8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

1/23

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 14!4" Ma# $% ""1

ANTON&O BENGSON &&&% petitione'%(s.)OUSE O* REPRESENTAT&+ES E,ECTORA, TR&BUNA, an- TEOORO C.CRU/% 'espon-ents.

CONCURR&NG OP&N&ON

&SSENT&NG OP&N&ON

0APUNAN% .2

The citi3enship of 'espon-ent Teo-o'o C. C'u3 is at issue in this case% in (ie of the constitutional'e5ui'e6ent that 7no pe'son shall be a Me6be' of the )ouse of Rep'esentati(e unless he is anatu'al8bo'n citi3en.71

Respon-ent C'u3 as a natu'al8bo'n citi3en of the Philippines. )e as bo'n in San Cle6ente%Ta'lac% on Ap'il $% 19:"% of *ilipino pa'ents. The fun-a6ental la then applicable as the 19;n count'#.7 Sai- p'o(ision of la 'ea-s2

SECT&ON 1. )o citi3enship 6a# be lost. A *ilipino citi3en 6a# lose his citi3enship in an#of the folloin> a#s an-o' e(ents2

?4@ B# 'en-e'in> se'(ices to% o' acceptin> co66ission in% the a'6e- of a fo'ei>ncount'#2 P'o(i-e-% That the 'en-e'in> of se'(ice to% o' the acceptance of such co66issionin% the a'6e- fo'ces of a fo'ei>n count'#% an- the ta=in> of an oath of alle>iance inci-ent

the'eto% ith the consent of the Republic of the Philippines% shall not -i(est a *ilipino of hisPhilippine citi3enship if eithe' of the folloin> ci'cu6stances is p'esent2

?a@ The Republic of the Philippines has a -efensi(e an-o' offensi(e pact of alliance ithsai- fo'ei>n count'#D o'

?b@ The sai- fo'ei>n count'# 6aintains a'6e- fo'ces on Philippine te''ito'# ith the consentof the Republic of the Philippines2 P'o(i-e-% That the *ilipino citi3en conce'ne-% at the ti6eof 'en-e'in> sai- se'(ice% o' acceptance of sai- co66ission% an- ta=in> the oath ofalle>iance inci-ent the'eto% states that he -oes so onl# in connection ith his se'(ice to sai-

1

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/may2001/gr_142840_2001.html#panganiban_cohttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/may2001/gr_142840_2001.html#gutierrez_dohttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/may2001/gr_142840_2001.html#panganiban_cohttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/may2001/gr_142840_2001.html#gutierrez_do

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

2/23

fo'ei>n count'#D An- p'o(i-e-% finall#% That an# *ilipino citi3en ho is 'en-e'in> se'(ice to%o' is co66issione- in% the a'6e- fo'ces of a fo'ei>n count'# un-e' an# of theci'cu6stances 6entione- in pa'a>'aph ?a@ o' ?b@% shall not be Republic of the Philippines-u'in> the pe'io- of his se'(ice to% o' co66ission in% the a'6e- fo'ces of sai- count'#. Uponhis -ischa'>e f'o6 the se'(ice of the sai- fo'ei>n count'#% he shall be auto6aticall# entitle-to the full eno#6ent of his ci(il an- politicall# entitle- to the full eno#6ent of his ci(il

political 'i>hts as a *ilipino citi3en .

Fhate(e' -oubt that 'e6aine- 'e>a'-in> his loss of Philippine citi3enship as e'ase- b# hisnatu'ali3ation as a U.S. citi3en on une asinan in the Ma# 11% 199! elections. )e on b# a con(incin> 6a'>in of :%:$1(otes o(e' petitione' Antonio Ben>son &&&% ho as then 'unnin> fo' 'eelection.1phi1.nHt

Subse5uentl#% petitione' file- a case fo' Iuo Fa''anto A- Cautela6 ith 'espon-ent )ouse ofRep'esentati(es Electo'al T'ibunal ?)RET@ clai6in> that 'espon-ent C'u3 as not 5ualifie- tobeco6e a 6e6be' of the )ouse of Rep'esentati(es since he is not a natu'al8bo'n citi3en as'e5ui'e- un-e' A'ticle +&% section : of the Constitution.4

On Ma'ch % """% the )RET 'en-e'e- its -ecision the petition fo' 5uo a''anto an--ecla'in> C'u3 the -ul# electe- Rep'esentati(e of the Secon- ist'ict of Pan>asinan in the Ma#199! elections. The )RET li=eise -enie- petitione'Js 6otion fo' 'econsi-e'ation of the -ecision inits 'esolution -ate- Ap'il $% """.:

Petitione' thus file- the p'esent petition fo' ce'tio'a'i assailin> the )RETJs -ecision on the folloin>>'oun-s2

1. The )RET co66itte- se'ious e''o's an- >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion% a6ountin> to ecessof u'is-iction% hen it 'ule- that p'i(ate 'espon-ent is a natu'al8bo'n citi3en of thePhilippines -espite the fact that he ha- cease- bein> such in (ie of the loss an-'enunciation of such citi3enship on his pa't.

. The )RET co66itte- se'ious e''o's an- >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion% a6ountin> to ecessof u'is-iction% hen it consi-e'e- p'i(ate 'espon-ent as a citi3en of the Philippines -espitethe fact he -i- not (ali-l# ac5ui'e his Philippine citi3enship.

;. Assu6in> that p'i(ate 'espon-entJs ac5uisition of Philippine citi3enship as in(ali-% the)RET co66itte- se'ious e''o's an- >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion% a6ountin> to ecess of

u'is-iction% hen it -is6isse- the petition -espite the fact that such 'eac5uisition coul- notle>all# an- constitutionall# 'esto'e his natu'al8bo'n status.$

The issue no befo'e us is hethe' 'espon-ent C'u3% a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino ho beca6e anA6e'ican citi3en% can still be consi-e'e- a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino upon his 'eac5uisition of Philippineciti3enship.

Petitione' asse'ts that 'espon-ent C'u3 6a# no lon>e' be consi-e'e- a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino sincehe lost h is Philippine citi3enship hen he so'e alle>iance to the Unite- States in 199

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

3/23

to 'eac5ui'e the sa6e b# 'epat'iation. )e insists that A'ticle citi3ens a'e those ho a'e f'o6 bi'thith out ha(in> to pe'fo'6 an# act to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect such citi3enship.

Respon-ent on the othe' han- conten-s that he 'eac5ui'e- his status as natu'al8bo'n citi3en henhe as 'epat'iate- since the ph'ase 7f'o6 bi'th7 in A'ticle &+% Section 'efe's to the innate% inhe'entan- inbo'n cha'acte'istic of bein> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en.

The petition is ithout 6e'it.

The 19!$ Constitution enu6e'ates ho a'e *ilipino citi3ens as follo2

?1@ Those ho a'e citi3ens of the Philippines at the ti6e of the a-option of this ConstitutionD

?@ Those hose fathe's o' 6othe's a'e citi3ens of the PhilippinesD

?;@ Those bo'n befo'e anua'# 1$% 19$; of *ilipino 6othe'% ho elect Philippine citi3enshipupon 'eachin> the a>e of 6ao'it#% an-

?4@ Those ho a'e natu'ali3e- in acco'-ance ith la.!

The'e a'e to a#s of ac5ui'in> citi3enship2 ?1@ b# bi'th% an- ?@ b# natu'ali3ation. These a#s ofac5ui'in> citi3enship co''espon- to the to =in-s of citi3ens2 the natu'al8bo'n citi3en% an- thenatu'ali3e- citi3en. A pe'son ho at the ti6e of his bi'th is a citi3en of a pa'ticula' count'#% is anatu'al8bo'n citi3en the'eof.9

As -efine- in the sa6e Constitution% natu'al8bo'n citi3ens 7a'e those citi3ens of the Philippinesf'o6 bi'th ithout ha(in> to pe'fo'6 an# act to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect his Philippine cite3enship.7 1"

On the othe' han-% natu'ali3e- citi3ens a'e those ho ha(e beco6e *ilipino citi3ens th'ou>h

natu'ali3ation% >ene'all# un-e' Co66onealth Act No. 4$;% othe'ise =non as the Re(ise-Natu'ali3ation ,a% hich 'epeale- the fo'6e' Natu'ali3ation ,a ?Act No. 9$@% an- b# Republic

Act No.

