http://www.balitapinoy.net/images/balita_pinoy_caribou_banner_75_vert.jpg Balita Pinoy Headlines

Front Page Headlines Foreclosed Properties Features OFW/Filipino News Site Map Press Releases Crime News Legal News Mindanao Cross Immigration News Travel News OFW Services Media Intelligence Missing Persons 1 Humor Motoring News Free Classified Ads OFW Beauty PHL Beauty OFW Jobs PHL Jobs OFW Services PHL Services PHL Plumbing PHL Property Events Lonely Hearts MNL For Sale Missing Persons 2 Missing Persons 3 Missing Persons 4 Missing Persons 5 Missing Persons 6 Missing Persons Historic Photo 3

Dual Citizenship Problems Revealed For Filipinos

19 Dec 2011

 

The following is important, not just to Filipinos in Ireland, but all OFW's who have or are contemplating having dual citizenship.

It is obvious that Filipinos do not have the same freedom of movement as that of (for example) US, Canadian or EU passport holders. So a lot do take those all-important passports for visa-free travel and other benefits.

However, as reported below, there are pitfalls. John Ferris, the former honorary Philippine consul in Ireland edits his monthly Dublin Filipino diary which is mainly of interest to those in Ireland as well as the UK. This particular one should be required reading for all those with a second passport or are getting one.

It is rather heavy going but we make no apologies for that. It is an extremely important issue, especially in respect of property rights and land ownership.

If any legal or property experts spot any errors, please let us know, either by the comment box at the bottom or by clicking the "Have you been affected" link underneath.

 

 

Have You Been Affected? Click Here

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

TwitterFacebookShare

 

FILIPINO DIARY   DECEMBER 2011  

IN THIS ISSUE OF THE DIARY WE BRING YOU  ANSWERS FROM THE PHILLIPPINE EMBASSY  TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING DUAL NATIONALITY.

The answers were given in response to  questions asked at  the last FCN meeting held at the embassy.   The FCN  is a Filipino organisation known as the "Filipino Community Network"  who are rumoured  to have a special relationship with the embassy.

EXTRACT FROM PART ONE OF THE FCN COMMITTEE MEETING AT THE PHILIPPINE EMBASSY FRIDAY 11TH. NOV.'11

According to the minutes of the meeting  there were  five questions posed,  probably in writing.

The Consul General appears not to have answered question by question, but rather by addressing the questions with a statement at the end.  Here we list the questions numbered 1 to 5, and make our own editorial answer to each question in blue print................

   

Q and A

  1. After Irish Naturalization, if a person decides to reacquire Filipino Citizenship, will he lose any of his rights as a Filipino? 

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:   How  could he/she  lose their rights ?

Frankly, not the brightest question !   Firstly, NO Filipino citizen looses his Filipino citizenship by gaining Irish citizenship by naturalisation.   The  Irish  oath taken does NOT in ANY way diminish his/her commitment to his/her country of birth  (Philippines).   The key to this on-going error is the fact that the ACT was initiated by a Filipino-American.   In America the oath taken requires the person to swear allegiance etc. to the USA AND NO OTHER;  and that is where the problem arises........

  HERE IS THE WORDING OF THE OATH TAKEN IN THE USA.................. I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

 

     The further problem that arises here is that IF a Filipino gains US citizenship and then ‘REACQUIRES' Filipino citizenship - by taking the oath prescribed in RA 9225 -  is that they are SPECIFICALLY renouncing the USA oath they have already taken !

This does NOT arise in the Irish situation, SO the whole concept of having to re-acquire Filipino citizenship is legally flawed and simply does NOT arise !

 

HERE IS THE WORDING OF THE OATH TAKEN AT THE PHILIPPINE EMBASSY..........

"I _________________, 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."  

 

Here is the wording of the Irish oath of fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State............. 

I ,...........(name in full)

of................................................................................................................................... having applied to

the Minister  for Justice and Equality for a certificate of naturalisation, hereby solemnly declare my fidelity to the Irish nation and my loyalty to the State. 

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT: when comparing the Irish and Philippine Oaths of Fidelity, it seems  that the Philippine Oath goes way overboard, and even obliges Filipinos, against their better judgement, to renounce the Irish Oath of Fidelity  they have just taken, and to instead  recognize and accept the supreme authority of the Philippines ( over and above the authority of the Irish State).

 

It's astonishing that a Philippine Embassy would put a Filipino in such a dilema and so blatantly disparage a Filipino's   fildeily to the Irish State

Given the extravagant demands of the Philippine embassy on it's citizens, It's understandable why Filipinos are trying to keep well clear of the embassy.

 

2. Can a 20y/o be petitioned to come and join family in Ireland?

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT: In the minutes of the FCN there's no answer given to this question either !  

 

One should always give a good simple answer to a direct question. 

 

 There CAN be circumstances where a 20 y/o MAY be accepted as a dependant but they are VERY limited and difficult to prove  -  I know of one instance where the Filipina mother of a five year old boy died; a dependent (of the mother) living in the Philippines was given a stamp 4 to come and be guardian to the child. The child held an Irish passport.  But these cases are VERY difficult to prove and quite uncommon.

 

  1. If naturalized, will they automatically lose Filipino Citizenship? 

 

 EDITORIAL COMMENT:   In Ireland the ACTUAL simple, factual answer is NO, but, of course, if ConGen gave such an answer, "then the embassy's process of " ‘re-acquisation' of citizenship would be proven false and would fail."



4. What are the pros and cons of dual citizenship? 

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:   If the questioner does not know the answer then they should not apply !   Freedom to travel all around the EU and EEA.   Access to the USA without a Visa.   What else do they want to know ?   Of course, when  you go back to the Philippines they will screw you as a non-Filipino  (unless you know your Balikbayan rights, and study these rights  before you go;  they don't appear on airline monitor screens);   Irish citizens can only  stay up to 21 days without a visa.

