Anda di halaman 1dari 2

58. DJUMANTAN V.

DOMINGO resident legal – NO, but right to deport has


GR. No. 99358 January 30, 1995 prescribed.
TOPIC: Nationality and Domicile HELD:
 There was a blatant abuse of our immigration laws in
PARTIES INVOLVED: effecting petitioner’s entry into the country and the
PETITIONER: Djumantan (no first name sa case) change of her immigration status from temporary
RESPONDENTS: Hon. Andrea Domingo, Commissioner of the visitor to permanent resident.
Board of Immigration, et al.  All such privileges were obtained through
misinterpretation.
DOCTRINE: Marriage of an alien woman to a Filipino husband  Never was the marriage of petitioner to Banez
does not ipso facto make her a Filipino citizen and does not disclosed to the immigration authorities in her
excuse her from her failure to depart from the country upon applications for temporary visitor’s visa and for
the expiration of her extended stay here as an alien. permanent residency.
 Generally, the right of the President to expel or
FACTS: deport aliens whose presence is deemed inimical to
 Bernard Banez, husband of Marina Cabael (1st wife), the public interest is as absolute and unqualified as
went to Indonesia as a contract worker. He then the right to prohibit and prevent their entry into the
embraced and was converted to Islam. country. This right is based on the fact that since the
 He then, married petitioner Djumantan (2nd wife) in aliens are not part of the nation, their admission into
accordance with Islamic rites. Banez then returned to the territory is a matter of pure permission and
the Philippines. simple tolerance which creates no obligation on the
 Petitioner Djumantan and her two children with part of the government to permit them to stay.
Banez arrived in Manila as the “guests” of Banez.  There is no law guaranteeing aliens married to
 The latter made it appear that he was just a friend of Filipino citizens the right to be admitted, much less to
the family of petitioner and was merely repaying the be given permanent residency, in the Philippines.
hospitability extended to him during his stay in  The fact of marriage by an alien to a citizen does not
Indonesia. withdraw her from the operation of the immigration
 Banez executed an “Affidavit of Guaranty and laws governing the admission and exclusion of aliens.
Support,” for his “guests.”  Marriage of an alien woman to a Filipino husband
 As “guests,” petitioner and her two children lived in does not ipso facto make her a Filipino citizen and
the house of Banez. Petitioner and her children were does not excuse her from her failure to depart from
admitted to the Philippines as temporary visitors. the country upon the expiration of her extended stay
 Marina Cabael discovered the true relationship of her here as an alien.
husband and petitioner.  It is not mandatory for the CID to admit any alien
 She filed a complaint for “concubinage”, however, who applies for a visitor’s visa.
subsequently dismissed for lack of merit.  Once admitted into the country, the alien has no
 Immigration status of petitioner was changed from right to an indefinite stay. An alien allowed to stay
temporary visitor to that of permanent resident. temporarily may apply for a change of status and
 Petitioner was issued an alien certificate of “may be admitted” as a permanent resident.
registration.  Among those considered qualified to apply for
 Banez’ eldest son, Leonardo, filed a letter complaint permanent residency if the wife or husband of a
subsequently referred to CID. Philippine citizen. The entry of aliens into the country
 Petitioner Djumantan was detained at the CID and their admission as immigrants is not a matter of
detention cell, but was eventually released after right, even if they are legally married to Filipino
posting bond. citizens.
 Petitioner Djumantan initially manifested that she be  HOWEVER, the right of the public respondents to
allowed to voluntarily depart from the Philippines by deport petitioner has prescribed.
she eventually had a change of heart and moved for  Deportation of an alien under Section 37(a) has a
the dismissal of the deportation case on the ground prescriptive period and "shall not be effected ...
that she was validly married to a Filipino citizen. unless the arrest in the deportation proceedings is
 CID disposed that the second marriage of Bernardo made within 5 years after the cause for deportation
Banes to respondent Djumantan irregular and not in arises.
accordance with the laws of the Philippines. They  Petitioner was admitted and allowed entry into the
revoked the visa previously granted to her. Philippines on January 13, 1979 on the basis of false
and misleading statements in her application and in
ISSUE: the other supporting documents submitted to the
 WON Djumantan’s admission and change of immigration authorities.
immigration status from temporary to permanent
 Leonardo C. Banez first complained with the CID on
November 19, 1980 about the manner petitioner was
admitted into the country and asked for her
deportation
 Tolling the prescriptive period from November 19,
1980, when Leonardo C. Banez informed the CID of
the illegal entry of petitioner into the country, more
than five years had elapsed before the issuance of
the order of her deportation on September 27, 1990.

NOTE: the court did not see the importance of resolving the
validity of the marriage between Banez and Djumantan to
resolve the immigration status.