Macquiling v. Commission on Elections
NEW DOCTRINEFacts
The Antecedents: Respondent Rommel Arnado, a natural-born Filipino citizen, acquired American citizenship. He later reacquired his Filipino citizenship by taking an Oath of Allegiance and executed an Affidavit of Renunciation of American Citizenship on April 3, 2009. He ran for and was elected Mayor of Kauswagan, Lanao del Norte. Procedural History: The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) First Division initially found that Arnado used his U.S. passport at least six times after renouncing his American citizenship. However, the COMELEC En Banc reversed this, finding that Arnado only used his U.S. passport four times because his Philippine passport was not yet issued, and that he used his Philippine passport for subsequent travels. The COMELEC En Banc concluded that the use of the U.S. passport was due to the non-issuance of his Philippine passport. The Petition: This resolution resolves a Motion for Reconsideration and a Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration filed by respondent Arnado. The core issue revolves around the efficacy of Arnado's renunciation of his American citizenship and whether his subsequent use of his U.S. passport disqualified him from running for local elective office under Section 40(d) of the Local Government Code, despite his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship under RA 9225.
Issue(s)
Whether the continued use of a U.S. passport after renouncing American citizenship negates the renunciation and disqualifies a candidate for local elective office. Whether the COMELEC En Banc committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that Arnado's use of his U.S. passport was justified and did not affect his qualification.
Ruling
The Motion for Reconsideration and the Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration are DENIED with finality. The Court affirmed its previous decision, holding that the continued use of a U.S. passport after renouncing American citizenship demonstrates that the renunciation was not complete and unequivocal, thus disqualifying Arnado from running for local elective office.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of continued use of a U.S. passport after renunciation: The Court held that the use of a U.S. passport after executing an Affidavit of Renunciation of American Citizenship is a positive declaration that one is a citizen of the country which issued the passport, or that it proves the country recognizes the person as its national. The renunciation of foreign citizenship must be complete and unequivocal, and allowing the subsequent use of a foreign passport, even if for convenience, renders the oath of renunciation a hollow act. The Court found that Arnado's travel records showed he continued to use his U.S. passport even after his Philippine passport was issued, contradicting the COMELEC En Banc's finding that such use was solely due to the non-issuance of his Philippine passport. This continued use, therefore, indicated that he still possessed American citizenship at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy, making him subject to disqualification under Section 40(d) of the Local Government Code. On the issue of COMELEC En Banc's ruling: The Court found that the ruling of the COMELEC En Banc was based on a misapprehension of facts, specifically the claim that the use of the U.S. passport was discontinued upon obtaining the Philippine passport. The records showed otherwise, with Arnado using his U.S. passport on dates after he had presumably received his Philippine passport. Therefore, the COMELEC En Banc's conclusion that Arnado's use of the U.S. passport was justified and did not affect his qualification was not supported by the facts, and the Court found no grave abuse of discretion in reversing it.
Main Doctrine
The continued use of a foreign passport after executing an affidavit of renunciation of foreign citizenship can be considered as evidence that the renunciation was not complete and unequivocal. This is particularly relevant in election law, where candidates for local elective positions must be exclusively Filipino citizens. The Court stressed that the policy behind RA 9225 and Section 40(d) of the Local Government Code requires a strict adherence to the principle that those seeking public office must be solely and exclusively Filipino citizens, and the use of a foreign passport indicates recognition by a foreign state as its national.