5. What is the official version (embassy's explanation) if you lose Filipino Citizenship?

 

 

Consul General gave her response to the five questions with a general statement as follows (according to the minutes of the meeting).

 

Congen Joy opened the forum for discussion.

 

Congen started the discussion by explaining how the Citizenship may be lost and how it can be

Reacquired through the Commonwealth Act 63.

This act was proposed by Filipino-­]American Citizen who wanted to reacquire their Filipino citizenship

After naturalization in a foreign country, and that this act was amended which is now the RA9225.

 

Copy of this law has been distributed to the leaders/representatives present at the meeting.

In this law, an individual naturalized in a foreign country can retain Filipino citizenship, but will have

 To go through a process and this is the reason why an administration fee is charged.

 

Reacquisition of Filipino citizenship is NOT COMPULSARY.

It is a personal choice and does not have any relevance to the Irish Immigration Law.

 

Congen Joy has also informed the group that those 411Filipinos naturalized in Ireland, came to the

Embassy seeking reacquisition of Filipino citizenship.

The interest of the Philippine Embassy is on everybody's desire to be a Filipino and NOT to make a

Profit out of it and that the operation of the office is guided by RA7157.

 

It is not true that properties owned in the Philippines will be lost when one become an Irish citizen

But there will be a limitation on the rights if you are not a Filipino citizen.

 

Congen Joy urged the council of leaders to explain to its members the topics discussed based how

They understand.

She then thanked the group for the time and interest in finding out the issue about citizenship.

Mr. Jess Corpuz, chairman of FCN delivered the closing remarks followed by a song from the

Philippine Chorale.

 

They then proceeded to Part 2 of the programme.

 

HERE IS OUR REACTION TO THE ABOVE STATEMENT BY CONSUL GENERAL.

 

We respond line by line with editorial comment printed in blue colour..................

 

 

Congen started the discussion by explaining how the Citizenship may be lost and how it can be

re-acquired through the Commonwealth Act 63

 

EDITORIAL  COMMENT:  Unfortunately  the minutes of the meeting do not state how Filipino Citizenship may be lost.

  By reading CA 63 one can see that it states how a Filipino MAY loose their citizenship.   In any case it has effectively been replaced by RA 9225 now.

 

Congen continued........This  RA 9225  act was proposed by a Filipino -­ American Citizen who wanted to re-acquire their Filipino citizenship  after naturalization in a foreign country, and that this act was amended which is now the RA9225.

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT: ...the Fil-American in question  wanted to re-acquire Filipino citizenship  after naturalization in "AMERICA" specifically,     and not in a foreign country  as such.  (as we stated previously  different rules apply in foreign countries  like Ireland, for example)

 

ConGen continued .............Copy of this law has been distributed to the leaders/representatives present at the meeting.

In this law, an individual naturalized in a foreign country can retain Filipino citizenship,

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT: that is fine IF they have actually LOST it, but in Ireland they DO NOT.

 

ConGen continues....... but will have to go through a process and this is the reason why an administration fee is charged. 

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:  That is NOT what the Act states and that is just a BULLSHIT answer.

 

ConGen continues.......Reacquisition of Filipino citizenship is NOT COMPULSARY.

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:  that is good news.  Will ConGen therefore confirm the following:-

 

  1. When  Filipinos aquire Irish citizenship will their existing Philippine passports remain valid for travel purposes until they expire ?
  2. When they apply for a new Philippine passport and indicate on the application form that they hold an Irish passport,  will the embassy refuse to process their renewal unless they take an oath in front of the ConGen ?

 

ConGen continued ........It is a personal choice and does not have any relevance to the Irish Immigration Law.

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:  Of course it has relevance.  This begs the question  "are they using the excuse of Irish Naturalisation to engage in a revenue gathering exercise at the expense of Filipinos in Ireland.

 

Congen Joy has also informed the group that those 411 Filipinos naturalised in Ireland, came to the

Embassy seeking re-acquisition of Filipino citizenship. 

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:     NO they did NOT.   They came because they were told that they would loose their Philippine Citizenships if they did not, and they were afraid their passport validity would be in doubt !

 

ConGen continues.......The interest of the Philippine Embassy is on everybody's desire to be a Filipino and NOT to make a  profit out of it and that the operation of the office is guided by RA7157. 

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:   Has somebody got the laws mixed up ?   RA 7157 has NOTHING to do with it.   It deals with the operation  of Foreign Service Offices and Staff.  Nothing to do with Dual Nationality.

 

ConGen continues.......It is not true that properties owned in the Philippines will be lost when one become an Irish citizen, but there will be a limitation on the rights if you are not a Filipino citizen.  

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:  Is ConGen saying that a Filipino national who owns six hectares of rural land will have to dispose of three of those hectares if they acquire Irish citizenship ?  (Under Philippine law  those who lose Filipino citizenship may only own three hectares of rural land).

 

Congen Joy urged the council of leaders to explain to its members the topics discussed based how

They understand.  

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:   So now the Embassy expects a bunch of well-meaning amateurs (the FCN) to do their job for them in a delicate subject where the embassy  are mis-interpreting their OWN legislation !

 

ConGen continues ...........She then thanked the group for the time and interest in finding out the issue about citizenship.

Mr. Jess Corpuz, chairman of FCN delivered the closing remarks followed by a song from the

Philippine Chorale.

 

They then proceeded to Part 2 of the programme.

 

FOR YOUR FURTHER RESEARCH WE QUOTE TO YOU THE FOLLOWING..........

EDITORIAL COMMENT:   Congen is quoted as saying that Filipino citizenship can be re-acquired through Commonwealth Act 63.

 

I quote below directly from the Act  ................

COMMONWEALTH ACT No. 63

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE WAYS IN WHICH PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP MAY BE LOST OR REACQUIRED.  