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

4/23

Repat'iation% on the othe' han-% 6a# be ha- un-e' (a'ious statutes b# those ho lost thei'citi3enship -ue to2 ?1@ -ese'tion of the a'6e- fo'cesD19se'(ices in the a'6e- fo'ces of the allie-fo'ces in Fo'l- Fa' &&D"?;@ se'(ice in the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States at an# othe'ti6e%1?4@ 6a''ia>e of a *ilipino o6an to an alienDan- ?uishe- f'o6 the len>th# p'ocess of natu'ali3ation% 'epat'iation si6pl# consists of the

ta=in> of an oath of alle>iance to the Republic of the Philippine an- 'e>iste'in> sai- oath in the,ocal Ci(il Re>ist'# of the place he'e the pe'son conce'ne- 'esi-es o' last 'esi-e-.

&n An>at (. Republic%4e hel-2

. Pa'entheticall#% un-e' these statutes K'efe''in> to RA Nos. 9:< an- :;"L% the pe'son-esi'in> to 'eac5ui'e Philippine citi3enship oul- not e(en be 'e5ui'e- to file a petition incou't% an- all that he ha- to -o as to ta=e an oath of alle>iance to the Republic of thePhilippines an- to 'e>iste' that fact ith the ci(il 'e>ist'# in the place of his 'esi-ence o'he'e he ha- last 'esi-e- in the Philippines. K&talics in the o'i>inal. inal nationalit#.:This 6eans that anatu'ali3e- *ilipino ho lost his citi3enship ill be 'esto'e- to his p'io' status as a natu'ali3e-*ilipino citi3en. On the othe' han-% if he as o'i>inall# a natu'al8bo'n citi3en befo'e he lost hisPhilippine citi3enship% he ill be 'esto'e- to his fo'6e' status as a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino.

&n 'espon-ent C'u3Js case% he lost his *ilipino citi3enship hen he 'en-e'e- se'(ice in the A'6e-*o'ces of the Unite- States. )oe(e'% he subse5uentl# 'eac5ui'e- Philippine citi3enship un-e'R.A. No. :;"% hich p'o(i-es2

Section 1. An# pe'son ho ha- lost his Philippine citi3enship b# 'en-e'in> se'(ice to% o'acceptin> co66ission in% the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States% o' afte' sepa'ation f'o6the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States% ac5ui'e- Unite- States citi3enship% 6a# 'eac5ui'e

Philippine citi3enship b# ta=in> an oath of alle>iance to the Republic of the Philippines an-'e>iste'in> the sa6e ith ,ocal Ci(il Re>ist'# in the place he'e he 'esi-es o' last 'esi-e-in the Philippines. The sai- oath of alle>iance shall contain a 'enunciation of an# othe'citi3enship.

)a(in> thus ta=en the 'e5ui'e- oath of alle>iance to the Republic an- ha(in> 'e>iste'e- the sa6ein the Ci(il Re>ist'# of Ma>anta'e6% Pan>asinan in acco'-ance ith the afo'ecite- p'o(ision%'espon-ent C'u3 is -ee6e- to ha(e 'eco(e'e- his o'i>inal status as a natu'al8bo'n citi3en% a statushich he ac5ui'e- at bi'th as the son of a *ilipino fathe'. $&t bea's st'essin> that the act of'epat'iation allos hi6 to 'eco(e'% o' 'etu'n to% his o'i>inal status befo'e he lost his Philippineciti3enship.

Petitione'Js contention that 'espon-ent C'u3 is no lon>e' a natu'al8bo'n citi3en since he ha- tope'fo'6 an act to 'e>ain his citi3enship is untenable. As co''ectl# eplaine- b# the )RET in its-ecision% the te'6 7natu'al8bo'n citi3en7 as fi'st -efine- in A'ticle &&&% Section 4 of the 19$;Constitution as follos2

Sec. 4. A natu'al8bo'n citi3en is one ho is a citi3en of the Philippines f'o6 bi'th ithoutha(in> to pe'fo'6 an# act to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect his Philippine citi3enship.

4

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

5/23

To 'e5uisites 6ust concu' fo' a pe'son to be consi-e'e- as such2 ?1@ a pe'son 6ust be a *ilipinociti3en bi'th an- ?@ he -oes not ha(e to pe'fo'6 an# act to obtain o' pe'fect his Philippineciti3enship.

Un-e' the 19$; Constitution -efinition% the'e e'e to cate>o'ies of *ilipino citi3ens hich e'e notconsi-e'e- natu'al8bo'n2 ?1@ those ho e'e natu'ali3e- an- ?@ those bo'n befo'e anua'# 1$%

19$;%;!of *ilipino 6othe's ho% upon 'eachin> the a>e of 6ao'it#% electe- Philippine citi3enship.Those 7natu'ali3e- citi3ens7 e'e not consi-e'e- natu'al8bo'n ob(iousl# because the# e'e not*ilipino at bi'th an- ha- to pe'fo'6 an act to ac5ui'e Philippine citi3enship. Those bo'n of *ilipino6othe's befo'e the effecti(el# of the 19$; Constitution e'e li=eise not consi-e'e- natu'al8bo'nbecause the# also ha- to pe'fo'6 an act to pe'fect thei' Philippines citi3enship.

The p'esent Constitution% hoe(e'% no consi-e' those bo'n of *ilipino 6othe's befo'e theeffecti(it# of the 19$; Constitution an- ho electe- Philippine citi3enship upon 'eachin> the6ao'it# a>e as natu'al8bo'n. Afte' -efinin> ho 'e natu'al8bo'n citi3ens% Section of A'ticle &+a--s a sentence2 7Those ho elect Philippine citi3enship in acco'-ance ith pa'a>'aph ?;@%Section 1 he'eof shall be -ee6e- natu'al8bo'n citi3ens.7 Conse5uentl#% onl# natu'ali3e- *ilipinosa'e consi-e'e- not natu'al8bo'n citi3ens. &t is appa'ent f'o6 the enu6e'ation of ho a'e citi3ens

un-e' the p'esent Constitution that the'e a'e onl# to classes of citi3ens2 ?1@ those ho a'enatu'al8bo'n an- ?@ those ho a'e natu'ali3e- in acco'-ance ith la. A citi3en ho is not anatu'ali3e- *ilipino% i.e.% -i- not ha(e to un-e'>o the p'ocess of natu'ali3ation to obtain Philippineciti3enship% necessa'il# is natu'al8bo'n *ilipino. Noteo'th# is the absence in sai- enu6e'ation of asepa'ate cate>o'# fo' pe'sons ho% afte' losin> Philippine citi3enship% subse5uentl# 'eac5ui'e it.The 'eason the'efo' is clea'2 as to such pe'sons% the# oul- eithe' be natu'al8bo'n o' natu'ali3e--epen-in> on the 'easons fo' the loss of thei' citi3enship an- the 6o-e p'esc'ibe- b# theapplicable la fo' the 'eac5uisition the'eof. As 'espon-ent C'u3 as not 'e5ui'e- b# la to >oth'ou>h natu'ali3ation p'ocee-in> in o'-e' to 'eac5ui'e his citi3enship% he is pe'fo'ce a natu'al8bo'n*ilipino. As such% he possesse- all the necessa'# 5ualifications to be electe- as 6e6be' of the)ouse of Rep'esentati(es.

