1912, Congress of United States amended Philippine Bill acquisition of Philippine citizenship by natives of Philippine Islands who do not come within the foregoing provisions, natives of other insular possession of the United States, and such other persons residing in the Philippine Islands who would become citizens of United States, under laws of the United States, if residing therein 1916 Philippine Autonomy Act or Jones Laws 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. 1935 Constitution8: Jus Sanguinis or Blood Relationship as basis of Filipino Citizenship 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. 1973 Constitution Curative Change9 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 generally adopted provisions of the 1973 Constitution main change: o (2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines. o (3) Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and aimed to correct irregular situation generated by the questionable proviso in the 1935 Constitution. Four Modes of Aquiring Citizenship naturalization jus soli res judicata jus sanguinis o Onlyjus soli and jus sanguinis, qualifies a person as natural born. Citizenship of Philippine President 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 citizen

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. 9Section 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."