G.R. No. L-29166 August 29, 1969
IN RE: PETITION FOR INCLUSION IN THE PERMANENT LIST OF QUALIFIED VOTERS. (MRS.) ROSALIA TAN COHON, petitioner-appellant, vs. THE ELECTION REGISTRAR, CITY OF CEBU, respondent-appellee.

FACTS

Petitioner-appellant Rosalia Tan Cohon, originally a Chinese citizen, married Antonio S. Cohon in 1952. Her husband became a Filipino citizen by naturalization in 1962. Subsequently, upon her petition, her alien registry in the Bureau of Immigration was cancelled, she was recognized as a Filipino citizen, and she was allowed to register as a voter in the 1963 and 1965 elections. However, on November 4, 1967, the Election Registrar of Cebu City excluded her from the new registry list of voters, ruling that her Filipino citizenship had not been duly established. This ruling was based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Zita Ngo Burca v. Republic (G.R. No. L-24252, January 30, 1967), which declared null and void any administrative action certifying or declaring an alien wife of a Filipino citizen to be a Filipino citizen, holding that such a change in status could only be effected by a competent court’s judgment. The petitioner appealed the Election Registrar’s decision to the City Court of Cebu, which denied her petition. She then appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Cebu. The CFI dismissed her appeal, holding that under Republic Act No. 5178, the decisions of the City Court and the CFI in inclusion and exclusion proceedings are immediately executory and final as to questions of fact, and an appeal from the City Court to the CFI was not justified. The petitioner then filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the Supreme Court can entertain the appeal from the CFI’s decision dismissing the petitioner’s appeal from the City Court’s order, and ultimately, whether the petitioner is entitled to inclusion in the permanent list of voters based on her claim of derived Filipino citizenship through marriage.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of First Instance, thereby denying the petitioner’s inclusion in the permanent list of voters.
1. On the Entertainability of the Appeal: The Supreme Court held it could entertain the appeal from the CFI’s decision. While Republic Act No. 5178 made decisions of City Courts and CFIs in inclusion proceedings final as to questions of fact, an appeal on a pure question of law is implicitly allowed and is a necessary consequence of the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisdiction to review final judgments involving questions of law. The Court treated the appeal as one raising a question of law and conducted a total review, even though the appellant’s assigned errors technically pertained to the City Court’s ruling and not the CFI’s dismissal.
2. On the Application of the Zita Ngo Burca Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled that the doctrine in Zita Ngo Burca is applicable to the petitioner’s case. The Court rejected the argument that the ruling should not be given retroactive effect, stating that judicial decisions apply to cases pending at the time of their promulgation, as they are deemed to be the law from the beginning. The Burca doctrine explicitly nullified any administrative certification or declaration that an alien wife of a Filipino citizen is also a Filipino citizen, reserving such power exclusively to a competent court. Since the petitioner’s claim to citizenship was based solely on the administrative cancellation of her alien registry by the Bureau of Immigration, and not on a judicial declaration, it was invalid under the Burca ruling.
3. On the Nature of Inclusion Proceedings: The Court clarified that a petition for inclusion in the list of voters is not the proper proceeding to establish Filipino citizenship. Its purpose is merely to determine if a person possesses all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications of a voter at the time of the inquiry. It cannot be used as a substitute for a judicial proceeding to declare citizenship. The petitioner’s remedy was to file an appropriate action in court to seek a judicial declaration of her citizenship.