Be it enacted by the National Assembly of the Philippines:

Section 1. How citizenship may be lost. - A Filipino citizen may lose his citizenship in any of the following ways and/or events:

(1) By naturalization in a foreign country;

(2) By express renunciation of citizenship;

(3) By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws of a foreign country upon attaining twenty-one years of age or more: Provided, however, that a Filipino may not divest himself of Philippine citizenship in any manner while the Republic of the Philippines is at war with any country;

(4) By rendering services to, ......................etc

 (5) By cancellation of the of the certificates of naturalization;

(6) By having been declared by competent authority, a deserter   ............  etc  etc

(7) In the 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.1

The provisions of this section notwithstanding, the acquisition of citizenship by a natural born Filipino citizen from one of the Iberian and any friendly democratic Ibero-American countries ......................

EDITORIAL COMMENT:      there is NO SUCH THING legally

....... or from the United Kingdom shall not produce loss or forfeiture of his Philippine citizenship if the law of that country grants the same privilege to its citizens and such had been agreed upon by treaty between the Philippines and the foreign country from which citizenship is acquired.

EDITORIAL COMMENT: Once again what we see here is the obvious overbearing influence of the USA on all things Filipino.   How very sad !

Con Gen then goes on to state......... "and that this act was amended which is now the RA9225".

We bring you extracts of RA9225...........

Republic Act No. 9225             August 29, 2003

AN ACT MAKING THE CITIZENSHIP OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENS WHO ACQUIRE FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP PERMANENT.
AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE COMMONWEALTH ACT. NO. 63, AS AMENDED AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

Section 1. Short Title this act shall be known as the "Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003."

Section 2. Declaration of Policy It is hereby declared the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of this Act.

Section 3. Retention of Philippine Citizenship Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, natural-born citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are hereby deemed to have re-acquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the following oath of allegiance to the Republic:

EDITORIAL COMMENT:   We were hoping that ConGen could explain Section 2 of the above;  and if there is  a contradiction between Section  2  and Section 3 ?                                                                         Of course there is, but what else would we expect;   they can interpret it what ever way they wish to their own advantage   

In other words section 2 states they don't lose citizenship !  while section 3 may be stating  that they do lose it !

Then ConGen goes on to state  that "that the operation of the embassy  is guided by RA7157."

 

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7157

 

AN ACT REVISING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 708, AS AMENDED

 

Sec. 1.          Title. - This Act shall be known as the "Philippine Foreign Service Act of 1991."

Sec. 2.          Table of Contents. - The table of contents of this Act is as follows:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1-Title

Section 2-Table of Contents

 

EDITORIAL COMMENT: As previously stated above by this editor, this is an Act instituted in 1991, and has no reference to Dual Nationality.  It deals with the operation  of Foreign Service Offices and Staff  specifically.

We still haven't received satisfactory explanations addressing the points raised in our first November issue which are as follows ....................

 

  • 1. The Dual Nationality Act of 2003 is VERY poorly drafted, has a poor usage of quality English and, as it stands, allows several interpretations.It is VERY poor legislation.

  Does the embassy accept that as a valid opinion ?

2.     The KEY issue  is that the re-taking of an Oath of Allegiance is ONLY required where the gaining of an additional Citizenship by Naturalisation causes that person to lose their Filipino Citizenship.      Does the embassy accept that fact ?

 

  ( This IS the case in many countries which DO NOT allow DUAL Citizenship and require a Naturalised Citizen  (Filipino)   to cancel or revoke their original Citizenship.  This, however, IS NOT the case in Ireland )

 

3.  We ask the embassy how can you re-become a citizen of a state of which you are ALREADY a citizen.  i.e.  how can a Filipino  again become a citizen of the Philippines if he is already a  Philippine Citizen ?

 

  1. From the office of the President we notice the  "Commission on Filipios Overseas"  have given a sensible interpretation which is  to the benefit of Overseas Filipinos;

In the interests of The Filipino Community in Ireland we call upon the Philippine embassy to consider adopting the CFO interpretation  to avoid  the Community from  concluding that the embassy  are interpreting the law to their own advantage  to increase revenue ?

 

The following can be found on the http://www.cfo.com/ website.  It also corresponds exactly with the CFO primer published and presented in June 2004 by  Secretary Delia Domingo Albert, Secretary of Foreign Affairs.

Again we emphasize the opening paragraph in her booklet which states the following:-

"What is the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003 ?"

ANSWER: Republic Act No. 9225 or the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003 is a law passed on 29th August 2003 which grants natural-born Filipinos who have lost their Filipino citizenship through naturalization in a foreign country, the opportunity to retain or re-acquire their Filipino citizenship.

(Again we must state that by taking the Oath of Fidelity of Irish naturalization you do not lose Filipino citizenship;  whereas by taking the Oath to become a US citizen you do lose your Filipino citizenship due to the wording of the Oath).

CFO interpretation follows.....................

 

 

Dual Citizenship

What is the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003?

Republic Act No. 9225 or the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003 is a law passed on 29 August 2003 which grants natural-born Filipinos who have lost their Filipino citizenship through naturalization in a foreign country, the opportunity to retain or re-acquire their Filipino citizenship.

Who are natural-born citizens of the Philippines?

Natural-born citizens of the Philippines are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. These are:

  • Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines at the time of their birth; and
  • Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.

Is it possible for Filipino to hold dual citizenship or more than one citizenship at the same time?

 

Before the passage of R.A. 9225, dual citizenship of some Filipinos already existed as result of the operation of nationality laws. For example, a child born in the United States of America of Filipino parents is an American citizen under US law, and a Filipino citizen under Philippine law. The child's American citizenship is derived from the principle of jus soli or place of birth, while his Philippine citizenship is derived from the principle of jus sanguinis or citizenship of his parents.

The passage of R.A. 9225 makes it possible for Filipinos to hold dual citizenship through means other than by birth.

With the passage of R.A. 9225, what happens to a natural-born Filipino who becomes naturalized in another country?

A natural born Filipino who becomes a naturalized citizen of another country is deemed not to have lost his/her citizenship under the provisions of the said law.

