In their commentary “The Court that became Congress” (Opinion, 3/22/16), lawyers Cristina Montes and Jemy Gatdula lamented how the Supreme Court allowed the “trampling of our Constitution” by declaring Grace Poe qualified to run for president despite all uncertainty regarding her citizenship status.
They cited Justice Arturo Brion’s dissent which decried the decision of the majority of the justices for “read(ing) into the Constitution what is not written there,” and injecting their “pet social and human rights advocacies” into the decision-making process “not justified by the clear terms of the Constitution.”
What “clear terms”? The Constitution is totally silent about the citizenship of foundlings found in the Philippines! While its bias is for jus sanguinis (by blood ties) as seen from the enumerations of who are citizens of this country, there is absolutely no preclusion against a classification by jus soli (by place of birth).
In fact, by categorically declaring that the Philippines “hereby adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land,” the Constitution itself lays its door open for a class of citizenship not necessary based on jus sanguinis. The phrase “hereby adopts” clearly means no “enabling law” from Congress is needed to make those principles part of our laws. It is direct legislation, so to speak, by the people who ratified the Constitution.
Foundlings found in any country are presumed citizens of that country under international law (in the absence of local laws to the contrary). Foundlings, by definition, have no known parents. Such citizenship can only be based on jus soli, not jus sanguinis. If Montes and Gatdula really cared that much about this country making citizens of “foundlings” (who could in reality be aliens, as Justice Brion so impudently hypothesized), why were they never heard of in the past, objecting to the citizenship of countless “foundlings” scattered across the land?
Take note that Bengzon vs. HRET already settled that there are only two kinds of Filipino citizenship: natural-born and naturalized—nothing in between. Beyond that, it’s alien territory! Clear as daylight, it said if a citizen did not have to undergo any naturalization under existing laws, he/she is “necessarily” deemed natural-born, period. What part of that pronouncement is so hard to understand?
By virtue of that doctrine, foundlings in this country have all along been deemed “natural-born” Filipinos having undergone no naturalization to become Filipinos. Weren’t Montes and Gatdula ever alarmed by their sheer number? Apparently not, since none of them found the guts to run for president, duh!? See the hypocrisy? So, it’s OK for that sector of the hoi polloi to keep their “natural-born” status so long as they stay in the corner and mind their own business?
Concerned lawyers as they claim to be, would that the bleeding-heart duo spend more of their time and energy targeting the biggest crook now threatening to lay siege on the country’s seat of power!
—SCARLET S. SYTANGCO, sssytangco@gmail.com