jueves, 14 de julio de 2016

Results for a mere right to duplication of documents for further security and allegiance of Enlightenment






                                                           She wants to be complete


The Dual Citizenship
 January-December 2005
 UST Law Review
-Coomonwealth act no. 63 which provides that acquisition of foreign citizenship is a gorund for the loss of Philippine citizenship. Thus under R.A. 9225, citizens of the Philippines who becomes citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of the law 1.
-Lose his Philippine citizenship; express renunciation of Filipino citizenship being in the service of the armed forces of a foreign country; and seeking public office in a foreign country. Hence, effectively allowing and approving dual citizenship. Considering that the fate of R.A. 9225, has nopt yet been decided by the Supreme Court, all arguments raised by proponents and critics alike are jjust mere opinions. Nothing is settled yet. As it is sai, The law is what the judges say it is, "This paper, as an academic excercise, will discuss 2 constitution.
art. 4 and 5: Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
-Every question surrounding dual citizenship, dual allegiance, and the dual citizenship law. It is intended to shed some light on the issue using legal principles, doctrines and jurisprudence.
-This status confers upon the individual certain prerogatives which may be denied the alien. Thus, the citizen enjoys certain exclusive rights, such as the rights to vot, to run for public office, to exploit natural resources, to operate public utilitie, to administer educational institutions, and to manage the mass media.
Modes of Acquiring Citizenship
1999
R. Ledesma, an outline of Philippines Immigration and citizenship Laws 354
Modern law recognizes three district modes of acquiring citizenship:
1.) jus sanguinis, or acquisition of citizenship on the basis of blood relationship:
2.) jus sol, or aquisition of citizenship on the basis of place of birth; and
3.) naturalization, or the legal act of adopting an alien abnd clothing him with the privilege of a native born citizen.
Prior to the adoption of the 1935 constitution, the supreme court applied the principle of jus soli to determine the citizenship of person who were born in the Philippines. 13, thus, in one case, 14 it was held that "all inhabitants of the Philippine islands who were Spanish subjects on the 11th day of April, 1899, and, and then resided in said islands and their children born subsequent thereto, shall be deemed and held to be citizens of the Philippine islands except such as shall have elected to preserve their allegience to the Crown of Spain in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty of Peace between the United States and Spain, signed in Pari, Decmeber tenth, 1898, and escept such others as have since become citizens of some other country."
Citizens of the Philippines
2003
Cruz, International Law 183
Under the present constitution, the following are considered citizens of the Philippines:
1.) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the constitution.
2.) Those whose fathers and mothers are citizens of the Philippines.
3.) Those born before January 17,1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon attainin the age of majority.
4.) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
Dual Citizenship: An Oxymoron?
January-December 2005
UST Law Review
Dual citizenship is citizenship in two different countries. The concept of dual citizenship recognizes that a person may have and excercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both.  It is generally a result if the concurrent application of the different laws of two or more states; a person is simultaneuosly considered a national by the said states.
Philippine citizenship, Dual citizensip and Dual allegiance
January-Decmber 2005
UST Law Review
-Now all other states would, without hesitation, bestow their citizenship upon our citizens, if we had the same system of law as themselve... Thus we see that citizens if Athens, Rhodes, Sparta, and of other states far and wide, are enrolled as citizens of greek states, and that the same person are citizens of many states.
-Since the court held that Section 5, Article IV of the 1987 Constitution sanctions only dual allegiance and not dual citizenship, then dual citizenship may be allowed.
-One problem with dual citizenship is the divided loylty of the person possesing two citizenships. Although this was seemingly safeguarded by publuic officials, before assuming office, they would have to renounce their other citizenship, the authors of R.A. 9225 still failed to consider other situations where undivided loyalty is important.
Distinguishing Dual Citizenship and Dual Allegiance
January-Decmber 2005
UST Law Review
Ernestp Mamaril filed a disqualification case against vice-mayoralty candidate Manzano on the ground disqualifiction case against vice mayoralty candidate Manzano on the ground that he is not a citizen of the Philippines but of the United States. In its resolution, the second division of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) granted the petition of Mamaril and ordered the cancellation of the certificate of candidacy of Manzano on the ground that he is a dual citizen and, under the Local Government code and the Makati charter, persons with dual citizenship are disqualified from running for any eelctive position.
The Dual Citizenship Law (R.A. 9225)
January-Decmber 2005
UST Law Review
Under this new law, it declares as the policy of the state that all Philippine citizens who become of another country shall be deemed bot to have lost their Philippine citizenship. It provides that natural born citizens of the Philippines who have lost their Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of  a foreign country, are hereby deemed to havereacquired Philippine citizenship upom taking tha following oath of allegiance to the Republic.
Those who retain or reacquire Philippine citizenship under the law shall enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines and the following conditions:
1.) Those intending to excercise theior right of suffrage must meet the requirements under Section 1, Artcile V of the constitution, the Overseas Absentee Voting law, and other existing laws;
2.) those seeking elective public office in the Philippines shall meet the qualifications for holding such public office as required by the constitution and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy, make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer and oath;
3.) Those appointed to any public office shall subscribed and swear an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to their assumption of office; Provided, that they renounced their oath of allegiance to the country where they took that oath;
4.) Those intendting to practice theoir profession in the Philippines shall apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such practice; and
5.) That right to vote or be elected or appointed to any puiblic office in the Philippines  cannot be excercised by, or extended to, those who: (a) are candidates for or are occupying any public office in the country of which they are naturalized citizens; and/or (b) are in active service as commisioned or non-commisioned officers in the armed forces of the country whic they are natuaralized citizens.
Advantges of Dual citizenship and the Dual citizenship Law
January-Decmber 2005
UST Law Review