How does one re-acquire Filipino citizenship?

A natural-born Filipino who lost his/her Filipino citizenship through naturalization in another country may re-acquire Filipino citizenship through the following process:

(editorial comment:  we won't give the procedures here because it's only applicable to those who lose Filipino nationality).

END OF http://www.cfo.gov.ie/ QUOTE

The following article should be of interest to Filipinos who have bought houses and are now in negative equity.



FILIPINO DIARY    Part two.

                                                          December 2011

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT STATES THAT BY REAQUIRING FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP YOU IMPLICITLY RENOUNCE IRISH CITIZENSHP  ?

In our December issue (part one) we mentioned  the embassy had conducted a question and answer  session at an FCN meeting.   The subject was "Dual Nationality"  during which the Consul General answered questions from those  in attendance.

In our response to the answers given at the above meeting we made the following points as follows:-

  

 A problem that arises when a Filipino gains US citizenship and then ‘REACQUIRES' Filipino citizenship - by taking the oath prescribed in RA 9225 - they SPECIFICALLY renounce the USA oath they have already taken !

 

It now also appears that when the Filipino is taking the Philippine Oath of Allegiance at the Philippine embassy  he is renouncing his or her Irish  citizenship;  this is according  the Philippine Supreme  Court  which states  "The act of taking an oath of allegiance is an implicit renunciation of a naturalized citizen's foreign citizenship.

We have quoted the full 2009 Supreme Court ruling below for your attention as extracted from http://www.lexforiphilippines.com/   

This could have serious consequences for the 411 Filipinos who have taken the Oath,  because the Philippine Supreme Court made a ruling on Dual nationality on 19th  February 2009, and the 411 Filipinos may not have been made aware of the Supreme court ruling when taking the Oath.

If you read carefully the ruling below you may conclude that under Philippine law the Children of Filipinos in Ireland can be Dual Nationals (i.e. both Filipino and Irish citizenship),  but their parents cannot be.

  It now appears that by taking an Oath of supreme allegiance to the Philippines these 411 Filipinos have unwittingly renounced their Irish Citizenship for which they paid  €950 euro to  obtain.

Dual Citizenship or Dual Allegiance?

Posted by www.lexforiphilippines.com  on February 5, 2010

Since it is election time, we are hearing a lot of cases being filed to seek the disqualification of certain candidates from seeking elective posts.  Most notable is the case for disqualification of Vivien Tan, daughter of Lucio Tan, from seeking the congressional seat for a Quezon City district.

But what is really the basis for disqualification? Is it dual citizenship or dual allegiance?

In Cordora vs. COMELEC, et al. (G.R. No. 176947, 19 February 2009) , the Supreme Court explained -

Dual citizenship is different from dual allegiance.

Dual citizenship is involuntary and arises when, as a result of the concurrent application of the different laws of two or more states, a person is simultaneously considered a national by the said states.  For instance, such a situation may arise when a person whose parents are citizens of a state which adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis* is born in a state which follows the doctrine of jus soli.**  Such a person, automatically and without any voluntary act on his part, is concurrently considered a citizen of both states.

Given the provisions on citizenship under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, it is possible for the following classes of citizens of the Philippines to possess dual citizenship:

(1) Those born of Filipino fathers and/or mothers in foreign countries which follow the principle of jus soli;

(2) Those born in the Philippines of Filipino mothers and alien fathers if by the laws of their fathers' country such children are citizens of that country;

(3) Those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latter's country the former are considered citizens, unless by their act or omission they are deemed to have renounced Philippine citizenship.

There may be other situations in which a citizen of the Philippines may, without performing any act, be also a citizen of another state.

Dual allegiance, on the other hand, refers to the situation in which a person simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two or more states.  While dual citizenship is involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of an individual's volition - his active participation in the naturalization process.

Under Republic Act No. 9225,*** a Filipino who becomes a naturalized citizen of another country is allowed to retain his Filipino citizenship by swearing to the supreme authority of the Republic of the Philippines. The act of taking an oath of allegiance is an implicit renunciation of a naturalized citizen's foreign citizenship.

Dual citizenship is not a ground for disqualification from running for elective position.  Like any other natural-born Filipino, it is enough for a person with dual citizenship who seeks public office to file his certificate of candidacy and swear to the Oath of Allegiance contained therein.  On the other hand, a person with dual allegiance who seeks public office must (apart from meeting the qualifications under Philippine law) swear to an Oath of Allegiance and execute a Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship pursuant to R.A. 9225.

* A child's citizenship is determined by its parents' citizenship, as in the Philippines.

** A child's citizenship is determined by its place of birth, as i

END OF QUOTE.

 

Is it therefore possible to conclude from this very clear statement of the Philippine Supreme Court that taking the Oath at the embassy is a waste of time,  and defeats the whole purpose of  Dual Citizenship.  It's better to keep your Irish citizenship and not put it at risk.

 

This doesn't matter under Irish law,  because Ireland does not  recognize Philippine law in this regard; as far as Ireland is concerned they are  still Irish citizens.

However,  this  situation could change in the near future  if it suited the Irish government who might endorse the Philippine Supreme Court ruling, especially with the approach of the aging crisis in Ireland where increasing numbers will be entitled to state pension benefit of the €230 per week.  Eventually Ireland will not be able to afford to pay this to everybody,  and therefore the State will be forced to eliminate as many people as possible from the benefit.   They could start by disqualifying those who have retired to the Philippines after reaching 65, and who had unwittingly renounced their Irish citizenship by taking an Oath at the embassy.  We know that 411 Filipinos are now on public record as having renounced.

 

We already know that the Department are already discriminating against Filipinos who take their maternity leave in the Philippines,  and have demanded back €7,000 from one nurse who they claim should have taken her leave in Ireland instead.

 

The question now arises  "can Filipinos who recently took the Oath at the embassy reverse the procedure and get a refund  on the grounds that they weren't informed about the 2009 ruling before taking the Oath "?

