G.R. No. 191810, June 22, 2015
Jimmy T. Go a.k.a. Jaime T. Gaisano, Petitioner, vs. Bureau of Immigration and Deportation and its Commissioners and Luis T. Ramos, Respondents.

FACTS

In April 2000, respondent Luis T. Ramos filed a complaint-affidavit for the deportation of petitioner Jimmy T. Go before the Bureau of Immigration (BI), alleging that Go is a Chinese citizen born in the Philippines to Chinese parents, in violation of the Philippine Immigration Act. Ramos presented birth certificates indicating Go and his siblings as “Chinese.” Go countered that his father, Carlos Go, Sr., elected Philippine citizenship in July 1950, as evidenced by an Oath of Allegiance and an Affidavit of Election, and that his own birth certificate states his father’s citizenship as “Filipino.” Initially, a BI Associate Commissioner dismissed the complaint based on an NBI report. However, on March 8, 2001, the BI Board of Commissioners reversed the dismissal, holding that the father’s election of citizenship was made out of time, and directed the filing of deportation charges. A Charge Sheet was subsequently filed against Go. On April 17, 2002, the BI Board issued a Decision ordering Go’s apprehension and deportation. Go challenged this via a petition before the RTC of Pasig, which was eventually dismissed. The CA also dismissed Go’s subsequent petition. Meanwhile, Go appealed the BI’s April 17, 2002 Decision to the Office of the President (OP), which concurred with the BI’s findings. Go then elevated the case to the CA via a petition for review. On October 28, 2009, the CA dismissed this petition, holding that the BI’s April 17, 2002 Decision had already become final and executory. The CA denied Go’s motion for reconsideration on March 22, 2010.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the petition and in declaring that the April 17, 2002 Decision of the Bureau of Immigration had become final and executory.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the assailed CA Decision and Resolution. The Court held that the April 17, 2002 Decision of the BI Board had attained finality. It emphasized that a second motion for reconsideration is a prohibited pleading under the Rules of Court and the Court’s Internal Rules, and only for extraordinarily persuasive reasons and after express leave may such a motion be entertained. The Court found that Go’s pending “Motion for Leave to Admit Attached Second (2nd) Motion for Reconsideration” did not prevent the decision from becoming final, as no leave was granted to file the second motion for reconsideration. The Court also noted that the issue of Go’s citizenship had been conclusively settled in a related case, Go, Sr. v. Ramos, which sustained the CA’s earlier dismissal of Go’s petition challenging the BI’s jurisdiction. Therefore, the BI’s deportation order had become final and executory.