A final point. The )RET has been e6poe'e- b# the Constitution to be the 7sole u->e7 of allcontests 'elatin> to the election% 'etu'ns% an- 5ualifications of the 6e6be's of the )ouse. 9TheCou'tJs u'is-iction o(e' the )RET is 6e'el# to chec= 7hethe' o' not the'e has been a >'a(eabuse of -isc'etion a6ountin> to lac= o' ecess of u'is-iction7 on the pa't of the latte'.;"&n theabsence the'eof% the'e is no occasion fo' the Cou't to ee'cise its co''ecti(e poe' an- annul the-ecision of the )RET no' to substitute the Cou'tJs u->e6ent fo' that of the latte' fo' the si6ple'eason that it is not the office of a petition fo' ce'tio'a'i to in5ui'e into the co''ectness of theassaile- -ecision.;1The'e is no such shoin> of >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion in this case.

F)ERE*ORE% the petition is he'eb# &SM&SSE.

SO ORERE.

a(i-e% '.% C..% Bellosillo% Puno% an- .% concu'.

Melo% +itu>% Men-o3a% no pa't.

Pan>aniban% concu''in> opinion.

Iuisu6bin>% Buena% e ,eon% '.% on lea(e.

5

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

6/23

San-o(al8Gutie''e3% -issentin> opinion.

Pa'-o% Gon3a>a8Re#es% concu' on this an- the concu''in> opinion of . Pan>aniban

na'es8Santia>o% ce'tif# 6ao'it# opinion of . 0apunan.

*ootnote

119!$ Constitution% A'ticle &+% Section :.

A'ticle &+% Section 1 of the 19;< Constitution states2

The folloin> a'e citi3ens of the Philippines2

1@ Those ho a'e citi3ens of the Philippine &slan-s at the ti6e of the a-option of theConstitutionD

@ Those bo'n in the Philippine &slan-s of fo'ei>n pa'ents ho% befo'e the a-optionof this Constitution ha- been electe- to public office in the Philippine &slan-sD

;@ Those hose fathe's a'e citi3ens of the PhilippinesD

4@ Those hose 6othe's a'e citi3ens of the Philippines an-% upon 'eachin> the a>eof 6ao'it#% electe- Philippine citi3enshipD an-

fo' Reac5uisition of Philippine Citi3enship b# Pe'sons Fho ,ost SuchCiti3enship b# Ren-e'in> Se'(ice To% o' Acceptin> Co66ission &n% the A'6e- *o'ces of theUnite- States ?19:"@.

4Sai- p'o(ision 'ea-s2

No pe'son shall be a 6e6be' of the )ouse of Rep'esentati(es unless he is anatu'al8bo'n citi3en of the Philippines an-% on the -a# of the election% is at leasttent#8fi(e #ea's of a>e% able to 'ea- an- 'ite% an- ecept the pa't#8list'ep'esentati(es% a 'e>iste'e- (ote' in the -ist'ict in hich he shall be electe-% an- a'esi-ent the'eof fo' a pe'io- of not less than one #ea' i66e-iatel# p'ece-in> the-a# of the election.

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

7/23

9TO,ENT&NO% COMMETAR&ES AN UR&SPRUENCE ON T)E C&+&, COE O* T)EP)&,&PP&NES 1!!% 199" E-.

1"19!$ Constitution% A'ticle &+% Section .

11u'in> the pe'io- un-e' Ma'tial ,a -ecla'e- b# P'esi-ent *e'-inan- E. Ma'cos%thousan-s of aliens e'e natu'ali3e- b# P'esi-ential ec'ee he'e the sc'eenin> of theapplicants as un-e'ta=en b# special co66ittee un-e' ,ette' of &nst'uctions No. $"% -ate-

Ap'il 11%19$e on the -a# of the hea'in> of thepetitionD

?b@ )e 6ust ha(e 'esi-e- in the Philippines fo' a continuous pe'io- of not less thanten #ea'sD

?c@ )e 6ust be of >oo- 6o'al cha'acte' an- belie(es in the p'inciples un-e'l#in> thePhilippine Constitution% an- 6ust ha(e con-ucte- hi6self in a p'ope' an-i''ep'oachable 6anne' -u'in> the enti'e pe'io- of his 'esi-ence in the Philippines inhis 'elation ith the constitute- >o(e'n6ent an- ell as ith the co66unit# in hichhe is li(in>D

?-@ )e 6ust on 'eal estate in the Philippines o'th not less than fi(e thousan-pesos% Philippine cu''enc#% o' 6ust ha(e so6e =non luc'ati(e t'a-e% p'ofession% o'laful occupationD

?e@ )e 6ust be able to spea= an- 'ite En>lish o' Spanish an- an# of the p'incipal

lan>ua>esD an-

?f@ )e 6ust ha(e en'olle- his 6ino' chil-'en of school a>e% in an# of the publicschools o' p'i(ate schools 'eco>ni3e- b# the Bu'eau of P'i(ate Schools of thePhilippines he'e Philippine histo'#% >o(e'n6ent an- ci(ic a'e tau>ht o' p'esc'ibe-as pa't of the school cu''iculu6% -u'in> the enti'e pe'io- of the 'esi-ence in thePhilippines 'e5ui'e- of hi6 p'io' to the lea'nin> of his petition fo' natu'ali3ation asPhilippine citi3en.

1;Section 4% Act 4$;% p'o(i-es the folloin> -is5ualifications2

?a@ )e 6ust not be oppose- to o'>ani3e- >o(e'n6ent o' affiliate- ith an#

association o' >'oup of pe'sons ho uphol- an- teach -oct'ines opposin> allo'>ani3e- >o(e'n6entsD

?b@ )e 6ust not be -efen-in> o' teachin> the necessit# o' p'op'iet# of (iolence%pe'sonal assault% o' assassination fo' the success an- p'e-o6inance of thei' i-easD

?c@ )e 6ust not be pol#>a6ist o' belie(e' in the p'actice of pol#>a6#D

?-@ )e 6ust not ha(e been con(icte- of an# c'i6e in(ol(in> 6o'al tu'pitu-eD

7

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

8/23

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

9/23

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

10/23

&t is not -ispute- eithe' that p'i(ate 'espon-ent 'en-e'e- 6ilita'# se'(ice to the Unite- StatesMa'ine Co'ps f'o6 No(e6be' 19

A6e'ican citi3en% in connection ith his US 6ilita'# se'(ice. Conse5uentl#% un-e' Section 1 ?4@;ofCA No. :;% he lost his Philippine citi3enship.

Upon his -ischa'>e f'o6 the US Ma'ine Co'ps% p'i(ate 'espon-ent 'etu'ne- to the Philippines an-

-eci-e- to 'e>ain his *ilipino citi3enship. Thus% on Ma'ch 1$% 1994% a(ailin> hi6self of the benefitsof Republic Act ?RA@ No. :;"% entitle- 7An Act P'o(i-in> fo' Reac5uisition of Philippine Citi3enshipb# Pe'sons Fho ,ost Such b# Ren-e'in> Se'(ice to% o' Acceptin> Co66ission in% the A'6e-*o'ce of the Unite- States%74C'u3 too= his oath of alle>iance to the Republic an- 'e>iste'e- thesa6e ith the ,ocal Ci(il Re>ist'# of Man>ata'e6% Pan>asinan. On the sa6e -a#% he alsoeecute- an Affi-a(it of Reac5uisition of Philippine Citi3enship.

Main &ssue

The 6ain 5uestion he'e is2 i- the )ouse of Rep'esentati(es Electo'al T'ibunal ?)RET@ co66it>'a(e abuse of -isc'etion in hol-in> that% b# 'eason of his 'epat'iation% Con>'ess6an Teo-o'o C.C'u3 ha- 'e(e'te- to his o'i>inal status as a natu'al8bo'n citi3en & 'espectfull# sub6it that theanse' is 7No.7 &n fact% & belie(e that the )RET as co''ect in its 'ulin>.

