Article IV – Citizenship
ARTICLE IV - CITIZENSHIP 2. By naturalization
What is citizenship?
 It is membership in a political community which is personal and more
or less permanent in character.
Who is a citizen?
 According to Aristotle, citizens are persons who possess rights and
who shares in the administration of justice, and in offices.
Citizenship vs. Nationality
 Nationality is membership in any class or form of political community.
Thus, nationals may be citizens [if members of a democratic
community] or subjects [if members of a monarchical community].
Nationality does not necessarily include the right or privilege of
exercising civil or political rights.
Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:
[1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of
this Constitution;
[2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
[3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and
[4] Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
What are the modes of acquiring citizenship?
1. By birth
a) Jus sanguinis – acquisition of citizenship on the basis of blood
relationship.
b) Jus soli – acquisition of citizenship on the basis of the place of
birth.
3. By marriage
Note: Jus sanguinis and naturalization are the modes followed in the
Philippines.
What is the Caram Rule?
 Chiongbian v. de Leon, under the 1935 Constitution, those born in the
Philippines of foreign parent, who before the adoption of the
Constitution had been elected to public office, are considered Filipino
citizens.
 In Tecson v. COMELEC, the 1935, Constitution, during which regime
FPJ had seen first light, confers citizenship to all persons whose fathers
are Filipino citizens regardless of whether such children are legitimate
or illegitimate.
“Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of
this Constitution” – Filipino citizen
1. Re: 1935 Constitution
o Sec. 4, Philippine Bill of 1902; Sec. 2, Jones Law of 1916
[including children born after April 11, 1899], Under these
organic acts, inhabitants of the islands who were Spanish
subjects on April 11, 1899, who did not opt in writing to retain
Spanish nationality between April 11, 1899 to October 11,
1900 — including their children — were deemed citizens of
the Philippines.
o Act No. 2927 [March 26,1920], then CA473, on naturalization
[including children below 21 and residing in the Philippines at
the time of naturalization, as well as children born subsequent
to naturalization
o Foreign women married to Filipino citizens before or after
November 30, 1938 [effectivity of CA 473] who might
themselves be lawfully naturalized
o Those benefited by the Roa doctrine applying the jus soli
principle.
o Caram provision.
o Those who elected Philippine citizenship.
1
Article IV – Citizenship
2. Re: 1973 Constitution. - Those whose mothers are citizens of
thePhilippines. Provision is prospective in application; to benefit only
those born on or after January 17, 1973 [date of effectivity of 1973
Constitution],
“Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.” – considered
Filipino citizen
 Procedure for election. Election is expressed in a statement to be signed
and sworn to by the party concerned before any official authorized to
administer oaths. Statement to be filed with the nearest Civil Registry.
The statement is to be accompanied with the Oath of Allegiance to the
Constitution and the Government of the Philippines [Sec. 1, CA 625].
 When to elect. Within three (3) years from reaching the age of majority
[Opinion, Secretary of Justice, s. 1948]; except when there is a
justifiable reason for the delay.
o In Co v. HRET, the Supreme Court affirmed the finding of the
HRET that the exercise of the right of suffrage and participation
in election exercises constitute a positive act of election of
Philippine citizenship. (doctrine of implied election)
o However, In Re: Ching, Bar Matter No. 914, where Ching,
having been born on April 11, 1964, was already 35 years old
when he complied with requirements of CA 625 on June 15,
1999, or over 14 years after he had reached the age of majority.
By any reasonable yardstick, Ching’s election was clearly
beyond the allowable period within which to exercise the
privilege. All his mentioned acts cannot vest in him citizenship
as the law gives the requirement for election of Filipino
citizenship which Ching did not comply with.
 The constitutional and statutory requirements of electing Filipino
citizenship apply only to legitimate children.
o If illegitimate, follow the citizenship of the mother.
Additional note: The 1973 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, (In
Filipino: Ang Saligang Batas ng Pilipinas), ratified by the Citizens Assemblies on
January 17, 1973
In Republic v. Lim, it was held that respondent, who was concededly an
illegitimate child considering that her Chinese father and Filipino mother were
never married, is not required to comply with said constitutional and statutory
requirements. Being an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother, respondent
became a Filipino upon birth. This notwithstanding, records show that the
respondent elected Filipino citizenship when she reached the age of majority.