 

RECENT SURVEY BY FILIPINO FORUM MAGAZINE

According to a recent survey by the Filipino Forum the following reactions were recorded  by Filipinos when asked about dual Nationality................................

 

...........As of the time of writing, all interview  informants were considering to re-apply  for Philippine passports believing that  dual citizenship is beneficial. Non-Philippine  passport holders are legally banned   from owning land or voting in the Philippines

and still required tourist visas when  visiting for five months. All have expressed   their desire to return home upon  retirement,...........

 

EDITORIAL  COMMENT.

 This level of knowledge about the implications of swearing the Oath at the embassy should ring alarm bells,  and the embassy should consider withdrawing the service  to those who do not realize the consequences of what they are doing.

 

 Questions arising from the Filipino Forum survey...................

 

  1. Non Philippine citizens are not banned from owning land in the Philippines.
  2. They do not require visas to enter the Philippines.  When a Filipino holding an Irish passport          presents it at immigration  control at the entry point she should simply request a "Balikbayan visa".  This will entitle them to stay for up to one year.
  3. Irish passport holders who were not born in the Philippines require a visa if they are going for more than 21 days.  The place of birth is indicated inside an Irish passport.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

THE LAWS OF OTHER COUNTRIES ABOUT DUAL NATIONALITY.

 For better perspective, we extracted our archives (Postscript, 03Nov02) this summary sent by former Ambassador Rodolfo Arizala of how some countries regard dual or multiple citizenship: 

1. United Kingdom - The British Nationality Act allows a citizen to re-apply for British citizenship if his/her act of renouncing British citizenship was necessary for the retention or acquisition of some other citizenship or nationality. 

2. Italy - It allows Italians who possess, acquire or regain a foreign citizenship to retain their citizenship. 

3. South Africa - It allows specifically other nationals to acquire South African citizenship without renouncing their original citizenship. 

4. Ireland - Irish citizenship law provides in Article 24: "No person shall be deemed ever to have lost Irish citizenship . . . merely by operation of the law of another country whereby citizenship of that country is conferred on that person without any voluntary act on his part." 

5. Mexico - The Mexican Nationality Law was adopted in 1998 making it possible for Mexicans to regain their nationality even if they had acquired another citizenship or nationality. 

6. Spain - Filipinos with legal residence in Spain may become Spanish citizens after two years of residence without having to renounce their Filipino citizenship. 

7. Portugal - The law makes it optional whether a Portuguese acquiring other citizenship shall renounce his/her Portuguese citizenship. 

8. Canada - It allows its citizens to become members of the armed forces of other country without losing their Canadian citizenship. It is only when there is an armed conflict between Canada and that foreign country that Canada strips the citizenship of such Canadians rendering military service in the foreign country. 

9. New Zealand - It allows its citizens who have acquired another citizenship the option to renounce their original citizenship through a formal declaration of renunciation. In other words, loss of original citizenship is not automatic. 

10. Chile - It recognizes "dual citizenship" by providing in paragraph 1, Article II, Chapter 11 of its 1980 political constitution that Chilean citizenship is lost by naturalization in a foreign country. 

" . . . except in the case of Chileans covered by clauses 1, 2, and 3 of the prece-ding Article, who should have obtained another nationality without surrendering their Chilean citizenship in accordance with the provisions set forth in clause 4 of the same Article. 

"The aforementioned grounds for loss of Chilean nationality shall not apply to Chileans who, by virtue of constitutional, legal or administrative provisions of the State in the territory in which they should reside, may adopt the foreign nationality whenever it should be a condition for remaining in that country or for juridical equality with nationals of the respective country in the exercise of civil rights."

 

 LOSING CITIZENSHIP: Naturalization in another country is one of the seven ways listed under CA 63 (enacted in 1936) for a Filipino to lose citizenship.

 

 

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW IN BUYING PROPERTIES BACK HOME:

 

 

 

 Those who have become citizens of  Ireland  but who want to purchase houses and lots in the Philippines in preparation for their retirement years are confronted with the question of whether they can still own real property in the Philippines. Below is a primer that tackles the common questions on this issue.

 

Question 1:

 I am a former natural-born Philippine citizen but have become a naturalized  Irish citizen. Am I still allowed to own land in the Philippines ?

 

 Answer 1: Yes. Any natural-born Philippine citizen who has lost his Philippine citizenship may still own private land in the Philippines up to a maximum area of 5,000 square meters of urban land, or  in the case of rural land three hectacres.   In the case of married couples, the total area that both couples are allowed to purchase should not exceed the maximum area mentioned above.

 

Question 2:

 

Can I purchase several lots located in different cities and municipalities if the total area of all lots does not exceed 5,000 square meters of urban land or three hectares of rural land?

 

 Answer 2: A former natural-born Philippine citizen can acquire not more than two lots situated in different municipalities or cities and the total area of the two lots should not exceed 5,000 square meters of urban land or three hectares of rural land.

 

 Question 3:

 

If I am allowed to own a maximum of two lots situated in different municipalities or cities, can I own a 5,000-square-meter urban lot in Quezon City and three hectares of rural land and vice versa.

 

 Answer 3:

 No. A former natural-born Philippine citizen who has already acquired urban land shall be disqualified from acquiring rural land and vice versa.

 

 Question 4:

 

 Is there a way for a former natural-born Philippine citizen to own more than 5,000 square meters of urban land or three hectares of rural land?

 

 Answer 4: Yes. If a former natural-born Philippine citizen reacquires Philippine citizenship, he can acquire land without area limit.

 

 Question 5:

 

 When my children were born, I was already an  Irish citizen. Can they inherit my land in the Philippines ?

 

Answer 5:

Yes. Foreign nationals (even if they were not former natural-born Philippine citizens) can own land in the Philippines if they acquire it by inheritance. These nationals should, however, inherit the property by intestate succession. Intestate succession means that the foreign national inherits the property because he/she is an heir under Philippine law.

