G.R. No. 160869, May 11, 2007
- Sec. 3, RA 9225 stayed clear of the problem of dual allegiance and shifted the burden of confronting the issue of whether or not there is dual allegiance to the concerned foreign country.
FACTS:
This is an action for prohibition against the Secretary of Justice, the official tasked to implement laws governing citizenship. According to petitioner, RA 9225 condones dual allegiance which is contrary to the Constitution.
ISSUE:
- Whether or not RA 9225 allows dual allegiance
HELD:
...it is clear that the intent of the legislature in drafting RA 9225 is to do away with the provision in the CA 63 which takes away Philippine citizenship from natural-born Filipinos who become naturalized citizens of other countries. What RA 9225 allows is dual citizenship to natural-born Filipino citizens who have lost Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country. On its face, it does not recognize dual allegiance. By swearing to the supreme authority of the Republic, the person implicitly renounces his foreign citizenship. Plainly, from Sec. 3, RA 9225 stayed clear of the problem of dual allegiance and shifted the burden of confronting the issue of whether or not there is dual allegiance to the concerned foreign country. What happens to the other citizenship was not made a concern of RA 9225.