She registered as a voter in Misamis Oriental when she was 18 years old. The
exercise of the right of suffrage and the participation in election exercises
constitute a positive act of electing Philippine citizenship.
Section 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the
Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or
perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship
in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed
natural-born citizens.
Who are natural born citizens?
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to
perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship.
2. Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching age of majority.
Naturalization
 The act of formally adopting a foreigner into the political body of a
nation by clothing him or her with the privileges of a citizen
Modes of naturalization
1. Direct: Citizenship is acquired by:
(i) Individual, through judicial or administrative proceedings;
(ii) Special act of legislature;
(iii) Collective change of nationality, as a result of cession or
subjugation; or
(iv) In some cases, by adoption of orphan minors as nationals of the
State where they are born.
2
Article IV – Citizenship
2. Derivative: Citizenship conferred on:
(i) Wife of naturalized husband;
(ii) Minor children of naturalized person; or on the
(iii) Alien woman upon marriage to a national.
Note: Derivative naturalization does not always follow as a matter of
course, for it is usually made subject to stringent restrictions and
conditions. Our own laws, for instance, provide that an alien woman
married to a Filipino shall acquire his citizenship only if she herself might
be lawfully naturalized.
Doctrine of indelible allegiance
 An individual may be compelled to retain his original nationality even if
he has already renounced or forfeited it under the laws of the second
State whose nationality he has acquired.
Direct naturalization under Philippine laws
 Under current and existing laws, there are three (3) ways by which an
alien may become a citizen of the Philippines by naturalization:
a. judicial naturalization under Commonwealth Act No. 473, as
amended;
b. administrative naturalization under Rep. Act No. 9139; and
c. legislative naturalization in the form of a law enacted by
Congress, bestowing Philippine citizenship to an alien.
State the qualifications for judicial naturalization - CA 473 (A R C – R S E)
1. Not less than 18 years of age on the date of hearing the petition (as
amended by R.A. 6809);
2. Resided in the Philippines for not less than 10 years; may be reduced to
5 years, if; (O – I M – T B)
a. Honorably held office in the Philippines
b. Established new industry or introduced a useful invention
c. Married to a Filipino woman
d. Engaged as teacher in Philippine public or private school not
established for exclusive instruction of a particular nationality
or race, or in any branches of education or industry for a
period of not less than 2 years; and
e. Born in the Philippines
3. Character
a. Good moral character
b. Believes in the Constitution
c. Conducted himself in an irreproachable conduct during his
stay in the Philippines
4. Owns real estate in the Philippines not less than P5,000 in value; or has
some lucrative trade, profession or lawful occupation that can support
himself and his family
o In the Matter of the Petition of Ban Uan, lucrative trade,
profession or lawful occupation means gainful employment. It
is not only that the person having the employment gets enough
for his ordinary necessities in life. It must be shown that the
employment gives one an income such that there is an
appreciable margin of his income over his expenses as to be
able to provide for an adequate support in the event of
unemployment, sickness, or disability to work and thus avoid
one's becoming the object of charity or a public charge
And this qualification has been construed to mean, not only
that he is not a beggar, a pauper or indigent, but, also, that his
financial condition must be such as to permit him and the
members of his family to live with reasonable comfort, in
accordance with the prevailing standard of living, and
consistently with the demands of human dignity, at this stage
of our civilization.'"
Note: While to be a student is a lawful occupation, it is not a lucrative one
and therefore comes short of the legal requirement. (Lim v. Republic)
5. Speaks and writes English or Filipino and any principal Philippine
dialects (as amended by Sec. 6 Art. XIV); and
Note: A deaf-mute cannot be naturalized.
6. Enrolled minor children in any public or private school recognized by
the government where Philippine history, government and civics are
3
Article IV – Citizenship
taught as part of the curriculum, during the entire period of residence
prior to hearing of petition.