Naming one's heir by executing a "last Will and Testament" or a "Living Will" will not work to validly transfer real property in the Philippines to a foreign national.

(Incidently the former honorary consul still executes wills for Filipinos free of charge.  Phone 086 399 7654. I can come to your residence in the evening tme).

 Question 6:

 

 My husband is a natural-born Irish citizen. Can he buy a condominium unit in the Philippines and have the title in his name?

 

Answer 6:

Yes. The land on which a condominium building stands is always owned by a condominium corporation. When a person buys a condominium unit, he automatically becomes a stock-holder in the corporation which owns the land. Under Philippine law, foreigners are allowed to become stockholders of a corporation which own land but only up to a maximum of forty percent (40%) of the shares of the corporation. Foreigners, therefore, are allowed to own condominium units provided the total floor area owned by all foreigners in the condominium building does not exceed forty percent (40%). Many Filipinos living abroad are usually confronted with the question of whether their children are considered Filipino citizens. The question is engendered in the minds of expatriate Filipinos because any of the following circumstances obtain: Their child was born outside of the Philippines ; Their child was born with foreign parent and one Filipino parent; and Their child is already considered a citizen of the foreign country where they reside.

 

 Below is a primer on issues about Filipino citizenship relevant to Filipino expats with children born outside of the Philippines .

 

Question 1:

 Is Philippine citizenship acquired by blood or by country of birth?

 

 Answer 1: Philippine citizenship is acquired by blood (jus sanguini). A child is deemed a Filipino citizen because at least one of his parents was a Filipino citizen at the time of his birth. Even if the child was born outside the Philippines , for as long as at least one of his parents was a Filipino citizen.

    On the other hand, if both parents are non-Filipinos, the child is not a Filipino citizen even if he was born in the Philippines . This is different from the US law that determines American citizenship by the country of birth (jus soli). Under US law, a child is considered an American citizen if he is born in the United States even if both parents are not American citizens.  This also used to be Irish law up to 1st January 2005.  However now a child born to Filipino parents in Ireland can only become Irish if the parents were residing legally up to and prior to the birth.

 

 Question 2:

 

 What are the conditions that should be met for my child to be deemed a Filipino citizen?

 

Answer 2:

Your child is a Filipino citizen if he qualifies under any of the following conditions: Your child was born after January 17, 1973, with a Filipino father or a Filipino mother. In other words, if a child was born after January 17, 1973, he is a Filipino citizen if he has at least one parent who is a Filipino citizen at the time of his birth; Your child was born before January 17, 1973, with a Filipino mother and your child elected Philippine citizenship when he reached his 21st birthday. If your child was born before January 17, 1973, with a Filipino father, he is a Filipino citizen without any need of electing Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of 21; Incidentally, January 17, 1973, is the date when the 1973 Philippine Constitution came into effect; thus the importance of the date.

 

 Question 3:

 

Our son was born in  Ireland  at the time when my wife was still a  Filipino citizen. One week after our son's birth, however, my wife  obtained Irish  Citizenship. Did our son lose his Philippine citizenship when she became Irish ?

 

Answer 3:

No. The child was vested with the Philippine citizenship at the time of his birth. He does not lose his Philippine citizenship even if the parents acquire foreign citizenship after his birth.

 

 Question 4:

 

 My daughter was born in Ireland  at the time when my wife and I were still Filipino citizens. My daughter has been using an Irish  passport for 10 years. She has never visited the Philippines . Is my daughter considered a Philippine citizen even if she is  already an  Irish  citizen.

 

Answer 4:

  Yes. Philippine law allows dual citizenship. A child can both be an  Irish  citizen and a Filipino citizen at the same time. Under present laws, a person loses his Philippine citizenship if he renounces it. Using an Irish passport exclusively and not visiting Philippines does not amount to a renunciation of Philippine citizenship.

 

 Question 5:

 

If my child is born in Ireland at the time when my wife and I are still Filipino citizens, what should we do to document his Philippine citizenship?

 

Answer 5:

 A copy of the child's birth certificate should be submitted to the Philippine embassy in Dublin who  will transmit the birth certificate to the National Statistics Office in the Philippines for registration purposes. The document will be in triplicate, and the embassy will give you one of the triplicates with their stamp on it;  It's vitally important that you should always keep this safe, as it's your proof that the child is registered.  It's also a good idea to check with the NSO next time when on holidays in Manila to make sure they've entered your child's name correctly on their data base.  When I was consul I frequently came across cases where the NSO had failed to register the name.

 

 Question 6:

 

If a child is born in Ireland  at the time when his parents are still Filipino citizens, can he later on run for President of the Republic of the Philippines ?

 

 Answer 6: Yes, The child is a natural-born Filipino citizen. A natural-born Filipino citizen is one who does not have to do anything to acquire Philippine citizenship because he is a Filipino from birth.

(We spoke at length about this subject at the beginning of this newsletter, re the 2009 Supreme Court ruling.)

 

On the other hand, a naturalized Filipino citizen is one who has to undergo a naturalization proceeding to acquire Philippine citizenship. The distinction is important because only natural-born Filipino citizens can become President, Vice President, Senator, Congressman, Supreme Court Justice, and other propositions in constitutional bodies Yes, The child is a natural-born Filipino citizen.

A natural-born Filipino citizen is one who does not have to do anything to acquire Philippine citizenship because he is a Filipino from birth. On the other hand, a naturalized Filipino citizen is one who has to undergo a naturalization proceeding to acquire Philippine citizenship. The distinction is important because only natural-born Filipino citizens can become President, Vice President, Senator, Congressman, Supreme Court Justice, and other propositions in constitutional bodies.

 

 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS FROM FILIPINOS

May a married woman, who has chosen to adopt her husband's surname in her passport, be allowed to revert to her maiden name when she renews her passport?

