Doctrine:
Philippine citizenship is an indispensable requirement for
holding an elective office. As mandated by law: "An elective local
official must be a citizen of the Philippines." The filing of a certificate of candidacy does
not ipso facto amount to a renunciation of his foreign citizenship under R.A.
No. 9225. Our rulings in the cases of Frivaldo and Mercado are not applicable
to the instant case because R.A. No. 9225 provides for more requirements
Petitioner Roseller de Guzman filed petition for certiorari
for being declared by COMELEC as a disqualified Vice-Mayor candidate of Guimba,
Nueva Ecija. He was a naturalized American citizen who took oath of allegiance
to the Republic of the Philippines. Having acquired Philippine citizenship, he
argued that he is entitled to exercise full civil and political rights and such
is he is qualified to run as vice mayor post.
When he lost the election, he filed
for an election protest on the grounds of irregularities and massive cheating.
Meanwhile, COMELEC rendered its Resolution disqualifying de Guzman. De Guzman
filed motion for reconsideration but was dismissed having been rendered moot
due to the opponent’s victory.
ISSUES:
1.
Whether or not the COMELEC
gravely abused its discretion in dismissing petitioner’s motion for
reconsideration for being moot;
2.
Whether or not the
petitioner is disqualified from running for vice-mayor of Guimba, Nueva Ecija
in the May 14, 2007 elections for having failed to renounce his American
citizenship in accordance with R.A. No. 9225.
HELD:
1.
Yes,
a definitive ruling on the issue of
petitioner's citizenship was clearly necessary. Hence, the COMELEC committed
grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petitioner's motion for reconsideration
solely on the ground that the same was rendered moot because he lost to private
respondent.
In
this case, the pendency of petitioner’s election protest assailing the results
of the election did not render moot on the reconsideration filed by petitioner
for his disqualification. The citizenship issue of the petitioner remained
relevant since it could significantly affect the results of the election
protest.
2.
Supreme Court finds the petitioner is disqualified from
running for public office in view of his failure to renounce his American
citizenship.
R.A. No. 9225 was
enacted to allow re-acquisition and retention of Philippine citizenship for: 1)
natural-born citizens who have lost their Philippine citizenship by reason of
their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country; and 2) natural-born
citizens of the Philippines who, after the effectivity of the law, become
citizens of a foreign country. The law provides that they are deemed to have
re-acquired or retained their Philippine citizenship upon taking the oath of
allegiance.
Petitioner falls
under the first category, being a natural-born citizen who lost his Philippine
citizenship upon his naturalization as an American citizen. In the instant
case, there is no question that petitioner re-acquired his Philippine
citizenship after taking the oath of allegiance on September 6, 2006. However, it
must be emphasized that R.A. No. 9225 imposes an additional requirement on
those who wish to seek elective public office, as follows:
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:
x x x x
(2) Those seeking
elective public office in the Philippines shall meet the qualifications 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.
Contrary to
petitioner’s claims, the filing of a certificate of candidacy does not ipso
facto amount to a renunciation of his foreign citizenship under R.A.
No. 9225. Our rulings in the cases of Frivaldo and Mercado are not applicable
to the instant case because R.A. No. 9225 provides for more requirements.
In the instant case,
petitioner’s Oath of Allegiance and Certificate of Candidacy did not comply
with Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 9225 which further requires those seeking
elective public office in the Philippines to make a personal and sworn
renunciation of foreign citizenship. Petitioner failed to renounce his American
citizenship; as such, he is disqualified from running for vice-mayor of Guimba,
Nueva Ecija in the May 14, 2007 elections.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED. Petitioner is declared
DISQUALIFIED from running for Vice-Mayor of Guimba, Nueva Ecija in the May 14,
2007 elections because of his failure to renounce his foreign citizenship
pursuant to Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 9225.
###
No comments:
Post a Comment