Citizenship bckup
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Citizenship bckup

on

  • 1,304 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,304
Views on SlideShare
1,304
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
48
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Citizenship bckup Citizenship bckup Presentation Transcript

    • CITIZENSHIP a powerpoint report on
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP Chapter 22 CITIZENSHIP is membership in a political community with all its affiliated rights and responsibilities.
    • CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN CITIZENSHIP
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN Right to Vote Right to Run for Public Office Right to Exploit Natural Resources Right to Operate Public Utilities Right to Administer Educational Institutions Right to Manage the Mass Media
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN Right to Vote Right to Run for Public Office Right to Exploit Natural Resources Right to Operate Public Utilities Right to Administer Educational Institutions Right to Manage the Mass Media
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN Right to Vote Right to Run for Public Office Right to Exploit Natural Resources Right to Operate Public Utilities Right to Administer Educational Institutions Right to Manage the Mass Media
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN Right to Vote Right to Run for Public Office Right to Exploit Natural Resources Right to Operate Public Utilities Right to Administer Educational Institutions Right to Manage the Mass Media
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN Right to Vote Right to Run for Public Office Right to Exploit Natural Resources Right to Operate Public Utilities Right to Administer Educational Institutions Right to Manage the Mass Media
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS of a FILIPINO CITIZEN Right to Vote Right to Run for Public Office Right to Exploit Natural Resources Right to Operate Public Utilities Right to Administer Educational Institutions Right to Manage the Mass Media
    • CITIZENSHIP COMMON METHODS OF ACQUISITION CITIZENSHIP By Birth Jus Sanguinis & Jus Soli
    • The Jus Sanguinis The Jus Soli CITIZENSHIP A person‟s citizenship is by „blood‟, that of the parents. This rule is followed in most countries of the world.
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP COMMON METHODS OF ACQUISITION the legal principle that an individual's nationality is determined by that person's place of birth. The Jus Sanguinis The Jus Soli
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES CITIZENSHIP
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES 1. Citizenship under 1935 Constitution 2. Children of Filipino Parents 3. Election of Philippine Citizenship 4. Naturalization
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILLIPINES UNDER THE PRESENT CONSTITUTION Those who/whose: • are citizens of the Philippines at the adoption of the constitution • fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines • born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who choose Philippine citizenship upon attaining the age of majority. • are naturalized in accordance with law.
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILLIPINES Those who/whose: • are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of the Commonwealth Constitution on November 15, 1935. • born in the Philippine Islands of foreign parents who, prior to the adoption of the commonwealth Constitution, had been elected to public office in the Philippine Islands. • fathers were citizens of the Philippines and mothers were citizens of the Philippines, upon attaining majority age chose Philippine citizenship • were naturalized in accordance with law 1. UNDER THE 1935 CONSTITUTION
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILLIPINES • Children born to Filipino fathers were granted natural born citizenship under Commonwealth Constitution. • Only exception is, if the child was born out of lawful wedlock he will acquire the citizenship of the only known parent which is the mother. • Under new rule, child is considered natural-born Filipino citizen provided that either of his parents is a Filipino citizen. 2. CHILDREN OF FILIPINO PARENTS
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILLIPINES • The right of election permitted under the present Constitution was available only to those born to Filipino mothers under the 1935 Constitution who, had the charter not been changed, would have been able to elect Philippine citizenship upon attaining majority age. • If Filipino mother lost her citizenship upon marriage to foreigner, the right of election cannot be claimed by the offspring born under the new constitution. • This right could only be exercised only within 3 years from attainment of the majority age of 18, or only up to January 17, 1994. 3. ELECTION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP CITIZENS OF THE PHILLIPINES • is a process by which a foreigner acquires, voluntarily or by operation of law, the citizenship of another state. 4. NATURALIZATION
    • CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION CITIZENSHIP Direct OR Derivative
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION is effected: 1.) by individual proceedings, usually general naturalization laws; 2.) by special act of legislature, often in favor of distinguished foreigners who have rendered some notable service to the local state; 3.) by collective change of nationality as a result of cession or subjugation; and 4.) in some cases, by adoption or orphan minors as nationals of the state where they are born. DIRECT NATURALIZATION
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP is conferred/honored: 1.) on the wife of the naturalized husband; 2.) on the minor children of the naturalized parent; and 3.) on the alien woman upon marriage to a national. DERIVATIVE NATURALIZATION NATURALIZATION
    • CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION CITIZENSHIP A. PROCEDURE