Who are disqualified for naturalization? (P O D – S C W – R2)
1. Polygamists or believers of polygamy
2. Persons opposed to organized government or affiliated with any
association or group of persons which uphold and teach doctrines
opposing all organized governments
3. Persons defending or teaching necessity or propriety of violence,
personal assault or assassination for the success or predominance of
their ideas
4. Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious
disease
5. Persons convicted of crime involving moral turpitude
6. Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the Philippines is at war,
during the period of such war
7. Persons who, during residence in the Philippines, have not mingled
socially with Filipinos, or did not evince sincere desire to learn and
embrace customs, traditions and ideals of Filipinos
8. Citizens or subjects of a foreign country whose laws do not grant
Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens or subjects thereof
(no reciprocity)
Procedure for naturalization (I P P -R H D – A O)
1. Filing of declaration of intention one year prior to the filing of the
petition with the Office of the Solicitor General. The following are
exempt from filing declaration of intention:
a) Born in the Philippines and have received their primary and
secondary education in public or private schools recognized by
the Government and not limited to any race or nationality.
b) Resided in the Philippines for 30 years or more before the
filing of the petition, and enrolled his children in elementary
and high schools recognized by the Government and not
limited to any race or nationality.
c) Widow and minor children of an alien who has declared his
intention to become a citizen of the Philippines and dies before
he is actually naturalized.
o Purpose: to enable government to make initial investigations into
his circumstances to determine, his fitness for citizenship and to
test his sincerity.
2. Filing of the petition, accompanied by the affidavit of two credible
persons, citizens of the Philippines, who personally know the
petitioner, as character witnesses.
3. Publication of the petition. Under Sec. 9, Revised Naturalization Law, in
order that there be a valid publication, the following requisites must
concur:
a) the petition and notice of hearing must be published;
b) the publication must be made once a week for three
consecutive weeks; and
c) the publication must be in the Official Gazette and in a
newspaper of general circulation in the province where the
applicant resides. In addition, copies of the petition and notice
of hearing must be posted in the office of the Clerk of Court or
in the building where the office is located. The same notice
must also indicate, among others, the names of the witnesses
whom the petitioner proposes to introduce at the trial
[Republic v. Michael Hong, G.R. No. 168877 March 23 2006],
o Publication is a jurisdictional requirement. Noncompliance is
fatal for it impairs the very root or foundation of the authority
to decide the case, regardless of whether the one to blame is
the clerk of court or the petitioner or his counsel [Gan Tsitung
v. Republic].
o This rule applies equally to the determination of the sufficiency
of the contents of the notice of hearing and of the petition itself,
because an incomplete notice or petition, even if published, is
no publication at all. Thus, in Sy v. Republic, it was held that
the copy of the petition to be posted and published should be a
textual or verbatim restatement of the petition filed.
o In the same vein, the failure to state all the required details in
the notice of hearing, like the names of applicant’s witnesses,
constitutes a fatal defect. The publication of the affidavit of
such witnesses did not cure the omission of their names in the
notice of hearing. It is a settled rule that naturalization laws
4
Article IV – Citizenship
should be rigidly enforced and strictly construed in favour of
the government and against the applicant [Ong Chua v.
Republic].
4. Actual residence in the Philippines during the entire proceedings.
5. Hearing of the petition.
6. Promulgation of the decision.
7. Hearing after two years. At this hearing, the applicant shall show that
during the two-year probation period, applicant has
a) not left the Philippines;
b) dedicated himself continuously to a lawful calling or profession
c) not been convicted of any offense or violation of rules; and
d) not committed an act prejudicial to the interest of the nation or
contrary to any Government- announced policies.
8. Oath taking and issuance of the Certificate of Naturalization.
 In Republic v. Dela Rosa, it is not for an applicant to decide for himself
and to select the requirement which he believes, even sincerely, are
applicable to his case and discard those which be believes are
inconvenient or merely of nuisance value. The law does not distinguish
between an applicant who was formerly a Filipino citizen and one who
was never such a citizen. It does not provide a special procedure for the
reacquisition of Philippine citizenship by former Filipino citizens akin
to the repatriation of a woman who had lost her Philippine citizenship
by reason of her marriage to an alien.
What are the effects of naturalization?