Generally, dual citizens canc arry two passports abd essentially live, work, and travel freely within their native naturalized countries. Some dual citizens also enjoy the privilege of voting in both countries, owning property in both countries, and having government health care in both coutries. Dual citizens under R.A. 9225 shall enjoy full civil and political rights of a Philippine citizen, aside from the privileges they have as citizens of other states. Thus, dual citizens under the said law can fully participate in the exploitationof our natural resourceswithout being subjected to 40-60 percetn arrangement in case of foreigners.
According to the proponents of the law, the best advantage, the dual citizenship law can provide is to our country, which is facing a daunting and gargantuan economic crisis.
The Doubts and problems on dual citizenship
May 22, 2002
House of Representatives
A dual citizen may have and excercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both. Concurrently, he will be subject to claims from both nations, claims which at times may be competing or conflicting .
Philippine citizenship, Dual citizenship, and Dual Allegiance
January-Decembe2005
UST Law Review, Vol. XLIX,
One problem with the dual citizenship is the divided loyalty of the person possesing two citizenships. Although this was seemingly safguarded by the authors of R.A. 9225 when they provided that, for example, as to elective public officials, before assuming office, they would have to renounce their other citizenship, the authors of R.A 9225 still failed to consider othet situations where undivided loyalty is important.
The constitution provides: Section 11: 1,) The ownership and management of mass media shall be limited to citizens of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or associations, wholly-owned and manage by such citizens.
Const, art. 2 & 4: The government may call upon the people to defend the state and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personal, military, or civil service.
343 U.S. 717 (1952)
887 tan
The obligations of military service have frequently given rise to controversies.One cannot turn it into a fair weather citizenship, retaining it for possible contingent benefits but, meanwhile, playing the part of the traitor. An American citizen owed allegiance to the United States whereever he may reside. This case indoctrinates that a dual citizen owes allegiance to both states to which he is a citizen. Considering this ruling of United States Supreme Court, it would be hard to conceive that a Filipino naturalized in the United States who subsequently took an oath of allegiance to the Republic as authorized by R.A. 9225, thus, possessing dual citizenship, owes allegiance only to the Philippines.
Section 5 of article 4 of our 1987 constitution for the following reasons:
1.) Although it is settled under International Law that a sovereing state is free and has the right to determine who it will consider as its citizens, such right, if made through a legislative act of Congress, is still subject to and must conform with the highest law of the land, the Constitution.
2.) Section 5 of article 4 of our 1987 Constitution is not applicable only to naturalized citizens, especially the Chineese, for it made no mention of such naturalized citizens or Chineese and is generalized in application. 
3.) What is excluded from the purview of Section 5 of article 4 of our 1987 constitution, which provides that "Dual allegiance is inimical to the national interest," is dual citizenship per se, meaning, based on explanations of Commisioner Ople and as adopted by Supreme Court Mercado vs. Manzano, that which is involuntarily acquired or which is result of mixed marriages or birth on foreign soil. It does not exclude from its provision all forms of dual citizenship, especially those acquired through a positive deliberate act, such as that authorized by R.A. 9225.
4.) Dual citizenship generally includes dual allegiance and dual citizenship involuntarily or accidentally acquired is an exceptional case not covered by Section 5 of Article 4 of the 1987 constitution. This is also very clear from the most basic defiinitions of citizenship as given by authorities. Citizenship connotes allegiance, says Fr. bernas. Moreover, in Kawakita vs. U>S., it was held that a dual citizen owes allegiance to both states to which he is citizen, at least insofar as those acquired through a positive act, such as that authorized by R.A. 9225.
5.) The recognition and approval of second allegiance or dual allegiance is crystal clear from the face of R.A. 9225, the dual citizenship law, itself. First is it use of a non-exclusive and hypocrytical oath of allegiances. This will allow maintneance of allegiance of dual citizens under R.A. 9225 to other countries aside from the Philippines. Second is the requirement of renunciation of foreign oath of allegiances being only applicable to appointed as public officials, they may retain their foreign allegiances, effectively resulting in dual allegiance considered as inimical to the national interest by our Constittution.
Philippine citizenship, Dual citizenship, and Dual Allegiance ( E. Paras, conflict of laws  102 (1990)
January-December 2005
UST Law Review, vol. XLIX
Article 1039, NCC. Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of the nation of the decendent. It should be noted that for purposes of private International la, nationality and citizenship are synonyous terms. Thus, when we say that successional right to the estate of a person shall be governed by his national law, we really mean the law of the state of which the deceased was a citizen at the time of his death.
The Hague convention of 1930 on the conflict of Nationality laws provides:
Art. 1. It is for each state to determine under its law who are its nationals. This law shall be recognized by other states insofar as it is consistent with other international conventions, international customs and the principles of law generally recognized with regard to nationality.
Art, 2. Any question to wether a person possessses the nationality of a particular state shall be determined in accordance with the law of the State.
Art. 3. Subject to the provisions of the present Convention, a person having two or more nationalities may be regarded as its national by each of the States whose nationality he possesses.
Art. 4. A State may not afford Diplomatic protection to one of its nationals against a State whose nationality possesses.
Art. 5. Within a third State, a peson having more than one nationality shall be treated as if he had only one. Without prejudice to the application of its law in matters of personal status and of any convention in force, a third state shall, of the nationalities which any such person possesses, recognize exclusively in its territory either the resident or the nationality of the country in which he is habitually and principally resident or the nationality of the country with which in the circumstances he appears to be in fact most closely connected.
Art. 6. Without prejudice to the liberty of a state to accord wider rights to renounce its nationality, a person possessing two nationalities acquired without any voluntary act on his part may renounce one of them with the authorization of the state whose nationality he desires to surrender.
Philippine Citizenship, Dual Citizenship, and Dual Allegiance
(Structure of International Law 235 (1964)). this is also confirmed by G. VON GLAHN, LAW AMONG NATIONS 183 (1965).
January-December 2005
767 M. STA. MARIA, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAW 165 (199). See also Tenchave^v. Escano, 15SCRA256 (1965).)

