The Grace Poe Case Simplified

A further digest of another digest by Vena V. Verga, presented in a way laymen would better understand. It is for you to be informed of what netizens are raging about.

GRACE POE vs. COMELEC

The Case

·       Grace Poe was found abandoned as a newborn infant in the Parish Church of Jaro, Iloilo by Edgardo Militar in 1968. Parental care and custody over her was passed on by Edgardo to his relatives, Emiliano Militar and his wife. Emiliano reported and registered Grace Poe as a foundling with the Office of the Civil Registrar of Iloilo City. Fenando Poe, Jr. and Susan Roces adopted Grace Poe.

·         1991 – Poe went to the US to be a permanent resident therein

·         2001 – She became a naturalized US citizen

·         First quarter of 2005 – she came back to the Philippines to permanently reside herein

·         February 14, 2006- she went back to the US to dispose family belongings

·         July 18, 2006 – she re-acquired Filipino citizenship

·         According to Poe in her 2013 COC for Senator, before the May 13, 2013 election, she has been a resident of the Philippines for 6 years and 6 months (reckoned from year 2006 when she  re-acquired her Filipino citizenship under RA 9225). 

·         Poe filed her COC for Presidency for the May 9, 2016 elections (hence, computing from May, 2013, she has been a resident in the Philippines for 9 years and 6 months only)

·         However, in her COC, Poe 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 (when she returned from the US to the Philippines for good).

RULING OF THE SUPREME COURT

Poe is qualified to be a candidate for President in the National and Local Election on May 9, 2016.

1)       Is Poe, a foundling, a natural-born citizen? Yes, based on:

a)      Circumstantial evidence

b)      Legislation

c)       Generally accepted principles of international law

Circumstantial evidence

There is more than sufficient evidence that Poe has Filipino parents and is therefore a natural-born Filipino. xxx. [T]here is a high probability that her parents are Filipinos. The Solicitor General offered official Statistics from the Philippine Statistics office that from 1965 to 1975, the total number of foreigners born in the Philippines was 15,985. While the Filipinos born in the country were more than 10 Million. On this basis, there is a 99% chance that the child born in the Philippines would be a Filipino which in turn, would indicate more than ample probability that Poe’s parents are Filipinos.

Other circumstantial evidence of the nationality of Poe’s parents are the fact that:

1. She was abandoned in a Roman Catholic Church in Iloilo

2. She has typical Filipino features.

There are disputable presumptions that things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature. On this basis, it is safer to assume that Poe’s parents are Filipinos. To assume otherwise is to accept the absurd.

Legislation

Foundlings are as a class, natural born citizens.  

Ø  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.

Ø  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.

Ø  Recent legislation all expressly refer to “Filipino children” and include foundlings as among Filipino children who may be adopted.

Generally accepted principles of international law

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.

Poe’s 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.

2)      After renouncing her American citizenship and after having taken her Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, has Poe re-acquired her status as a natural-born Filipino citizen? Yes, Poe’s repatriation resulted to reacquisition of natural born citizenship.

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).

3)      Has Poe satisfied the 10 year residency requirement? Yes, she will have been a resident for 10 years and 11 months on the day of the election.

[T]here 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.

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. xxx These evidence, coupled with her eventual application to reacquire Philippine citizenship is clear that when she returned in May 2005, it was for good.

Poe was able to prove that her statement in her 2013 COC was only a mistake in good faith. As explained by Grace Poe, she misunderstood the date required in the 2013 COC as the period of residence as of the day she submitted that COC in 2012. She said that she reckoned residency from April-May 2006 which was the period when the U.S. house was sold and her husband returned to the Philippines. In that regard, she was advised by her lawyers in 2015 that residence could be counted from 25 May 2005. Such a mistake could be given in evidence against her but it was by no means conclusive considering the overwhelming evidence submitted by Poe.

--------------------------------------end-----------------------------------------------

NOTE: The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Philippines. It is the court of last resort, which means that it gives the final disposition to a case which cannot be overturned by any other court but itself. In short, it resolves controversies once and for all. Whatever it says, forms part of the law of the land; whatever it says, binds us all Filipinos, even our children yet to be born unless it has decided differently in another subsequent case. 

Classic display of power and personal interests, well-executed but of course, highly doubted. This is a shameless disregard of the most fundamental law, a revolutionary turn-around from the rule of law, slavery to the should-be infallible, thief to lawyers and aspirants, the downfall of a highly respected profession, an evidence of the evils of corruption. What else could happen in this country? 

As a law student, I am deeply frustrated but this is more reason for me to be one of the lawyers who stand for and by the law, inviolable as it is, sacred in its letters and spirit. Never shall I play blind, never shall I be blinded.

As it ever was  and should always be--dura lex sed lex.