Posted by lexforiphilippines on May 20, 2010

A married woman is not prohibited from using her maiden name upon marriage; she has an option, not a duty, to use her husband's surname (Article 370, Civil Code; Yasin vs. Hon. Judge Shari'a District Court, 311 Phil. 696, 707 [1995]).  Accordingly, a married woman who applies for a passport for the first time is allowed to use her maiden name.  If she opts to adopt her husband's surname in her passport, she may not revert to the use of her maiden name, except in the following instances as enumerated in Section 5(d) of Republic Act No.  8239 or thePhilippine Passport Act of 1996: (1) death of husband, (2) divorce, (3) annulment, or (4) nullity of marriage.  In other words, she may not revert to the use of her maiden name in her replacement passport as long as her marriage subsists.  So said the Supreme Court in the case ofRemo vs. Secretary of Foreign Affairs (G.R. 169202; 5 March 2010)

(Click on Digested Cases under Tools to find a summary of the case of Remo vs. Secretary of Foreign Affairs G.R. 169202; 5 March 2010.)

Posted in CasesCivil LawLaw SchoolRemedial Law | Leave a Comment »

Republic Act No. 9999, "Free Legal Assistance Act of 2010″

Posted by lexforiphilippines on March 8, 2010

Lawyers or law partnerships wishing to render free legal aid are now entitled to claim tax benefits for doing pro bono work.

Last February 23, 2010, the President signed into law the Free Legal Assistance Act of 2010 giving a lawyer or professional partnerships rendering actual free legal services, an allowable deduction from the gross income, the amount that could have been collected for the actual free legal services rendered or up to ten percent (10%) of the gross income derived from the actual performance of the legal profession (service?), whichever is lower. However, the actual free legal services contemplated shall be exclusive of the minimum sixty (60)-hour mandatory legal aid services rendered to indigent litigants as required under the Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Services for Practicing Lawyers, under BAR Matter No. 2012, issued by the Supreme Court.

The BIR is mandated to formulate within 90 days the necessary revenue regulation to implement the tax benefit envisioned under the Act.

Republic Act No. 9653 - Rent Control Act

Posted by lexforiphilippines on February 11, 2010

For lessors, a new law was signed stating that you could not demand more than one month advance rental and not more than two months deposit. Lessees, on the other hand, will be secured that no increase will be effected one year from its effectivity.

On 14 July 2009, the President signed into law Republic Act 9653, otherwise known as the "Rent Control Act of 2009."  The law seeks to protect housing tenants in the lower income brackets from unreasonable rent increases.

(To see the salient features of the Rent Control Act, you may click on Laws under Tools.)

Posted in Civil LawLaw SchoolLaws and Implementing Rules | Tagged: leaseelessorrent | 5 Comments »

  

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

Want To Contribute Stories/Features? Click Here

63


Posted at: 08:24 PM | Add Comment RSS | Digg!

flora borgonia said...

may apo ako pinanganak sya dto mla ag father nya ay south african at south african ang passport nya 3 yrs old palang sya gusto ko syang pa dual citezen magkano kaya ang bayad at ilan taon para maging dual sya

Posted 23 Feb 2014 10:52 PM | Reply to this comment

filrish said...

ask if what happen if i gonna marry a filipino nationality and i am a dual citizen of ireland but i use my filipino nationality in my marriage licence. is there any conflict if im going to petition my husband?

Posted 26 Feb 2013 11:14 PM | Reply to this comment

Balita Pinoy Editorial replied to Jojo...

Jojo, you have a bit of a nightmare there. This will require legal knowledge which is out of our level of competence, so would strongly advise a lawyer. All that can be said generally is that if a marriage is held legally in PHL, it is recognized in UK. As divorce in PHL is not legal, getting it annulled is only way, although we do believe PHL law does recognize foreign divorces; however, that may only apply to marriages made outside PHL. A lawyer is needed here.

Posted 9 Jan 2013 01:37 AM | Reply to this comment

Jojo said...

Hi, came across your site and I just had to ask this question. I have dual citizenship, Filipino & Brit both are acquired by birth. I am married in the Philippines however it didn't quite work out with my wife and well the whole annulment thing is a mess. I am only registered as married in the Philippines and still listed as single in the UK as the marriage broke off before I had the chance to even register the marriage. I haven't been in the Philippines for a long time and am also thinking of giving up my Filipino citizenship for good. Will that marriage in the Philippines be revoked also? Or is it still necessary to first file the annulment and then end it off? And for arguments sake, let's say I went on to revoking my Filipino citizenship without going through the annulment and got married elsewhere, if I came back to the Philippines by chance will the previous marriage still be listed as valid? Hoping to hear of some enlightenment! Thanks!

Posted 8 Jan 2013 11:05 AM | Reply to this comment

Roland replied to michael...

@michael You can apply for Philippine citizenship by having your Filipino Parent submit a late registration of birth to the nearest Philippine consulate. Your parent would have to prove he/she was filipino at time of your birth (show an old passport, naturalization papers so they can know when they got naturalized). You can also apply for the Philippine passport at the same time. Ask your local consulate for the forms.

Posted 1 Oct 2012 11:54 AM | Reply to this comment

felix said...

some of them applied and wait so long before they got the approval of their naturalisation and paid 950, im sure they don't want to apply and pay 950 again just bec. of that re-acquisition of philippine citizenship, philippine embassy should give more information to the people, not just for thinking how can they raise the profit of the agency, hope they can do something abt. those irish-filipino national who already applied for re-acquisition

Posted 1 Oct 2012 11:30 AM | Reply to this comment

felix said...

The question now arises "can Filipinos who recently took the Oath at the embassy reverse the procedure and get a refund on the grounds that they weren't informed about the 2009 ruling before taking the Oath "?

Posted 1 Oct 2012 11:16 AM | Reply to this comment

michael said...

