G.R. Nos.

92191-92 July 30, 1991

ANTONIO Y. CO, petitioner,

vs.
ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND JOSE
ONG, JR., respondents.

G.R. Nos. 92202-03 July 30, 1991

SIXTO T. BALANQUIT, JR., petitioner,

vs.
ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND JOSE
ONG, JR., respondents.

Facts:

The petitioners sought the reversal of a decision of the House of

Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET).

The HRET declared that respondent Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born Filipino
citizen and a resident of Laoang, Northern Samar for voting purposes.

On May 11, 1987, the congressional election for the second district of
Northern Samar was held.

Among the candidates who vied for the position of representative in the
second legislative district of Northern Samar are the petitioners, Sixto
Balinquit and Antonio Co and the private respondent, Jose Ong, Jr.

Respondent Ong was proclaimed the duly elected representative of the

second district of Northern Samar.

The petitioners filed election protests against the private respondent

premised on the following grounds:

o 1)Jose Ong, Jr. is not a natural born citizen of the Philippines; and

o 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.
 Hence, these petitions for certiorari.

Issues:

Main: WON Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born citizen of the Philippines.

Yes.

The father of the private respondent, Jose Ong Chuan was born in China in
1905 but was brought by private respondents grandfather Ong Te to
Samar in the year 1915 and he filed with the court an application for
naturalization and was declared a Filipino citizen. In 1984, the private
respondent married a Filipina named Desiree Lim. For the elections of 1984
and 1986, Jose Ong, Jr. registered himself as a voter of Laoang, Samar, and
voted there during those elections.
Under the 1973 Constitution, those born of Filipino fathers and those born of
Filipino mothers with an alien father were placed on equal footing. They were
both considered as natural born citizens. Besides, private r e s p o n d e n t d i d
m o r e t h a n m e r e l y e x e r c i s e h i s r i g h t o f s u ff r a g e . H e h a s
e s t a b l i s h e d h i s l i f e h e r e i n t h e Philippines.
On the issue of residence, it is not required that a person should have a
house in order to establish his residence and domicile. It is enough that he
should live in the municipality or in a rented house or in that of a friend or
relative. To require him to own property in order to be eligible to run for Congress would
be tantamount to a property qualification. The Constitution only requires that
the candidate meet the age, citizenship, voting and residence requirements.

WON HRET has committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of

jurisdiction.

No.

HRET shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns
and qualifications of their respective members. The word sole emphasizes the
exclusivity of the jurisdiction of these Tribunals.
In Robles v HRET the SC stated that the judgments of the Tribunal are beyond
judicial interference save only upon a determination that the Tribunals
decision or resolution was rendered without or in excess of its jurisdiction or
with grave abuse of discretion.
The court finds no improvident use of power and no denial of due process on
the part of the HRET which will necessitate the exercise of the power of
judicial review by the Supreme Court.

Dissent (Justice Padilla):

 Under the 1935 Constitution which was enforced at the time of respondents
birth on June 19, 1948, only those whose fathers were citizens of the
Philippines were considered Filipino citizens.
Respondent is not a natural born Filipino citizen, as defined in the 1987
Constitution, he having been born a Chines citizen by virtue of the Chinese
citizenship of his father at the time of his birth.
Although from birth, respondent had the right to elect Philippine citizenship,
the citizenship of his mother, but only upon his reaching the age of majority.