On the wife
In Moy Ya Lim Yao v. Comm. of Immigration, it vests citizenship on the
wife who might herself be lawfully naturalized; She need not prove her
qualifications but only that she is not disqualified. All she has to do is to file
before the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation a petition for the
cancellation of her Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR).
On the minor children
Born in the Philippines
Automatically becomes a citizen
Born Abroad
Before the naturalization of the father
If residing in the Phil. At the time of Automatically becomes a citizen.
naturalization
If not residing in the Phil. At the time GR: Considered citizen only during
of naturalization minority
XPN: He begins to reside
permanently in the Phil.
After parents’ naturalization
Considered Filipino, provided registered as such before any Phil. consulate
within 1 year after attaining majority age and takes oath of allegiance.
What are the grounds for denaturalization? (F R I G D)
1. Naturalization certificate obtained fraudulently or illegally
2. If, within 5 years, he returns to his native country or to some foreign
country and establishes residence therein
3. Naturalization obtained through invalid declaration of intention
4. Minor children failed to graduate through the fault of parents either by
neglecting support or by transferring them to another school
5. Allowing himself to be used as a dummy.
What are the effects of denaturalization?
1. If ground affects intrinsic validity of proceedings, denaturalization shall
divest wife and children of their derivative naturalization
2. If the ground is personal, the wife and children shall retain citizenship.
Special committee on naturalization ( RA 9319)
1. Composed of the Solicitor General, as chairman,
2. the Secretary of Foreign Affairs or his representative, and
3. the National Security Adviser, as members,
 this Committee has the power to approve, deny or reject applications
for naturalization under this Act.
Section 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner
provided by law.
5
Article IV – Citizenship
Section 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their
citizenship, unless by their act or omission, they are deemed, under the
law, to have renounced it.
What are the grounds for loss of Philippine citizenship? (N E O – C A D – M)
1. Naturalization in a foreign country
2. Express renunciation of citizenship (expatriation); or
3. Subscribing to an oath of allegiance to the constitution or laws of a
foreign country upon attaining 21 years of age; or
4. Cancellation of certificate of naturalization; or
5. Rendering service to or accepting commission in the armed forces of a
foreign country; or
6. Having been declared by final judgment a deserter of the armed forces
of the Philippines in times of war.
7. In case of a woman, upon her marriage, to a foreigner if, by virtue of the
laws in force in her husband’s country, she acquires his nationality.
Naturalization in a foreign country
 In Frivaldo v. COMELEC, if he really wanted to disavow his American
citizenship and reacquire Philippine citizenship, the petitioner should
have done so in accordance with the laws of our country. Under CA No.
63 as amended by CA No. 473 and PD No. 725, Philippine citizenship
may be reacquired by direct act of Congress, by naturalization, or by
repatriation.
 However, this is modified by R.A. 9225, entitled An Act Making the
Citizenship of Philippine Citizens Who Acquire Foreign Citizenship
Permanent (which took effect September 17, 2003), which declares the
policy of the State that all Philippine citizens who become citizens of
another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine
citizenship under the conditions of this Act.
 Sec. 3, R.A. 9225 provides Natural-born citizens of the Philippines
who have lost their Philippine citizenship by reason of their
naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are deemed to have
reacquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the following oath of
allegiance to the Republic: ________________ , solemnly swear (or affirm)
that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines and obey the laws and legal orders promulgated by the duly
constituted authorities of the Philippines; and I hereby declare that I
recognize and accept the supreme authority of the Philippines and will
maintain true faith and allegiance thereto; and that I impose this
obligation upon myself voluntarily, without mental reservation or
purpose of evasion.”
 Sec. 4, R.A. 9225 - The unmarried child, whether legitimate,
illegitimate or adopted, below 18 years of age, of those who reacquire
Philippine citizenship upon the effectivity of this Act shall be deemed
citizens of the Philippines .
By express renunciation of citizenship
 Express renunciation means a renunciation that is made known
distinctly and explicitly, and not left to inference or implication
 In Yu v. Defensor-Santiago, where obtention of a Portuguese passport
and signing of commercial documents as a Portuguese were construed
as renunciation of Philippine citizenship.
 In Mercado v. Manzano, the mere application or possession of an alien
certificate of registration does not amount to renunciation.