I am a half Filipino , half British by birth but I live in UK most of my life. I haven't claimed my Filipino citizenship yet and I would like to ask if someone here knows the process? I am 18 years old and wants to reside to the Philippines thats why I want to know about the dual citizenship thing.

Posted 15 Sep 2012 08:55 AM | Reply to this comment

Vine said...

I read this article point by point and we agree with the issue on how one can lose their citizenship if as per Section 2 of RA 9225, you have not lost it as stated, " It is hereby declared the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of this Act." Hence taking the Oath of Allegiance should not even be instrumental in retaining your Filipino citizenship if you were naturalized AFTER the law has been implemented. Maybe the step in "re-acquiring" is necessary as the law is not retro-active. To my actual objective in posting: for the past week, I have been browsing the web for information on acquiring land by former Filipinos. Due to a conversation about dual citizenship today, I came across your article where it has allowed me to post my comments and questions in relation to all topics: dual citizenship, former Filipinos and Philippine land purchase. I have known for years that former Filipinos are allowed to own up to 1,000 sq m of residential land as BP 185. Today, I discovered RA 8179 which states ownership of "private land up to a maximum area of 5,000 square meters in the case of urban land" (I am limiting my post to residential and urban land to where our interest lies). For the latter, it is specified "business or other purposes." Is this description relegated to just non-residential or "other purposes" has been repealed in recent years (by any case) to include residential as well? Finally, in my research, I have come across a few times with a condition for purchase as stated in BP 185 and I quote, "Sec. 7. The transferee shall not use the lands acquired under this Act for any purpose other than for his residence. Violations of this Section, any misrepresentation in the sworn statement required under Section 6 hereof, any acquisition through fraudulent means or failure to reside permanently in the land acquired within two years from the acquisition thereof, except when such failure is caused by force majeure, shall, in addition to any liability under the Revised Penal Code and deportation in appropriate cases, be penalized by forfeiture of such lands and their improvements to the National Government. For this purpose the Solicitor General or his representative shall institute escheat proceedings." Does this mean that if one intends to purchase a property to have you aged parents live in good conditions without the need to worry about a roof over their heads, instead of the buyer/child living in it because the latter is making a living elsewhere but is now considered "former" Filipino, then it is not a recommendation to proceed with a purchase? Then there seems to be no benefit to the clause of former Filipinos being allowed to buy land when they are not yet up for retirement themselves. Note: most websites have left out this information. If you can help answer these queries, thank you so much as I have been racking my brain and have been exhausted researching to understand and to make the right decision. At this point, dual citizenship should not be an answer, nor an option, to be able to help one's parents.

Posted 16 Jun 2012 03:46 PM | Reply to this comment

Editorial answer to Concern Pinoy replied to Concern Pinoy...

Current wisdom suggests that those who have been Naturalized in Ireland should not immediately reacquire Philippine Citizenship for the wrong reasons. It appears that some Filipinos are reacquiring this citizenship in the belief that it will reduce any difficulties they might experience in entering and staying in the Philippines, even on a temporary basis, and also of purchasing and retaining property including rural and urban land. These Filipinos should think long and hard before going forward for reacquisation in case taking such a step could have an unforeseen negative impact on their future, like remittances of State Pension to the Philippines when they retire. Remember that unlike the UK and other countries, Ireland and the Philippines do not have a bi-lateral agreement which would determine pension rights. A well thought out decision is essential in view of the fact that the Supreme Court of the Philippines have stated that "by reacquiring Philippne Citizenship Filipinos implicitly renounce their foreign citizenship". The Supreme Court have made a distinction between Dual Nationality (only for children), and Dual aliegance (Adults). Filipinos should also take to heart the contents of the CFO handbook (handbook for Filipinos by Manila DFA) and read the Balikbayan privileges on pages 44 to 50

Posted 13 Jun 2012 11:43 AM | Reply to this comment

Concern Pinoy said...

Hello to the Editor, I am totally confused now, can you answer this simple question I your opinion should we Filipino's in Ireland should re-acquire Filipino Citizenship? I do understand what you have wrote above is to explain us that we should not take the re-acquisition (this is what I gather from the above) and pardon me if this is not your intention. Anyways there still a bit of explanation you need to do since you already started it and already have knowledge about this more than us. I for example is now relying to waht you have wrote here and would not go for re-acquisition. So can you please give us a straight answer. Should we Filipipnos go and get our re-acquisition to the embassy? You have said that we do not loose our Filipino Citizenship upon taking the Oath of Fidelity to the Iris State. Thanks, Corcern Pinoy

Posted 12 Jun 2012 05:06 AM | Reply to this comment

Martin said...

I am an Irish man who came across your website while researching Irish citizenship. The comment I want to make is to describe my great disgust at the ignorance of the person who wrote the article. A question was asked: "After Irish Naturalization, if a person decides to reacquire Filipino Citizenship, will he lose any of his rights as a Filipino?" And the extraordinary response by your website is: "Frankly, not the brightest question!" This is a disgusting way to answer a question. The speaker who purports to evaluate the intelligence of the question is in fact showing his own ignorance and low intelligence, because all questions are a way for someone to improve their minds. The more questions I ask, the more I learn. Questions help to improve the mind. When an ignoramus like your correspondent punishes questions with insults, then in fact he attacks the process of learning, and that is ignorant and insulting behaviour. I ask you to forward my remarks to whoever wrote this ignorant article, and please amend it. The tone of the whole piece is one of self-indulgent, arrogant outrage and it is pompous. The thing should be re-written. The writer also arrognatly states, "It is rather heavy going but we make no apologies for that." This is just an excuse not to think by the writer. He should have found a way of analyzing his material so as to make it more digestible and less long-winded, and to do the reader the service of providing a more accessible explanation of Filipino law. The article is lazy and insults the reader. It is most unprofessional.

Posted 2 Apr 2012 01:59 PM | Reply to this comment

Add Comment

Your Name: (Required)
Comment:

Please enter the 4 to 6 character security code:

(This is to prevent automated comments.)