Go Julian v. Government of the Philippine Islands
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: Go Julian, a Chinese merchant born in the Philippines in 1899 to Chinese parents, filed a petition for naturalization under Act No. 2927. He had resided in the Philippines since birth, with two sojourns in China for study and one year of residence. He was married to a Chinese woman and had a child, both residing in the Philippines. He held a certificate of residence issued under the Act of Congress of April 29, 1902, and admitted to being a citizen of the Chinese Republic. His parents were not considered Spanish subjects before August 11, 1899. 2. Procedural History: The Attorney-General opposed the petition, arguing that Go Julian, being Chinese, was not entitled to benefits under Act No. 2927, as it requires eligibility for U.S. citizenship if residing therein, which he was not. The opposition also cited that under U.S. law, he could not be naturalized as a U.S. citizen. The Court of First Instance of Iloilo denied the petition. 3. The Petition: Go Julian appealed the denial, assigning error to the lower court's finding.
Issue(s)
Whether Go Julian, born in the Philippines of Chinese parents and having elected Chinese nationality upon reaching majority, is eligible for naturalization as a Philippine citizen under Act No. 2927. Whether the doctrine established in Wong Kim Ark and applied in Roa v. Collector of Customs is decisive of the petitioner's claim.
Ruling
The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the lower court, granted the petition of Go Julian, and ordered the issuance of a certificate of naturalization.
Ratio Decidendi
On the eligibility for naturalization under Act No. 2927: The Court held that Go Julian, despite being born of Chinese parents and electing Chinese nationality, was a "native of the Philippine Islands" within the meaning of Act No. 2927 and the Act of Congress of August 29, 1916. The Court reiterated the doctrine of jus soli (citizenship by place of birth), as established in the United States and applied in the Philippines, which generally confers citizenship upon all persons born within the territory, regardless of the parents' nationality, with limited exceptions. The Court found that the petitioner met the qualifications for naturalization under Act No. 2927, which was enacted pursuant to the authority granted by the Act of Congress of August 29, 1916. The fact that he was born in the Philippines was deemed significant, and under the doctrine of Wong Kim Ark, he could still pursue Philippine citizenship. On the decisiveness of Wong Kim Ark and Roa v. Collector of Customs: The Court found the doctrine laid down in Wong Kim Ark and applied in Roa v. Collector of Customs to be entirely decisive in favor of the petitioner. These cases affirmed the principle that citizenship is generally determined by the place of birth (jus soli). The Wong Kim Ark case specifically held that children born in the United States of resident aliens are citizens, and this principle was applied to the Philippine context. The Court noted that while expatriation is a right, a child born in the Philippines of foreign parents is a citizen until expatriation occurs, either by parents during minority or by the individual upon reaching majority through voluntary acts. The Court's application of these precedents underscored that the petitioner's birth in the Philippines was a strong basis for his claim to citizenship, even if he later elected his father's nationality.
Main Doctrine
A person born in the Philippine Islands of foreign parents, who has elected the nationality of his father upon reaching majority, may still be granted Philippine citizenship under Act No. 2927, provided they meet the qualifications therein, reaffirming the principle of citizenship by place of birth (jus soli) as recognized in the Philippines and the United States.