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE 1. The applicant shall file with the Office of the Solicitor General a declaration of his intention to be a citizen of the Philippines. 2. Filing of petition for naturalization with the regional trial court of the province or city where the petitioner has resided for at least one year. 3. Upon the receipt of the petition, the clerk of court shall have the duty of publishing the same in the Official Gazette and in one newspaper of general circulation in the province or city once a week for three consecutive weeks and to post notices thereof and of the hearing. 4. Six months after the last publication, but in no case within 30 (30) days before any election, the hearing shall begin, at which the petitioner shall establish all the allegation of his petition, to be corroborated by at least 2 credible witnesses. PROCEDURE
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE 1. He must not be less than eighteen (18) years of age on the date of the hearing of the petition. 2. He must have resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not les than ten years. 3. He must be of good moral character and believe in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution, and must have conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Philippines in relation with the constituted government as well as the community in which he is living; 4. He must own real estate in the Philippines worth no less than five thousand pesos, Philippine currency, or must have some known lucrative trade, profession or lawful occupation. 5. He must be able to speak and write English or Spanish and any of the principal Philippine language. 6. He must have enrolled his minor children of school age in any of the public schools or private schools recognized by the Office of Private Education in the Philippines, where Philippines history, government and civics are taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum during the entire period of the residence in the Philippines required of him prior to the hearing of his petition for naturalization as required for naturalization as Philippine citizen. THE PETITIONER IS REQUIRED TO POSSES THESE QUALIFICATIONS
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE 1. Having honorably held office under the Government of the Philippines or under that of any of the provinces, cities, municipalities, or political subdivisions thereof; 2. Having established a new industry or introduced a useful invention in the Philippines. 3. Being married to a Filipino woman; 4. Having been engaged as a teacher in the Philippines in a public or recognized private school not established for the exclusive instruction of children of persons of particular nationality or race, in any of the branches of education or industry for a period of not less than two years; 5. Having been born in the Philippines THE TEN (10) YEAR RESIDENCE IS REDUCE TO FIVE IF APPLICANT POSSES ANY OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL QUALIFICATION:
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE 1. Person opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines opposing all organized governments; 2. Persons defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of violence, personal assault, or assassination for the success and predominance of their ideas; 3. Polygamists or believers in the practice of polygamy; 4. Persons convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude; 5. Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious diseases; 6. Persons who during the period of their residence in the Philippines, have not mingled socially with Filipinos, or who have not evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions, and ideals of the Filipinos; 7. Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the Philippines is at war, during the period of such war; 8. Citizens or subjects of a foreign country whose laws do not grant Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens or subject thereof. THE FOLLOWING ARE DISQUALIFIED FROM NATURALIZATION
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE Within two (2) years of probationary period the petitioner must establish that: • He has not left the Philippines • Has devoted himself to a lawful calling • Has not been convicted of any violation of law • Has not committed any act in contravention of any government announce policy
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE Within two (2) years of probationary period the petitioner must establish that: • He has not left the Philippines • Has devoted himself to a lawful calling • Has not been convicted of any violation of law • Has not committed any act in contravention of any government announce policy
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE Within two (2) years of probationary period the petitioner must establish that: • He has not left the Philippines • Has devoted himself to a lawful calling • Has not been convicted of any violation of law • Has not committed any act in contravention of any government announce policy
    • CITIZENSHIP CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE Within two (2) years of probationary period the petitioner must establish that: • He has not left the Philippines • Has devoted himself to a lawful calling • Has not been convicted of any violation of law • Has not committed any act in contravention of any government announce policy
    • CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION PROCEDURE The Last Step Administration of the oath of citizenship, by virtue which the petitioner shall embrace Philippine citizenship and renounce allegiance to any foreign State. CITIZENSHIP
    • CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION CITIZENSHIP B. EFFECTS
    • CITIZENSHIP EFFECTS CITIZENSHIP Naturalized Filipinos have all the rights of a Philippine citizen except only those reserved by Constitution to natural-born citizens of the Philippines. Only Natural-Born citizens are allowed to hold constitutional offices such as: 1. Office of the President 2. Senators 3. Members of the House of Representatives 4. Members of the Supreme Court 5. Chairman and Commissioners of the Constitutional Commissions (Civil Service Commission, COMELEC and Commission on Audit)
    • CITIZENSHIP NATURALIZATION CITIZENSHIP C. REVOCATION
    • CITIZENSHIP EFFECTS CITIZENSHIP A person may be DENATURALIZED on the petition of the Solicitor General on the grounds: • that the certificate of naturalization was obtained fraudulently • that he established his permanent residence abroad within five (5) years after naturalization • that the petition was based on an invalid declaration of intention • that his minor children failed to comply with the educational requirements through his fault or neglect • he allowed himself to be used as a dummy in violation of our naturalization laws.