An alien abroad, it shall be recognized in the Philippines, provided that it is valid according to his national law. Now can the dual citizen husband not argue that since he is also an American and that absolute divorce is allowed in his "other" national law, then it should be recognized in the Philippines as well and that should be allowed to remarry? Following the logic in the answer in the previous example, it would seem that that the divorce should not be recognized in the Philippines and that he should not be allowed to remarry for the Philippines can only regard and consider him as a Filipino. But it should be noted that in case of divorce decree obtained in the Philippines because of our adherence to the nationality principle respect to the status of a person.
Constitutionality of R.A. 9225:
"To doubt is to sustain." But, is it just mere doubt? Under International Law, R.A. 9225 has no problem considering that every sovereign state is free and has the right to determine who it will recognize as its citizens. But is this true in domestic law? Unnder our present legal system, all laws passed by congress must conform and not contravene the highest law of the land, which is the 1987 Constitution.
Philippine Citizenship, Dual Citizenship, and Dual Allegiance
(Record of the 1986 Constitutional Commision 190, 192, 203, 209, ,233-235)
January-December 2005
UST Law Review, Vol. XLIX,
Based on the above explanation of Commisioner Ople, dual allegiance, and not dual citizenship, became the subject of the provision because dual citizenship is seldom intentional and is often a result of mixed marriages or of birth on foreign soil. In other words, dual citizenship per se is not threatening for it is usually involuntary, unlike dual allegiance, which is a result of one's positive acts. In the questioning that followed, Commisioner Ople explained:
Double citizenship does not reflect on the motives of citizens enjoying double citizenship. As I said, this is largely a fucntion of accident of mixed marriages or of birth on foreign soil.
The inconsistency is more apparent than real. In Mercado V. Manzano, the Supreme Court correctly distinguished dual citizenship from dual allegiance. It held that dual citizenship is involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of one's individual violation. The Court obviously adopted the same form of dual citizenship as that used by Commisioner Ople in his elucidations above, which is one that is involuntarily  or accidentally acquired.
Citizenship's main integrate element is allegiance, says our Supreme Court. Dual Citizenship assumes as a necessary complement thereof dual allegiance at the same time to two different countries. Hence, dual citizens, at least insofar as those voluntarily and deliberately acquired, owe allegiance to both states to which they are citizens, thus, resulting in dual allegiance as contemplated under Section 5 of Article IV on citizenship.

Are you in favor or against the double citizen law? Why or why not? Give legal basis:
"Coomonwealth act no. 63 which provides that acquisition of foreign citizenship is a gorund for the loss of Philippine citizenship. Thus under R.A. 9225, citizens of the Philippines who becomes citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of the law 1."
This statement gives me the idea favoring the double citizenship law since all of us can acquire the citizenship of other country without losing our citizenship as Filipinos. Therefore this concludes that we can enjoy privileges and advantages of both states laws, resources, land etc.

G Em Balaag
IV-AB FS
Immig. Law
Atty. Ida Escalano :)






           

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario en la entrada