Mary Grace Poe-Llamanzares vs COMELEC et al

FACTS:
Grace Poe (Poe) was found abandoned in a church in Jaro Iloilo sometime 1968. Parental care was
passed to the relatives of Edgardo Militar, the person who found the child. The relatives then reported and
registered the child as a founding with the Civil Registrar of Iloilo. The child was then named Mary Grace
Militar.
The child was subsequently adopted by Fernando Poe, Jr and Susan Roces sometime in 1974.
Necessary annotations were placed in the childs foundling certificate but it was only in 2005 that Susan
Roces discovered that their lawyer failed to secure a new Certificate of Live Birth indicating Poes new
name as well as the name of the adoptive parents. Roces then submitted an affidavit and in 2006, a
Certificate of Live Birth in the name of Mary Grace Poe was released by the Civil Registry of Iloilo.
At the age of 18, Poe was registered as a voter of San Juan. In 1988, she was issued a Philippine
passport. In 1991, Poe married Teodoro Llamanzares and flew to the US right after the wedding. She then
gave birth to her eldest child in the US.
In 2001, Poe became a naturalized American Citizen and she obtained a US Passport that same year. In
April 2004, Poe came back to the Philippines in order to support her fathers candidacy. It was at this time
that she gave birth to her youngest daughter. She then returned to the US in July 2004 with her two
daughters.
Poe returned in December 2004 after learning of her fathers deteriorating condition. The latter died and
Poe stayed until February 2005 to take care of the funeral arrangements. Poe stated that she wanted to
be with her grieving mother hence, she and her husband decided to move and reside permanently in the
Philippines sometime first quarter of 2005. They prepared for resettlement including notification of their
childrens schools, coordination with property movers and inquiry with Philippine authorities as to how
they can bring their pet dog.
According to Poe, as early as 2004, she already quit her job in the US.Poe came home on May 24, 2005
and immediately secured a TIN while her husband stayed in the US. She and her family stayed with her
mother until she and husband was able to purchase a condominium in San Juan sometime February
2006.
On February 14, 2006, Poe returned to the US to dispose the other family belongings. She travelled back
in March 2006. In early 2006, Poe and husband acquired a property in Corinthian Hills in Quezon City

where they built their family home. On July 7, 2006, Poe took her Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines pursuant to R.A. 9225. On July 10, 2006, she filed a sworn petition to reacquire Philippine
citizenship together with petitions for derivative citizenship on behalf of her three children. The Bureau of
Immigration acted in favor of the petition on July 18, 2006. She and her children were then considered
dual citizens.
Poe then registered as voter in August 2006 and secured a Philippine passport thereafter. On October 6,
2010, she was appointed as Chairperson of the MTRCB. Before assuming her post, she executed an
Affidavit of Renunciation of Allegiance to the US before a notary public in Pasig City on October 20, 2010.
The following day, she submitted the Affidavit to the Bureau of Immigration and took her oath as MTRCB
Chairperson.
According to Poe, she stopped using her American passport from then on. On July 12, 2011, Poe
executed an Oath/Affirmation of Renunciation of Nationality of the US before the Vice Consul of the US
Embassy in Manila. On December 9, 2011, the US Vice Consul issued a Certificate of Loss of Nationality
of the US effective October 21, 2010.
On October 2, 2012, Poe filed with COMELEC her Certificate of Candidacy for Senator stating that she
was a resident of the Philippines for a period of 6 years and 6 months before May 13, 2013. She was then
proclaimed a Senator on May 16, 2013.
On October 15, 2015, Poe filed her COC for the Presidency for the May 2016 elections. She declared that
she is a natural born and her residence in the Philippine up to the day before election would be 10 years
and 11 months counted from May 24, 2005.
Several petitions were filed against Poe alleging that (1) she committed material misrepresentation in her
COC when she stated that she is a resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years 11 months up to the
day before May 9, 2016 Elections, (2) she is not natural born considering that Poe is a foundling. It was
argued that international law does not confer natural born status and Filipino citizenship to foundlings
hence, she is not qualified to apply for reacquisition of Filipino citizenship under R.A.9225 as she is not a
natural citizen to begin with. Assuming that Poe was a natural born citizen, she lost it when she became a
US Citizen.
ISSUE:
1) Whether as a foundling, Poe is a natural born Citizen