1. Repat'iation &s Reco(e'# of O'i>inal Citi3enship

*i'st% 'epat'iation is si6pl# the 'eco(e'# of o'i>inal citi3enship. Un-e' Section 1 of RA :;"% ape'son 7ho haKsL lost his citi3enship7 6a# 7'eac5ui'e7 it b# 7 ta=in> an oath of alle>iance to theRepublic of the Philippines.7 *o'6e' Senate P'esi-ent o(ito R. Salon>a% a note- autho'it# on thesubect% eplains this 6etho- 6o'e p'ecisel# in his t'eatise% P'i(ate &nte'national ,a.eof'epat'iate% as 7to 'esto'e o' 'etu'n to oneJs count'# of o'i>in% alle>iance% o' citi3enshipD .7 $&n'elation to ou' subect 6atte'% 'epat'iation% then% 6eans 'esto'ation of citi3enship. &t is not a >'ant ofa ne citi3enship% but a 'eco(e'# of oneJs fo'6e' o' o'i>inal citi3enship.

To 7'eac5ui'e7 si6pl# 6eans 7to >et bac= as oneJs on a>ain.7!E'>o% since C'u3% p'io' to hisbeco6in> a US citi3en% as a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino citi3en% he 7'eac5ui'e-7 the sa6e status upon'epat'iation. To 'ule othe'ise that C'u3 beca6e a non8natu'al8bo'n citi3en oul- not beconsistent hit the le>al an- o'-ina'# 6eanin> of 'epat'iation. &t oul- be a=in to natu'ali3ation%hich is the ac5uisition of a ne citi3enship. 7Ne.7 Because it is not the sa6e as the ith hichhe has p'e(iousl# been en-oe-.

&n an# case% 7the leanin>% in 5uestions of citi3enship% shoul- ala#s be in fa(o' of KitsL clai6ant .79Acco'-in>l#% the sa6e shoul- be const'ue- in fa(o' of p'i(ate 'espon-ent% ho clai6s to be a

natu'al8bo'n citi3en.

. Not Bein> Natu'ali3e-% Respon-ent &s Natu'al Bo'n

Secon-% un-e' the p'esent Constitution% p'i(ate 'espon-ent shoul- be -ee6e- natu'al8bo'n%because as not natu'ali3e-. ,et 6e eplain.

The'e a'e >ene'all# to classes of citi3ens2 ?1@ natu'al8bo'n citi3ens an- ?@ natu'ali3e-citi3ens.1"Fhile CA :; p'o(i-es that citi3enship 6a# also be ac5ui'e- b# -i'ect act of the

10

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

11/23

,e>islatu'e% & belie(e that those ho -o beco6e citi3ens th'ou>h such p'oce-u'e oul- p'ope'l#fall un-e' the secon- cate>o'# ?natu'ali3e-@.11

Natu'ali3e- citi3ens a'e fo'6e' aliens o' fo'ei>ne's ho ha- to un-e'>o a 'i>i- p'oce-u'e% in hichthe# ha- to a--uce sufficient e(i-ence to p'o(e that the# possesse- all the 5ualifications an- noneof the -is5ualifications p'o(i-e- b# la in o'-e' to beco6e *ilipino citi3ens. &n cont'ast% as state- in

the ea'l# case Roa (. Collecto' of Custo6s%1a natu'al8bo'n citi3en is a citi3en 7ho has beco6esuch at the 6o6ent of his bi'th.7

The assaile- )RET ecision% penne- b# M'. ustice +icente +. Men-o3a% eplains clea'l# ho a'econsi-e'e- natu'al8bo'n *ilipino citi3ens. )e t'aces the concept as fi'st -efine- in A'ticle &&& of the19$; Constitution% hich si6pl# p'o(i-e- as follos2

7Sec 4. A natu'al8bo'n citi3en is one ho is a citi3en of the Philippines f'o6 bi'th ithoutha(in> to pe'fo'6 an# act to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect his Philippine citi3enship.7

Un-e' the abo(e -efinition% the'e a'e to 'e5uisites in o'-e' that a *ilipino citi3en 6a# beconsi-e'e- 7natu'al8bo'n72 ?1@ one 6ust be a citi3en of the Philippines f'o6 bi'th% an- ?@ one -oesnot ha(e to -o an#thin> to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect oneJs Philippine citi3enship.1;Thus% un-e' the 19$;Constitution% eclu-e- f'o6 the class of 7natu'al8bo'n citi3ens7 e'e ?1@ those ho e'e natu'ali3e-an- ?@ those bo'n befo'e anua'# 1$% 19$;% of *ilipino 6othe's ho% upon 'eachin> the a>e of6ao'it#% electe- Philippine citi3enship.14

The p'esent Constitution% hoe(e'% has epan-e- the scope of natu'al8bo'n citi3ens to inclu-e7KtLhose ho elect Philippine citi3enship in acco'-ance ith pa'a>'aph ?;@% Section 1 he'eof%76eanin> those co(e'e- un-e' class ?@ abo(e. Conse5uentl#% onl# natu'ali3e- *ilipino citi3ens a'enot consi-e'e- natu'al8bo'n citi3ens. P'e6isin> the'ef'o6% 'espon-ent bein> clea'l# an-conce-e-l# not natu'ali3e- is% the'efo'e% a natu'al8bo'n citi3en of the Philippines.1inal status as a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino citi3en% nothin> less.

;. No G'a(e Abuse of isc'etion on the Pa't of )RET

Thi'-% the )RET -i- not abuse% 6uch less >'a(el# abuse% its -isc'etion in hol-in> that Respon-entC'u3 is a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino citi3en ho is 5ualifie- to be a 6e6be' of Con>'ess. & st'ess that theCou't% in this ce'tio'a'i p'ocee-in> befo'e us% is li6ite- to -ete'6inin> hethe' the )RETco66itte- >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion a6ountin> to lac= o' ecess of u'is-iction in issuin> itsassaile- ecision. The Cou't has no poe' to 'e(e'se o' 6o-if# )RETJs 'ulin>s% si6pl# because it

-iffe's in its pe'ception of cont'o(e'sies. &t cannot substitute its -isc'etion fo' that of )RET% anin-epen-ent% constitutional bo-# ith its on specific 6an-ate.

The Constitution eplicitl# states that the 'especti(e Electo'al T'ibunals of the cha6be's ofCon>'ess 7shall be thesole u->es of all contests 'elatin> to the election% 'etu'ns%an- 5ualifications thei' 'especti(e 6e6be's.71:&n se(e'al cases%1$this Cou't has hel- that thepoe' an- the u'is-iction of the Electo'al T'ibunals a'e o'i>inal an- eclusi(e% as if the# 'e6aine-in the le>islatu'e% a coe5ual b'anch of >o(e'n6ent. Thei' u->6ent a'e be#on- u-icial inte'fe'ence%unless 'en-e'e- ithout o' in ecess of thei' u'is-iction o' ith >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion. 1!&n theele>ant o'-s of M'. ustice )u>o E. Gutie''e3 '.219

11

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

12/23

7The Cou't -oes not (entu'e into the pe'ilous a'ea of t'#in> to co''ect pe'cei(e- e''o's ofin-epen-ent b'anches of the Go(e'n6ent. &t co6es in onl# hen it has to (in-icate a -enialof -ue p'ocess o' co''ect an abuse of -isc'etion so >'a(e o' >la'in> that no less than theConstitution calls fo' 'e6e-ial action.7

T'ue% the'e is no settle- u-icial -oct'ine on the eact effect of 'epat'iation. But% as ea'lie'

eplaine-% the le>al an- co66on -efinition of 'epat'iation is the 'eac5uisition ofthe fo'6e' citi3enship. )o then can the )RET be 'ebu=e- ith >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion At best%& can conce-e that the le>al -efinition is not u-iciall# settle- o' is e(en -oubtful. Butan inte'p'etation 6a-e in >oo- faith an- >'oun-e- o 'eason one a# o' the othe' cannot be thesou'ce of >'a(e abuse a6ountin> to lac= o' ecess of u'is-iction. The )RET -i- not (iolate theConstitution o' the la o' an# settle- u-icial -oct'ine. &t as -efinitel# actin> ithin its eclusi(e-o6ain.