    • CITIZENSHIP EFFECTS CITIZENSHIP LOSS AND REAQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP According to C.A. No. 63 Philippine citizenship is lost: 1. By naturalization in foreign country 2. By express renunciation of citizenship 3. By oath of allegiance to other countries 4. By rendering service to or accepting commission in the armed forces of a foreign country. 5. By cancellation of the certificate of naturalization 6. A deserter of the Philippine Armed Forces in time of war 7. In case of a woman, upon marriage acquires her husband‟s nationality
    • CITIZENSHIP EFFECTS CITIZENSHIP INSTANCES WHEN A PHILIPPINE CITIZEN MAY POSSESS DUAL CITIZENSHIP 1. Those born of parents whose country adopts the jus sanguinis principle in foreign countries which follows the jus soli principle. 2. Those born in the Philippines of Filipino mothers and an alien father, if by laws of their father‟s country such children are citizens of that country. 3. Those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latter‟s country, the former are considered citizens unless, by their act or omission they are deemed to have renounced Philippine citizenship.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP TECSON v. COMMISSION on ELECTIONS (2004) Facts: Victorino X. Fornier, petitioner initiated a petition before the COMELEC to disqualify FPJ and to deny due course or to cancel his certificate of candidacy upon the thesis that FPJ made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by claiming to be a natural- born Filipino citizen when in truth, according to Fornier, his parents were foreigners; his mother, Bessie Kelley Poe, was an American, and his father, Allan Poe, was a Spanish national, being the son of Lorenzo Pou, a Spanish subject. Issue: Whether or Not FPJ is a natural born Filipino citizen. Held: The totality of the evidence may not establish conclusively that respondent FPJ is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, the evidence on hand still would preponderate in his favor enough to hold that he cannot be held guilty of having made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy in violation of Section 78, in relation to Section 74, of the Omnibus Election Code.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP CO VS. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal Facts: The petitioners come to this Court asking for the setting aside and reversal of a decision of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET). The petitioners filed election protests against the private respondent premised on the following grounds: 1)Jose Ong, Jr. is not a natural born citizen of the Philippines; and 2)Jose Ong, Jr. is not a resident of the second district of Northern Samar. The HRET in its decision dated November 6, 1989, found for the private respondent. A motion for reconsideration was filed by the petitioners on November 12, 1989. This was, however, denied by the HRET in its resolution dated February 22, 1989. Issue: WON Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born citizen of the Philippines. Held: Yes. Petitions are dismissed.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP YU vs. DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO FACTS: Petitioner Yu was originally issued a Portuguese passport in 1971. On February 10, 1978, he was naturalized as a Philippine citizen. Despite his naturalization, he applied for and was issued Portuguese Passport by the Consular Section of the Portuguese Embassy in Tokyo on July 21, 1981. Said Consular Office certifies that his Portuguese passport expired on 20 July 1986. He also declared his nationality as Portuguese in commercial documents he signed, specifically, the Companies registry of Tai Shun Estate Ltd. filed in Hongkong sometime in April 1980. ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner‟s acts constitute renunciation of his Philippine citizenship HELD: Express renunciation was held to mean a renunciation that is made known distinctly and explicitly and not left to inference or implication. Petitioner, with full knowledge, and legal capacity, after having renounced Portuguese citizenship upon naturalization as a Philippine citizen resumed or reacquired his prior status as a Portuguese citizen, applied for a renewal of his Portuguese passport and represented himself as such in official documents even after he had become a naturalized Philippine citizen.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP FRIVALDO vs COMELEC FACTS: Private respondent questioned petitioner governor‟s candidacy and election for being null and void ab initio due to his alienage. Petitioner governor contends that his active participation in the elections had divested him of American citizenship under the laws of the US, and restored him of his Philippine citizenship. ISSUE: Whether or not the filing of a certificate of candidacy by a naturalized American effectively recovers his Philippine citizenship. HELD: No, Philippine citizenship previously disowned is not that cheaply recovered. Citizenship once lost may be reacquired either by naturalization or repatriation or by direct grant by law (CA 63) which was not invoked by the petitioner.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP REPUBLIC of the PHILIPPINES vs. JUDGE DE LA ROSA FACTS: This is a petition for certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court in relation to R.A. No. 5440 and Section 25 of the Interim Rules, filed by the Republic of the Philippines: (1) to annul the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 28, Manila, which re-admitted private respondent as a Filipino citizen under the Revised Naturalization Law (C.A. No. 63 as amended by C.A. No. 473); and (2) to nullify the oath of allegiance taken by private respondent on February 27, 1992. On February 27, respondent Judge rendered the assailed Decision and held that Petitioner JUAN G. FRIVALDO, is re-admitted as a citizen of the Republic of the Philippines by naturalization, thereby vesting upon him, all the rights and privileges of a natural born Filipino citizen. ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner was duly re-admitted to his citizenship as Filipino. HELD: No. The supreme court ruled that Private respondent is declared NOT a citizen of the Philippines and therefore disqualified from continuing to serve as governor of the Province of Sorsogon. He is ordered to vacate his office and to surrender the same to the Vice-Governor of the Province of Sorsogon once this decision becomes final and executory.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP LABO vs COMELEC Facts: Petitioner Ramon Labo, elected mayor of Baguio City was questioned on his citizenship. He was married in the Philippines to an Australian citizen. The marriage was declared void in the Australian Federal Court in Sydney on the ground that the marriage had been bigamous. According to Australian records, Labo is still an Australian citizen. Issue: Whether or not Petitioner Labo is a citizen of the Philippines. Held: The petitioner‟s contention that his marriage to an Australian national in 1976 did not automatically divest him of Philippine citizenship is irrelevant. There is no claim or finding that he automatically ceased to be a Filipino because of that marriage. He became a citizen of Australia because he was naturalized as such through a formal and positive process, simplified in his case because he was married to an Australian citizen. As a condition for such naturalization, he formally took the Oath of Allegiance and/or made the Affirmation of Allegiance, renouncing all other allegiance. It does not appear in the record, nor does the petitioner claim, that he has reacquired Philippine citizenship.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP AZNER vs. COMELEC FACTS: In the case at bar, petitioner challenged respondent‟s right to hold public office on the ground that the latter was an alien. Respondent maintains that he is a son of a Filipino, was a holder of a valid subsisting passport, a continuous resident of the Philippines and a registered voter since 1965. He was, however, also a holder of an alien registration certificate. ISSUE: Whether or not respondent is an alien. HELD: No, because by virtue of his being a son of a Filipino, it is presumed that he was a Filipino and remained Filipino until proof could be shown that he had renounced or lost his Philippine citizenship. In addition, possession of an alien registration certificate unaccompanied by proof of performance of acts whereby Philippine citizenship had been lost is not adequate proof
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP MERCADO vs. MANZANO Facts: Petitioner Ernesto Mercado and Private respondent Eduardo Manzano are candidates for the position of Vice- Mayor of Makati City in the May, 1998 elections. Private respondent was the winner of the said election but the proclamation was suspended due to the petition of Ernesto Mamaril regarding the citizenship of private respondent. Mamaril alleged that the private respondent is not a citizen of the Philippines but of the United States. Issue: Whether or Not private respondent is qualified to hold office as Vice-Mayor. Held: By declaring in his certificate of candidacy that he is a Filipino citizen; that he is not a permanent resident or immigrant of another country; that he will defend and support the Constitution of the Philippines and bear true faith and allegiance. On the other hand, private respondent‟s oath of allegiance to the Philippine, when considered with the fact that he has spent his youth and adulthood, received his education, practiced his profession as an artist, and taken part in past elections in this country, leaves no doubt of his election of Philippine citizenship.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP IN RE: CHING FACTS: Vicente D. Ching, the legitimate son of the spouses Tat Ching, a Chinese citizen, and Prescila A. Dulay, a Filipino, was born in Francia West, Tubao, La Union on 11 April 1964. Since his birth, Ching has resided in the Philippines. In their comment, the OSG points out that Ching has not formally elected Philippine citizenship and, if ever he does, it would already be beyond the "reasonable time" allowed by present jurisprudence. ISSUE: Whether or not he has elected Philippine citizenship within a "reasonable time.“ HELD: Philippine citizenship can never be treated like a commodity that can be claimed when needed and suppressed when convenient. One who is privileged to elect Philippine citizenship has only an inchoate right to such citizenship. As such, he should avail of the right with fervor, enthusiasm and promptitude. Sadly, in this case, Ching slept on his opportunity to elect Philippine citizenship and, as a result this golden privilege slipped away from his grasp. Therefore, the Court Resolves to DENY Vicente D. Ching's application for admission to the Philippine Bar.
    • CITIZENSHIP CASES CITIZENSHIP BENGZON III vs. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal Facts: Respondent Teodoro Cruz was a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. He was born in San Clemente, Tarlac, on April 27, 1960, of Filipino parents. The fundamental law then applicable was the 1935 Constitution. On November 5, 1985, however, respondent Cruz enlisted in the United States Marine Corps and without the consent of the Republic of the Philippines, took an oath of allegiance to the United States. As a Consequence, he lost his Filipino citizenship. Issue: Whether or Not respondent Cruz is a natural born citizen of the Philippines in view of the constitutional requirement that "no person shall be a Member of the House of Representative unless he is a natural-born citizen.” Held: Respondent is a natural born citizen of the Philippines. As distinguished from the lengthy process of naturalization, repatriation simply consists of the taking of an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippine and registering said oath in the Local Civil Registry of the place where the person concerned resides or last resided. This means that a naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship will be restored to his prior status as a naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other hand, if he was originally a natural-born citizen before he lost his Philippine citizenship, he will be restored to his former status as a natural-born Filipino.
    • CITIZENSHIP END OF PRESENTATION CITIZENSHIP