HELD:
Foundlings are as a class, natural born citizens. While the 1935 Constitution is silent as to foundlings,
there is no restrictive language that would exclude them either. Because of silence and ambiguity in the
enumeration, there is a need to examine the intent of the framers. The amendment to the Constitution
proposed by constitutionalist Rafols to include foundlings as natural born citizens was not carried out, not
because there was any objection to the notion that persons of unknown parentage are not citizens, but
only because their number was not enough to merit specific mention. There was no intent or language
that would permit discrimination against foundlings. On the contrary, all three Constitutions guarantee the
basic right to equal protection of the laws. Likewise, domestic laws on adoption support the principle that
foundlings are Filipinos. These laws do not provide that adoption confers citizenship upon the adoptee,
rather, the adoptee must be Filipino in the first place to be adopted. Recent legislation all expressly refer
to Filipino children and include foundlings as among Filipino children who may be adopted. The
argument that the process to determine that the child is a foundling leading to the issuance of a foundling
certificate are acts to acquire or perfect Philippine citizenship is without merit. Hence, the argument that
as a foundling, Poe underwent a process in order to acquire or perfect her Philippine citizenship, is
untenable.
First, Having to perform an act means that the act must be personally done by the citizen. In this case,
the determination of foundling status was done by authorities, not by Poe. Second, the object of the
process is to determine the whereabouts of the parents, not the citizenship of the child and lastly, the
process is not analogous to naturalization proceedings.
Under international law, foundlings are citizens. Generally accepted principles of international law which
include international customs form part of the laws of the land. The common thread of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Convent on
Civil and Political Rights obligates the Philippines to grant nationality from birth and to ensure that no child
is stateless. The principles stated in the:
1. Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relation to the Conflict of Nationality laws (that a foundling is
presumed to have the nationality of the country of birth)
2. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (foundling is presumed born of citizens of the country
where he is found) bind the Philippines although we are not signatory to these conventions. Although we

are not a signatory to the Hague Convention, we are a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR) which affirms Article 14 of the Hague Convention. Likewise, the Convention on the
Reduction of Statelessness affirms Article 15 of the UDHR. By analogy, although the Philippines has not
signed the International Convention for the Protection of Persons from Enforced Disappearance, we (the
Supreme Court) ruled that the proscription against enforced disappearance was nonetheless binding as a
generally accepted principle of international law.
Poes evidence shows that at least 60 countries in Asia, North and South America and Europe have
passed legislation recognizing foundlings as its citizens. 166 out of 189 countries accept that foundlings
are recognized as citizens. Hence, there is a generally accepted principle of international law to presume
foundlings as having been born and a national of the country in which it is found. Hence, as a foundling,
Poe is a natural born Filipino citizen.
ISSUE:
2) Whether Poes repatriation resulted to reacquisition of natural born citizenship.
HELD:
The COMELEC arrogantly disregarded jurisprudence on the matter of repatriation which states that
repatriation results in the recovery of the original nationality. A natural born citizen before he lost his
Philippine nationality will be restored to his former status as natural born Filipino after repatriation
(Benson v. HRET, Pareno v. Commission on Audit etc). In passing R.A. 9225, Congress saw it fit to
decree that natural born citizenship may be reacquired even if it has been lost. It is not for the COMELEC
to disagree with the Congress determination. Neither is repatriation an act to acquire or perfect ones
citizenship. In the case of Bengson, the Court pointed out that there are only two types of citizens under
the 1987 constitution: natural born and naturalized. There is no third category for repatriated citizens. The
COMELEC cannot reverse a judicial precedent. Hence, COMELECs decision is wrapped with grave
abuse of discretion.
ISSUE:

3) Whether Poe is a resident of the Philippine for 10 years

HELD:
Poe alleged that her residency should be counted from May 24, 2005 when she returned for good from

the US. There are three requisites to acquire a new domicile 1. Residence or bodily presence in a new
locality 2. Intention to remain (animus manendi) and 3. Intention to abandon the old domicile (animus nonrevertendi). The purpose to remain in or at the domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period of time,
the change of residence must be voluntary and the residence at the place chosen for the new domicile
must be actual.
Poe presented voluminous evidence showing that she and her family abandoned their US domicile and
relocated to the Philippines for good. These evidence include former US passport showing her arrival on
May 24, 2005 and her return to the Philippines every time she travelled abroad, email correspondences
with freight company to arrange for the shipment of household items as well as with the pet Bureau;
school records of her children showing enrolment in the Philippine to the Philippine schools starting on
June 2005 etc.
COMELEC refused to consider the petitioners domicile has been timely changed as of May 24, 2005 and
maintained that although there is physical presence and animus manendi, there is no animus revertendi.
Respondents contend that the stay of an alien former Filipino cannot be counted until he/she obtains a
permanent resident visa or reacquired Philippine citizenship since she is still an American until July 7,
2006 on the basis of previous cases ruled upon by the Supreme Court.
SC held that the other cases previously decided by the court wherein residence was counted only from
the acquisition of permanent residence were decided as such because there is sparse evidence on
establishment of residence. These cases cannot be applied in the present case. In the case at bar, there
is overwhelming evidence that leads to no to other conclusion that Poe decided to permanently abandon
her US residence and reside in the Philippines as early as May 24, 2005.
These evidence, coupled with her eventual application to reacquire Philippine citizenship is clear that
when she returned in May 2005, it was for good. The stamp in her passport as a balikbayan does not
make Poe an ordinary transient. Poe was able to prove that her statement in her 2012 COC was only a
mistake in good faith. Such a mistake could be given in evidence against her but it was by no means
conclusive considering the overwhelming evidence submitted by Poe. Considering that the COMELEC
failed to take into consideration these overwhelming evidence, its decision is tainted with grave abuse of
discretion.
The decision of the COMELEC is hereby annulled and set aside. Poe is thus declared qualified to be a
candidate for President in the National and Local Election on May 9, 2016.