Aristotle Ong Case Digest - Finals

EN BANC

[ G.R. NO. 83882, JANUARY 24, 1989 ]

IN RE PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS OF WILLIE YU, WILLIE YU, PETITIONER, VS. MIRIAM DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO, BIENVENIDO P. ALANO, JR., MAJOR PABALAN, DELEO HERNANDEZ, BLODDY HERNANDEZ, BENNY REYES AND JUN ESPIRITU SANTO, RESPONDENTS. 

The Facts

Willie Yu (Petitioner) is a naturalized Filipino citizen. Petitioner was holder of a Portuguese passport and despite his naturalization on February 10, 1978 applied for a renewal of his travel document with the Portuguese Embassy in Tokyo and was issued same on July 21, 1981. Albeit, petitioner has renounced his former allegiance, he continues to revert to the former whenever convenient i.e. in business dealings and transactions local and overseas. Herein respondent has detained petitioner for eventual deportation alleging that the latter is not a citizen by virtue of his acts & evidences adduced. Petitioner filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking his release from detention.

Issue

Whether the Bureau of Immigration & Deportation (BID) was justified in detaining petitioner and processing him for deportation.

Decision

The court a quo, In Board of Immigration Commissioners vs. Go Gallano, enunciated that express renunciation was held to mean a renunciation that is made known distinctly and explicitly and not left to inference or implication. Petitioner after having renounced Portuguese citizenship upon naturalization, resumed or reacquired his prior status as a Portuguese citizen by applying for a renewal of his Portuguese passport and represented himself as such in official documents even after becoming a naturalized Filipino citizen. Such acts is grossly inconsistent with his maintenance of Philippine Citizenship.

Philippine Citizenship, it must be stressed, is not a commodity or ware to be displayed when required and suppressed when convenient.

Wherefore, premises considered, petitioner's motion for release from detention is denied. The decision is immediately executory.

EN BANC

[ B.M. NO. 2112, JULY 24, 2012 ]

IN RE: PETITION TO RE-ACQUIRE THE PRIVILEGE TO PRACTICE LAW IN THE PHILIPPINES, EPIFANJO B. MUNESES, PETITIONER.

RESOLUTION

The Facts

Epifanio B. Muneses, a Filipino and member of the Philippine Bar but lost the privilege because he became a citizen of the United States of America on August 28, 1981. On September 15, 2006 reacquired his Philippine citizenship pursuant to the "Citizenship Retention and Re-Acquisition Act of 2003" (R.A. No. 9225). He intends to retire in the Philippines & return to the practice of law after compliance with the requirements of the Office of the Bar Confidant, hence this petition.

Issue

If petitioner, after reacquiring Philippine citizenship, can practice law in the Philippines.

Decision

The court - In Bar Matter No. 1678, dated December 17, 2007, allowed Benjamin M. Dacanay (a Filipino citizen and a barrister who migrated to Canada) to return to the practice of law after complying with R.A. No. 9225 and the requirements of the Office of the Bar Confidant to wit:

1.                   Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine Citizenship;

2.                   Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine Citizenship;

3.                   Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines;

4.                   Identification  Certificate  (IC)  issued by the  Bureau  of Immigration;

5.                  Certificate of Good Standing issued by the IBP;

6.            Certification from the IBP on updated payments of annual membership dues;

7.                   Proof of payment of professional tax; and

8.                   Certificate of compliance issued by the MCLE Office.

The practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions. It is so delicately affected with public interest that it is both the power and duty of the State (through this Court) to control and regulate it in order to protect and promote the public welfare.

Wherefore, the petition of Atty. Epifanio B. Muneses is hereby granted.

EN BANC

[ G.R. NO. 182701, JULY 23, 2008 ]

EUSEBIO EUGENIO K. LOPEZ, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND TESSIE P. VILLANUEVA, RESPONDENTS.

R E S O L U T I O N

The Facts

Eusebio Eugenio K. Lopez herein petitioner was a candidate for the Barangay Election held last October 29, 2007. Petitioner won but was nonetheless disqualified by COMELEC. Allegedly, he is a Filipino-American.

Petitioner avers that he is indeed a dual citizen pursuant to his compliance with the Citizenship Retention & Re-acquisition Act of 2003 and that he returned to the Philippines and possesses all the qualifications to run for Barangay Chairman, hence this petition.

Issue

Whether herein petitioner, as a Filipino-American or with dual citizenship, is eligible to run for the office of Barangay Chairman.

Decision

The petition was dismissed and the order of the COMELEC disqualifying petitioner was upheld.

The court stated that the petitioner cannot rely on Valles vs. COMELEC because his case does not sit four squares with the facts of the same and that the doctrine in Valles has been superseded by the enactment of R.A. No. 9225 in 2003 which expressly provides the conditions before those who re-acquired Filipino citizenship may run for public office to wit:

Section 5. Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities. - Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship under this Act shall enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines and the following conditions:

xxxxxx

(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.