Be it 'e6e6be'e- that ou' Constitution (ests upon the )RET the poe' to be the sole u->e of the5ualifications of 6e6be's of the )ouse of Rep'esentati(es% one of hich is citi3enship. Absentan# clea' shoin> of a 6anifest (iolation of the Constitution o' the la o' na# u-icial -ecision% thisCou't cannot i6pute >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion to the )RET in the latte'Js actions on 6atte's o(e'

hich full -isc'etiona'# autho'it# is lo->e- upon it b# ou' fun-a6ental la."E(en assu6in> that e-isa>'ee ith the conclusion of public 'espon-ent% e cannot ipsofacto att'ibute to it 7>'a(e abuseof -isc'etion.7 +e'il#% the'e is a line beteen pe'cei(e- e''o' an- >'a(e abuse. 1

B# >'a(e abuse of -isc'etion is 6eant such cap'icious an- hi6sical ee'cise of u->6ent as ise5ui(alent to lac= of u'is-iction. Me'e abuse of -isc'etion is not enou>h. 7&t 6ust be >'a(e abuse of-isc'etion as hen the poe' is ee'cise- in an a'bit'a'# o' -espotic 6anne' b# 'eason of passiono' pe'sonal hostilit#% an- 6ust be so patent an- so >'oss as to a6ount to an e(asion of a positi(e-ut# o' to a (i'tual 'efusal to pe'fo'6 the -ut# enoine- o' to act at all in conte6plation of la.7

That the )RET% afte' ca'eful -elibe'ation an- pu'poseful stu-#% (ote- $ to to issue its ecisionuphol-in> the 5ualifications of Con>'ess6an C'u3 coul- not in an# ise be con-e6ne- as >'a(el#abusi(e. Neithe' can & fin- an# 7patent o' >'oss7 a'bit'a'iness o' -espotis6 7b# 'eason of passiono' hostilit#7 in such ee'cise.

4. &n Case of oubt% Popula' Fill P'e(ails

*ou'th% the cou't has a sole6n -ut# to uphol- the clea' an- un6ista=able 6an-ate of the people. &tcannot supplant the so(e'ei>n ill of the Secon- ist'ict of Pan>asinan ith f'actu'e- le>alis6.The people of the ist'ict ha(e clea'l# spo=en. The# o(e'hel6in>l# an- une5ui(ocall# (ote- fo'p'i(ate 'espon-ent to 'ep'esent the6 in the )ouse of Rep'esentati(es. The (otes that C'u3>a'ne'e- ?!"% 119@ in the last elections e'e 6uch 6o'e than those of all his opponents co6bine-?::% 1!@.;&n such instances% all possible -oubts shoul- be 'esol(e- in fa(o' of the innin>

can-i-ateJs eli>ibilit#D to 'ule othe'ise oul- be to -efeat the ill of the people.

4

Fell8ent'enche- in ou' u'isp'u-ence is the -oct'ine that in case of -oubt% political las 6ust be soconst'ucte- as to >i(e life an- spi'it to the popula' 6an-ate f'eel# ep'esse- th'ou>h theballot.n ill shoul-% at all ti6es% be the pa'a6ount consi-e'ationsin election cont'o(e'sies.:*o' it oul- be bette' to e'' in fa(o' of the peopleJs choice than to be'i>ht in co6ple but little un-e'stoo- le>alis6s.$

7&n-ee-% this Cou't has 'epeate-l# st'esse- the i6po'tance of >i(in> effect to the so(e'ei>n ill ino'-e' to ensu'e the su'(i(al of ou' -e6oc'ac#. &n an# action in(ol(in> the possibilit# of a 'e(e'sal ofthe popula' electo'al choice% this Cou't 6ust ee't ut6ost effo't to 'esol(e the issues in a 6anne'

12

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

13/23

that oul- >i(e effect to the ill of the 6ao'it#% fo' it is 6e'el# soun- public polic# to cause electi(eoffices to be fille- b# those ho a'e the choice of the 6ao'it#. To successfull# challen>e a innin>can-i-ateJs 5ualifications% the petitione' 6ust clea'l# -e6onst'ati(e that the ineli>ibilit# is sopatentl# anta>onistic to constitutional an- le>al p'inciples that o(e''i-in> such ineli>ibilit# an-the'eb# >i(in> effect to the appa'ent ill of the people oul- ulti6atel# c'eate >'eate' p'eu-ice tothe (e'# -e6oc'atic institutions an- u'istic t'a-itions that ou' Constitution an- las so 3ealousl#

p'otect an- p'o6ote.7!

lobali3ation.9P'otectionistba''ie's -is6antle-. Fhe'eas% in the past% >o(e'n6ents f'one- upon the openin> of thei' -oo's toaliens ho ante- to eno# the sa6e p'i(ile>es as thei' citi3ens% the cu''ent e'a is a-optin> a 6o'elibe'al pe'specti(e. No lon>e' a'e applicants fo' citi3enship e#e- ith the suspicion that the#6e'el# ant to eploit local 'esou'ces fo' the6sel(es. The# a'e no bein> consi-e'e- potentialsou'ces of -e(elop6ental s=ills% =no8ho an- capital.1phi1.nHt

Mo'e so shoul- ou' >o(e'n6ent open its -oo's to fo'6e' *ilipinos% li=e Con>'ess6an C'u3% hoant to 'eoin the *ilipino co66unit# as citi3ens a>ain. The# a'e not 7aliens7 in the t'ue sense ofthe la. The# a'e actuall# *ilipino b# bloo-% b# o'i>in an- b# cultu'e% ho ant to 'eac5ui'e thei'fo'6e' citi3enship.

&t cannot be -enie- that 6ost *ilipinos >o ab'oa- an- appl# fo' natu'ali3ation in fo'ei>n count'ies%because of the >'eat econo6ic o' social oppo'tunities the'e. )ence% e shoul- elco6e fo'6e'*ilipino citi3ens -esi'ous of not si6pl# 'etu'nin> to the count'# o' 'e>ainin> Philippine citi3enship%but of se'(in> the *ilipino people as ell. One of these a-6i'able *ilipino is p'i(ate 'espon-entho% in onl# a #ea' afte' bein> absent f'o6 the Philippines fo' about ei>ht ?!@ #ea's% as al'ea-#(ote- 6unicipal 6a#o' of Man>ata'e6% Pan>asinan. An- afte' se'(in> as such fo' ust one te'6% heas o(e'hel6in>l# chosen b# the people to be thei' 'ep'esentati(e in Con>'ess.

& 'eite'ate% the people ha(e spo=en. ,et not a 'est'icti(e an- pa'ochial inte'p'etation of the la ba'the so(e'ei>n ill. ,et not >'a(e abuse be i6pute- on the le>iti6ate ee'cise of )RETJsp'e'o>ati(es.

F)ERE*ORE% & (ote to &SM&SS the petition.