 In Labo v. COMELEC, it was held that Labo lost Filipino citizenship
because he expressly renounced allegiance to the Philippines when he
applied for Australian citizenship.
Subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution or laws of
a foreign country upon attaining 21 years of age
 Provided, however, Filipino may not divest himself of Philippine
citizenship in any manner while the Republic of the Philippines is at
war with any country.
 The proviso that a Filipino may not divest himself of Philippine
citizenship in this manner while the Republic of the Philippines is at
war with any country may be considered as an application of the
principle of indelible allegiance.
Bv rendering service to or accepting commission in the armed forces of a
foreign country
6
Article IV – Citizenship
 Provided, that the rendering of service to, or acceptance of such
commission in, the armed forces of a foreign country and the taking of
an oath of allegiance incident thereto, with consent of the Republic of
the Philippines, shall not divest a Filipino of his Philippine citizenship if
either of the following circumstances is present:
a) The Republic of the Philippines has a defensive and/or
offensive pact of alliance with the said foreign country; or
b) The said foreign country maintains armed forces in Philippine
territory with the consent of the Republic of the Philippines.
Bv having been declared bv competent authority a deserter of the
Philippine armed forces in time of war
 Unless subsequently, a plenary pardon or amnesty has been granted.
Marriage by Filipino to an alien
 “Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their
citizenship, unless by their act or omission they are deemed, under the
law, to have renounced it” [Sec. 4, Art. IV].
What are the ways to reacquire citizenship?
1. Naturalization, provided that the applicant possesses none of the
disqualifications prescribed for naturalization.
2. Repatriation
3. Direct act of Congress
R.A. 8171 is an act providing for the repatriation of:
1. Filipino women who have lost their Philippine citizenship by marriage
to aliens; and
2. Natural-born Filipinos who have lost their Philippine citizenship on
account of political or economic necessity
(Sec. 1, RA 8171)
How is repatriation effected?
 Sec.2, RA 8171. Repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary
a) oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and
b) registration in the proper civil registry and in the Bureau of
Immigration.
The Bureau of Immigration shall thereupon cancel the pertinent
alien certificate of registration and issue the certificate of
identification as Filipino citizen to the repatriated citizen.
What is the effect of repatriation?
 In Bengzon v. HRET, repatriation results in the recovery of the original
nationality. 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.
What is an example of reacquisition of citizenship by the direct act of
congress?
 R.A. 9225 also known as the “Citizenship Retention and Re‐acquisition
Act of 2003,” approved on August 29, 2003 provides that, upon taking
the oath of allegiance to the Republic:
1. Natural‐born citizens of the Philippines who have lost their
naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are deemed to
have re‐acquired Philippine citizenship; and
2. Natural‐born citizens of the Philippines who, after the
effectivity of said RA, become citizens of a foreign country shall
retain their Philippine citizenship.
Note: Read case of Grace poe.
Attack on one’s citizenship
 In Co v. HRET, attack on one’s citizenship may be made only through a
direct, not a collateral proceeding.
Does Res judicata set in cases involving citizenship?
 General Rule: No.
 Exceptions:
7
Article IV – Citizenship

a. Person’s citizenship is resolved by a court or an administrative Furthermore, for candidates with dual citizenship, it is enough that they
body as a material issue in the controversy, after a full-blown elect Philippine citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of
hearing; candidacy to terminate their status as persons with dual citizenship.
b. With the active participation of the Solicitor General or his The filing of a certificate of candidacy suffices to renounce foreign
representative; and citizenship, effectively removing any disqualification as dual citizen.
c. The finding of his citizenship is affirmed by the Supreme Court. This is so because in the certificate of candidacy one declares that
he/she is a Filipino citizen and that he/she will support and defend the
Then the decision on the matter shall constitute conclusive proof of Constitution and will maintain true faith and allegiance to the same.
such party’s citizenship in any other case or proceeding. Such declaration under oath operates as an effective renunciation of
foreign citizenship
 However, this doctrine Mercado that the filing of a certificate of
Section 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and candidacy suffices to renounce foreign citizenship does not apply to one
shall be dealt with by law. who, after having reacquired Philippine citizenship under R.A. 9225,
runs for public office. To comply with the provisions of Sec. 5 (2) of R.A.
