G.R. No.

L-83882 January 24, 1989

IN RE PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS OF WILLIE YU, petitioner,

vs.
MIRIAM DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO, BIENVENIDO P. ALANO, JR., MAJOR PABALAN, DELEO HERNANDEZ,
BLODDY HERNANDEZ, BENNY REYES and JUN ESPIRITU SANTO, respondent.

PADILLA, J.:

FACTS: Willie Yu is a Portuguese National who acquired Philippine citizenship by naturalization on February 10,1978.
Despite his naturalization, he applied for and was issued a renewed Portuguese Passport by the Consular Section of
the Portuguese Embassy in Tokyo. Said Consular Office certifies that his Portuguese passport expired on July 20,
1986. Being a naturalized Filipino, he signed commercial documents stating his citizenship as Portuguese without the
authentication of an appropriate Philippine consul. He was then detained by the CID for obtaining a foreign passport
while having a Filipino citizenship. Yu then filed a petition for habeas corpus.

An internal resolution of 7 November 1988 referred the case to the Court en Banc. The Court en Banc denied the
petition. He then filed a motion for reconsideration with prayer for restraining order but it was denied.

After denial, he filed a motion for clarification with prayer for restraining order. On December 7,1988, the temporary
Restraining Order (TRO) was issued. Santiago filed a motion to lift the said TRO, contending that Yu was in full
knowledge and Legal capacity when he applied for Philippine citizenship through naturalization he consequently
recognizes, identifies and agrees to the oath taken which states to renounce “absolutely and forever all allegiance and
fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty” and pledged to maintain true faith and allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines. Hence, Yu then knows the limitations or restrictions once solemnizing said oath and its
succeeding consequences should they be violated.

ISSUE: WON Yu’s act constituted a renunciation of his Philippine citizenship?

RULING: YES. Express renunciation was held to mean a renunciation that is made known distinctly and explicitly and
not left to inference or implication. Yu, 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. Such resumption or reacquisition of Portuguese citizenship is grossly
inconsistent with his maintenance of Philippine citizenship.

While normally the question of whether or not a person has renounced his Philippine citizenship should be heard before
a trial court of law in adversary proceedings, this has become unnecessary as this Court, no less, upon the insistence
of petitioner, had to look into the facts and satisfy itself on whether or not petitioner's claim to continued Philippine
citizenship is meritorious.