*ootnote

17Section 1. The folloin> a'e citi3ens of the Philippines2

?@ Those hose fathe's o' 6othe's a'e citi3ens of the PhilippinesD

7

7Section . Natu'al8bo'n citi3ens a'e those ho a'e citi3ens f'o6 bi'th ithout ha(in> tope'fo'6 an# act to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect thei' Philippine citi3enship. .7

;7Section 1. )o citi3enship 6a# be lost. A *ilipino citi3en 6a# lose his citi3enship in an#of the folloin> a#s an-o' e(ents2

7

13

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

14/23

?4@ B# 'en-e'in> se'(ices to% o' acceptin> co66ission in% the a'6e- fo'ces of afo'ei>n count'#2 .7

4Sec. 1 the'eof p'o(i-es2

7Sec. 1. An# pe'son ho ha- lost his Philippine citi3enship b# 'en-e'in> se'(ice to%o' acceptin> co66ission in% the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States% o' afte'sepa'ation f'o6 the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States% ac5ui'e- U.S. citi3enship%6a# 'eac5ui'e Philippine citi3enship b# ta=in> an oath alle>iance to the Republic ofthe Philippines an- 'e>iste'in> the sa6e ith the ,ocal Ci(il Re>ist'# in the placehe'e he 'esi-es of last 'esi-e- in the Philippines. The sai- oath of alle>iance shallcontain a 'enunciation of an# othe' citi3enship.

e-% 199; e-.!Febste'Js% ibi-.% -efines 'eac5ui'e as 7to ac5ui'e a>ain7% an- ac5ui'e as 7to >et as oneJson.7

9Roa (. Collecto' of Custo6s% ; Phil ;1 Bo#- (.Tha#e% 14; US 1; An>a'a (. Electo'alCo66ission% :; Phil 1;9 ?19;:@.

1!Co (. )RET% ibi-.% citin> Robles (. )RET% 1!1 SCRA $!"% *eb'ua'#

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

15/23

1&bi-.

Taa-a (. An>a'a% $ SCRA 1!% Ma# % 199$% pe' Pan>aniban% .

;7The folloin> e'e the 'esults of the election2

Teo-o'o C. C'u3 !"%119

Antonio E. Ben>son &&& ust abin% 7Globali3ation an- the u-icial *unction%7 O-#se# an- ,e>ac#2The Chief ustice An-'es R. Na'(asa Centennial ,ectu'e Se'ies% co6plie- an- e-ite- b#

Att#. Antonio M. Eliciano% publishe- b# the Sup'e6e Cou't P'intin> Se'(ices% 199! e-. Seealso A'tenio +. Pan>aniban% 7Ol- oct'ines an- Ne Pa'a-i>6s%7 a lectu'e -eli(e'e- -u'in>the Sup'e6e Cou't Centena'# ,ectu'e Se'ies% on *eb'ua'# 1;% ""1.

EN BANC

G.R. No. 14!4" Ma# $% ""1

ANTON&O BENGSON &&&% petitione'%(s.)OUSE O* REPRESENTAT&+ES E,ECTORA, TR&BUNA, an- TEOORO C.CRU/% 'espon-ents.

15

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/may2001/gr_142840_2001.html#top

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

16/23

&SSENT&NG OP&N&ON

SANO+A,8GUT&ERRE/% .2

Fith -ue 'espect% & -isa>'ee ith the ponencia of ustice Santia>o M. 0apunan. & a6 con(ince-that p'i(ate 'espon-ent Teo-o'o C. C'u3 is not natu'al bo'n citi3en an-% the'efo'e% 6ust be-is5ualifie- as a 6e6be' of Con>'ess.

Fho a'e natu'al8bo'n citi3ens

The las on citi3enship its ac5uisition o' loss% an- the 'i>hts% p'i(ile>es an- i66unities of citi3ens ha(e >i(en 'ise to so6e of the 6ost -isputations an- (isce'al issues 'esol(e- b# this Cou't. Thep'oble6 is ta=en up connection ith the so(e'ei>n 'i>ht of (ote's to choose thei' 'ep'esentati(es inCon>'ess.

&n this petition fo' ce'tio'a'i% petitione' Antonio Ben>son &&& as=s this Cou't of Rep'esentati(e of theSecon- ist'ict of Pan>asinan because he -oes not posses the constitutional 'e5ui'e6ent of bein>

a natu'al8bo'n citi3en of this count'#. Respon-ent% on the othe' han-% insists that he is 5ualifie- tobe electe- to Con>'ess consi-e'in> that b# 'epat'iation% he 'e8ac5ui'e- his status as a natu'al8bo'n*ilipino citi3en.

Reco'-s sho that Teo-o'o C'u3 as bo'n in the Philippines on Ap'il $% 19:" to *ilipino pa'ents%spouses ,a6be'to an- Ca'6elita C'u3. On No(e6be' fo' 'eac5uisition of Philippineciti3enship b# pe'sons ho lost such citi3enship b# 'en-e'in> se'(ice to o' acceptin> co66issionin the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States. On Ma'ch 1$% 1994% he too= his oath of alle>iance to theRepublic of the Philippines. The oath as 'e>iste'e- ith the ,ocal Ci(il Re>ist'# of Man>ata'e6%Pan>asinan. On the sa6e -ate% he eecute- an Affi-a(it of Reac5uisition of Philippine Citi3enship.Thus% on Ap'il 11% 1994% the Bu'eau of &66i>'ation an- epo'tation o'-e'e- the cancellation of his

Alien Ce'tificate of Resi-ence ?&CR No. !:asinan% -ecla'in> hi6self to be a natu'ali3e- *ilipino citi3en. )e on an- se'(e- as 6a#o' fo'one te'6.

The'eafte'% C'u3 file- his ce'tificate of can-i-ac# fo' a seat in Con>'ess% this ti6e -ecla'in> hi6selfas a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino. A>ain% he on ith a lea- of :%:$1 (otes o(e' can-i-ate AntonioBen>son% &&&.

On Septe6be' ;% 199!% C'u3 as p'oclai6e- inne' in the con>'essional 'ace in the Secon-ist'ict of Pan>asinan.

16

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

17/23

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

18/23

Petitione' conten-s that the ph'ase 7f'o6 bi'th7 in-icates that citi3enship 6ust sta't at a -efinitepoint an- 6ust be continuous% constant an- ithout inte''uption. The Constitution -oes not eten-the p'i(ile>e of 'eac5ui'in> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en status to 'espon-ent% ho at one ti6e% beca6e analien. )is loss of citi3enship ca''ie- ith it the conco6itant loss of all the benefits% p'i(ile>es an-att'ibutes of 7natu'al8bo'n7 citi3enship. Fhen he 'eac5ui'e- his citi3enship in 1994% he ha- toco6pl# ith 'e5ui'e6ents fo' 'epat'iation% thus effecti(el# ta=in> hi6 out of the constitutional

-efinition of a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino. *o' his pa't% 'espon-ent 6aintains that the ph'ase 7f'o6 bi'th7'efe's to the innate% inhe'ent an- inbo'n cha'acte'istic of bein> a 7natu'al8bo'n7. Since he as bo'nto *ilipino f'o6 bi'th. )is 'eac5uisition of Philippine citi3enship un-e' Republic Act No. :;" 'esultsin his 'eac5uisition of his inhe'ent cha'acte'istic of bein> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en.

*o' his pa't% 'espon-ent 6aintains that the ph'ase 7f'o6 bi'th7 'efe's to the innate% inhe'ent an-inbo'n cha'acte'istic of bein> a 7natu'al8bo'n7. Since he as bo'n to *ilipino pa'ents% he has been anatu'al8bo'n *ilipino f'o6 bi'th. )is 'eac5uisition of Philippine citi3enship un-e' Republic Act No.:;" 'esults in his 'eac5uisition of his inhe'ent cha'acte'istic of bein> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en.

The state of bein> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en has been 'e>a'-e-% not so 6uch in its lite'al sense% but6o'e in its le>al connotation.