9225, it is necessary that the candidate for public office must state in
Dual Citizenship v. Dual Allegiance clear and unequivocal terms that he is renouncing all foreign
citizenship.
Dual Citizenship Dual Allegiance  Sec. 5, Art. IV of the Constitution is a declaration of policy and it is not a
Arises when, as a result of Refers to the situation where a self-executing provision. The legislature still has to enact the law on
concurrent application of the person simultaneously owes, by dual allegiance.
different laws of two or more States, some positive act, loyalty to two or
a person is simultaneously more States. Other notes:
considered a citizen of said states.
 The use of two passports means a person does not renounce his citizenship in other
Involuntary Result of an individual’s volition and
country.
is prohibited by the Constitution.
Q: Are persons possessing dual citizenship by virtue of birth barred from running for
public office?
Policy against dual allegiance
 No, the fact that a person has dual citizenship does not disqualify him from running
 In Mercado v. Manzano, the Court clarified the “dual citizenship” for public office. (Cordora v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176947, Feb. 19, 2009)
disqualification in Sec. 40, Local Government Code, and reconciled the
Q: A, a naturalized US citizen, sought to reacquire his Philippine citizenship. He took his
same with Sec. 5, Art. IV of the Constitution on “dual allegiance”. oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines before the Vice Consul. He then ran
Recognizing situations in which a Filipino citizen may, without and won as Vice Mayor of a municipality. The COMELEC, however, disqualified him on
performing any act and as an involuntary consequence of the the ground that he failed to renounce his US citizenship.
conflicting laws of different countries, be also a citizen of another state,
Is A disqualified from running as a candidate in the local elections for his failure to
the Court explained that “dual citizenship” as a disqualification must make a personal and sworn renunciation of his US citizenship?
refer to citizens with “dual allegiance”. Consequently, persons with
mere dual citizenship do not fall under the disqualification.  A: Yes. Section 5(2) of R.A. 9225 (on the making of a personal and sworn
renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship) requires the Filipinos availing

8
Article IV – Citizenship

themselves of the benefits under the said Act to accomplish an undertaking other
than that which they have presumably complied with under Section 3 thereof (oath
of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines). There is little doubt, therefore, that
the intent of the legislators was not only for Filipinos reacquiring or retaining their
Philippine citizenship under R.A. 9225 to take their oath of allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines, but also to explicitly renounce their foreign citizenship if
they wish to run for elective posts in the Philippines. To qualify as a candidate in
Philippine elections, Filipinos must only have one citizenship, namely, Philippine
citizenship.

The oath of allegiance contained in the Certificate of Candidacy, does not constitute
the personal and sworn renunciation sought under Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 9225. It
bears to emphasize that the said oath of allegiance is a general requirement for all
those who wish to run as candidates in Philippine elections; while the renunciation
of foreign citizenship is an additional requisite only for those who have retained or
reacquired Philippine citizenship under R.A. No. 9225 and who seek elective public
posts, considering their special circumstance of having more than one citizenship.
(Jacot v. Dal, G.R. No. 179848, Nov.27, 2008)

Q: A” is a naturalized citizen of another country who reacquires Filipino citizenship. On

the other hand, “B” possesses dual citizenship by birth. If they desire to run for elective
public office, what requirement must they comply as regards their citizenship?

 A must comply with the requirements set in R.A 9225. Sec 5(3) of R.A. 9225 states
that naturalized citizens who reacquire Filipino citizenship and desire to run for
public office shall “…make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath” aside from
the oath of allegiance prescribed in Section 3 of R.A. 9225.

B need not comply with the twin requirements of swearing an oath of allegiance and
executing a renunciation of foreign citizenship because he is a natural‐born Filipino
who did not subsequently become a naturalized citizen of another country. It is
sufficed, if upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy, he elects Philippine
citizenship to terminate his status as person with dual citizenship considering that
his condition in the unavoidable consequence of conflicting laws of different States.
(Cordora v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176947, Feb. 19, 2009)