The (e'# fi'st natu'al8bo'n *ilipinos -i- not ac5ui'e that status at bi'th. The# e'e bo'n as Spanishsubects. &n Roa (s. Collecto' of Custo6s%the Sup'e6e Cou't t'aces the >'ant of natu'al8bo'nstatus f'o6 the T'eat# of Pa'is% an- the Acts of Con>'ess of ul# 1% 19" an- Ma'ch ;% 191%hich is a 'eenact6ent of Section 4 of the fo'6e' ith a p'o(iso hich 'ea-s2

7P'o(i-e-% That the Philippine ,e>islatu'e is he'eb# autho'i3e- to p'o(i-e b# la fo' theac5uisition of Philippine citi3enship b# those nati(es of the Philippine &slan-s ho -o notco6e ithin the fo'e>oin> p'o(isions% the nati(es of othe' &nsula' possessions of the Unite-States an- such othe' pe'sons 'esi-in> in the Philippine &slan-s ho coul- beco6e citi3ensof the Unite- State un-e' the las of the Unite- State% if 'esi-in> the'ein.7

&t as fu'the' hel- the'ein that un-e' the sai- p'o(ision% 7e(e'# pe'son bo'n the 11thof Ap'il% ofpa'ents ho e'e Spanish subects on that -ate an- ho continue- to 'esi-e in this count'# a'e atthe 6o6ent of thei' bi'th ipso facto citi3ens of the Philippine &slan-s.7

Un-e' the Ap'il $% 19"" &nst'uctions of P'esi-ent Fillia6 Mc0inle# to the Secon- PhilippineCo66ission% consi-e'e- as ou' fi'st colonial cha'te' of fun-a6ental la% e e'e 'efe''e- to as7people of the &slan-s%7 o' 7inhabitants of the Philippine &slan-s%7 o' 7nati(es of the &slan-s7 an- notas citi3ens% 6uch less natu'al8bo'n citi3ens. The fi'st -efinition of 7citi3ens of the Philippine &slan-s7in ou' la is foun- in Section 4 of the Philippine Bill of 19". ;

Philippine citi3enship% inclu-in> the status of natu'al8bo'n% as initiall# a loose o' e(en non8eistent

5ualification. As a 'e5ui'e6ent fo' the ee'cise of ce'tain 'i>hts an- p'i(ile>es% it beca6e a 6o'est'ict an- -ifficult status to achie(e ith the passin> of the #ea's.

Ea'l# -ecisions of the Sup'e6e Cou't hel- that Philippine citi3enship coul- be ac5ui'e- un-e'eithe' the us san>uinis o' us soli -oct'ine.4

This libe'al polic# as applie- e(en as the Philippine Bill of 19" an- the ones ,a of thePhilippine Autono6# Act of 191: appea' to ha(e li6ite- 7citi3ens of the Philippine &slan-s7 to'esi-ent inhabitants ho e'e Spanish subects on Ap'il 11% 1!99% thei' chil-'en bo'n subse5uentthe'eto% an- late'% those natu'ali3e- acco'-in> to la b# the Philippine le>islatu'e. Onl# late'as us san>uinis fi'6l# applie- an- us soli aban-one-.

18

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

19/23

)ence% the status of bein> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en at its incipient is a p'i(ile>e confe''e- b# la-i'ectl# to those ho inten-e-% an- actuall# continue-% to belon> to the Philippine &slan-. E(en atthe ti6e of its conception in the Philippines% such pe'sons upon ho6 citi3enship as confe''e--i- not ha(e to -o an#thin> to ac5ui'e full citi3enship. it.

Public 'espon-ent )RET affi'6e- 'espon-entJs position hen it p'onounce- that the -efinition ofnatu'al8bo'n citi3en in Section % A'ticle &+ of the Constitution 'efe's to the classes of citi3ensenu6e'ate- in Section 1 of the sa6e A'ticle% to it2

7Section 1. The folloin> a'e citi3ens of the Philippines2

?1@ Those ho a'e citi3ens of the Philippines at the ti6e of the a-option of this ConstitutionD

?@ Those hose fathe's o' 6othe's a'e citi3ens of the PhilippinesD

?;@ Those bo'n befo'e anua'# 1$% 19$;% of *ilipino 6othe's% ho elect Philippineciti3enship upon 'eachin> the a>e of 6ao'it#D an-

?4@ Those ho a'e natu'ali3e- in acco'-ance ith la.7

Thus % 'espon-ent )RET hel- that un-e' the abo(e enu6e'ation% the'e a'e onl# to classes ofciti3ens% i.e.% natu'al8bo'n an- natu'ali3e-. Since 'espon-ent C'u3 is not a natu'ali3e- citi3en% thenhe is a natu'al8bo'n *ilipino citi3en.

& -o not a>'ee. & 'eite'ate that Section % A'ticle &+ of the Constitution -efines natu'al8bo'n citi3ens

as 7 those ho a'e citi3ens of the Philippines f'o6 bi'th ithout ha(in> to pe'fo'6 an# act toac5ui'e o' pe'fect thei' Philippine citi3enship.7

Pu'suant to R.A. No. :;"% 5uote- as follo2

7Republic Act No. :;". AN ACT PRO+&&NG *OR REACIU&S&T&ON O* P)&,&PP&NEC&T&/ENS)&P B PERSONS F)O ,OST SUC) C&T&/ENS)&P B RENER&NGSER+&CE TO% OR ACCEPT&NG COMM&SS&ON &N% T)E ARME *ORCES O* T)EUN&TE STATES% p'o(i-es2

Section 1. An# pe'son ho ha- lost his Philippine citi3enship be 'en-e'in> se'(ice to% o'acceptin> co66ission in the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States% o' afte' sepa'ation f'o6

the A'6e- *o'ces of the Unite- States% ac5ui'e- Unite- States citi3enship% 6a# 'eac5ui'ePhilippine citi3enship b# ta=in> an oath of alle>iance to the Republic of the Philippines an-'e>iste'in> the sa6e ith the ,ocal Ci(il Re>ist'# in the place he'e he 'esi-es o' last'esi-e- in the Philippines. The sai- oath of alle>iance shall contain a 'enunciation of an#othe' citi3enship.7

'espon-ent C'u3 ha- pe'fo'6 ce'tain acts befo'e he coul- a>ain beco6e a *ilipino citi3en. )e ha-to ta=e an oath of alle>iance to the Republic of the Philippines an- 'e>iste' his oath ith the ,ocalCi(il Re>ist'# of Man>ata'u6% Pan>asinan. )e ha- to 'enounce his A6e'ican citi3enship an- ha-to eecute an affi-a(it of 'eac5uisition of Philippine citi3enship.

19

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

20/23

Clea'l#% he -i- not 'eac5ui'e his natu'al8bo'n citi3enship. The ca'-inal 'ule in the inte'p'etation an-constitution of a constitution is to >i(e effect to the intention of the f'a6e's an- of the people hoa-opte- it. Fo'-s appea'in> in Constitution a'e use- acco'-in> to thei' plain% natu'al% an- usualsi>nificance an- i6po't an- 6ust be un-e'stoo- in the sense 6ost ob(ious to the co66onun-e'stan-in> of the people at the ti6e of its a-option.

The p'o(ision on 7natu'al8bo'n citi3ens of the Philippines7 is p'ecise% clea' an- -efinite. &n-ee-%neithe' )RET no' this Cou't can const'ue it othe' than hat its plain 6eanin> con(e#s. &t is notph'ase- in >ene'al lan>ua>e hich 6a# call fo' const'uction of hat the o'-s i6pl#.

&n . M. Tuason Co.% &nc. (s. ,an- Tenu'e A-6inist'ation%:this Cou't hel-2

7Asce'tain6ent of 6eanin> of p'o(isions of Constitution be>ins ith the lan>ua>e of the-ocu6ent itself. The o'-s use- in the Constitution a'e to be >i(en thei' o'-ina'# 6eanin>%ecept he'e technical te'6s a'e e6plo#e-% in hich case the si>nificance thus attache- tothe6 p'e(ails. As the Constitution is not p'i6a'il# a la#e'Js -ocu6ent% it bein> essential fo'the 'ule of la to obtain that it shoul- e(e' be p'esent in the peopleJs consciousness% itslan>ua>e as 6uch as possible% shoul- be un-e'stoo- in the sense the# ha(e in co66onuse. Fhat it sa#s acco'-in> to the tet of the p'o(ision to be const'ue- co6pels acceptancean- ne>ates the poe' of the cou'ts to alte' it% base- on the postulate that the f'a6e's an-the people 6ean hat the# sa#.7

The -efinition of a natu'al8bo'n citi3en in the Constitution 6ust be applie- to this petition acco'-in>to its natu'al sense.

Respon-ent )RET li=eise 'ule- that the 7'eac5uisition of Philippine citi3enship th'ou>h an# ofthese 6o-es2 ?natu'ali3ation% 'epat'iation an- le>islation un-e' Section ;% C.A. No. :;@ 'esults inthe 'esto'ation of p'e(ious status% eithe' as a natu'al8bo'n o' a natu'ali3e- citi3en7 is a si6plisticapp'oach an- ten-s to be 6islea-in>.

&f citi3enship is >aine- th'ou>h natu'ali3ation% 'epat'iation o' le>islation% the citi3en conce'ne- cannot be consi-e'e- natu'al8bo'n. Ob(iousl#% he has to pe'fo'6 ce'tain acts to beco6e a citi3en.

As ep'esse- in the issent of ustice ose C. +itu>$in the instant case% concu''e- in b# usticeA.R. Melo2!

7Repat'iation is the 'esu6ption o' 'eco(e'# of the o'i>inal nationall# upon the fulfill6ent ofce'tain con-itions. Fhile an applicant nee- not ha(e to un-e'>o the te-ious an- ti6econsu6in> p'ocess 'e5ui'e- b# the Re(ise- Natu'ali3ation ,a ?CA 4$;% s a6en-e-@% he%ne(e'theless% oul- still ha(e to 6a=e an ep'ess an- une5ui(ocal act of fo'6all# 'eectin>his a-opte- state an- 'eaffi'6in> his total an- eclusi(e alle>iance an- lo#alt# to the

Republic of the Philippines. &t bea's e6phasis that% to be of section % A'ticle &+% of the 19!$Constitution% one shoul- not ha(e to pe'fo'6 an# act at all o' >o th'ou>h an# p'ocess%u-icial o' a-6inist'ati(e% to enable hi6 to 'eac5ui'e his citi3enship. illou>hb# opines that anatu'al8bo'n citi3en is one ho is able to clai6 citi3enship ithout an# p'io' -ecla'ation onhis pa't of a -esi'e to obtain such status. Un-e' this (ie% the te'6 Jnatu'al bo'nJ citi3enscoul- also co(e' those ho ha(e been collecti(el# -ee6e- citi3ens b# 'eason of the T'eat#of Pa'is an- the Philippine Bill of 19" an- those ho ha(e been acco'-e- b# the 19;ent 'e5ui'e6ent of the Constitution is soplace- as to insu'e that onl# *ilipino citi3ens ith an absolute an- pe'6anent -e>'ee of alle>iancean- lo#alt# shall be eli>ible fo' 6e6be'ship in Con>'ess% the b'anch of the >o(e'n6ent -i'ectl#in(ol(e- an- >i(en the -e-icate tas= of le>islation.7

The -issentin> opinion fu'the' states2

7The te'6 Jnatu'al8bo'nJ *ilipino citi3en% fi'st constitutionall# -efine- in the 19$; Cha'te'%late' a-opte- b# the 19!$ Constitution% pa'ticula'l# in Section % A'ticle &+ the'eof% is 6eantto 'efe' to those J ho a'e citi3ens of the Philippines f'o6 bi'th ithout ha(in> to pe'fo'6an# act to ac5ui'e o' pe'fect thei' citi3enship%J an- to those J ho elect Philippineciti3enship.J Ti6e an- a>ain% the Sup'e6e Cou't has -ecla'e- that he'e the las spea=sin clea' an- cate>o'ical lan>ua>e% the'e is no 'oo6 fo' inte'p'etation% (acillation o'e5ui(ocation the'e is onl# 'oo6 fo' application. The ph'ase Jf'o6 bi'th in-icates that the'eis a sta'tin> point of his citi3enship an- this citi3enship shoul- be continuous% constant an-ithout inte''uption.7

Thus% 'espon-ent is not eli>ible fo' election to Con>'ess as the Constitution 'e5ui'es that a6e6be' of the )ouse of Rep'esentati(e 6ust be a 7natu'al8bo'n citi3en of the Philippines.7

*o' su'e% the f'a6e's of ou' Constitution inten-e- to p'o(i-e a 6o'e st'in>ent citi3enship'e5ui'e6ent fo' hi>he' electi(e offices% inclu-in> that of the office of a Con>'ess6an. Othe'ise%the Constitution shoul- ha(e si6pl# p'o(i-e- that a can-i-ate fo' such position can be 6e'el# aciti3en of the Philippines% as 'e5ui'e- of local electi(e office's.

The spi'it of nationalis6 pe'(a-in> the 19;< Constitution% the fi'st cha'te' f'a6e- an- 'atifie- b# the*ilipino ?e(en as the -'aft ha- to be app'o(e- b# P'esi-ent *'an=lin elano Roose(elt of theUnite- States@ >ui-e an- >o(e'ns the inte'p'etation of Philippine citi3enship an- the 6o'e na''oan- boun-en concept of bein> a natu'al8bo'n citi3en.

Un-e' the 19;< costitution%9the 'e5ui'e6ent of natu'al8bo'n citi3enship as applicable to theP'esi-ent an- +ice Pe'si-ent.1"A pe'son ho ha- been a citi3en fo' onl# fi(e ?ene'al.

21

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

22/23

&t bea's st'essin> that e a'e t'acin> an- enfo'cin> a -oct'ine e6bo-ie- in no less that theconstitution. &n-ee-% a -e(iation f'o6 the clea' an- constitutional -efinition of a 7natu'al bo'n*ilipino citi3en7 is a 6atte' hich can onl# be acco6plishe- th'ou>h a constitutionala6en-6ent. Clea'l# 'espon-ent )RET >'a(el# abuse- its -isc'etion.

Respon-ent C'u3 has a(aile- hi6self of the p'oce-u'e he'eb# his citi3enship has been 'esto'e-.

)e can 'un fo' public office he'e natu'al8bo'n citi3enship is not 6an-ate-. But he cannot beelecte- to hi>h offices hich the Constitution has 'ese'(e- onl# fo' natu'al8bo'n *ilipino citi3ens.

F)ERE*ORE% & (ote to GRANT the petition.1phi1.nHt

*ootnote

119!$ Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.

; Phil ;1< ?191@.

;Section 4. That all inhabitants of the Philippine &slan-s continuin> to 'esi-e the'ein hoe'e Spanish subects on the ele(enth -a# of Ap'il% ei>hteen hun-'e- an- ninet#8nine an-then 'esi-e- in sai- &slan-s% an- thei' chil-'en bo'n subse5uent the'eto% shall be -ee6e-an- hel- to be citi3ens of the Philippine &slan-s an- as such entitle- to the p'otection of theUnite- States% ecept such as shall ha(e electe- to p'ese'(e thei' alle>iance to the C'onof Spain in acco'-ance ith the p'o(ision of the t'eat# of peace beteen the Unite- Statesan- Spain si>ne- at Pa'is% ece6be' tenth% ei>hteen hun-'e- an- ninet#8ei>ht.

4Roa (s. Collecto' of Custo6s% sup'aD ,i6 Teco (s. Collecto'% 4 Phil !4D ?191;@ Unite-

State (s. ,i6 Bin% ;: Phil 94 ?191$@.

8/10/2019 1 Bengzon v Cruz

23/23

1;Section 4 an- $% A'ticle +&% 19;< Constitution% as a6en-e-.

14Section : an- !% A'ticle +&&&% ibi-.

1