Natural-Born vs Naturalized Citizens

🔍

↵

SUBJECT: Natural-Brown vs Naturalized Citizens

I. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
This memorandum examines the constitutional and jurisprudential distinctions between natural-born and naturalized citizens of the Philippines. It addresses the legal definitions, the implications of these statuses on the exercise of political rights, and the practical remedies available to individuals seeking to establish or clarify their citizenship status.
II. BRIEF ANSWER
The 1987 Constitution creates a fundamental distinction between natural-born and naturalized citizens, primarily affecting eligibility for certain high public offices. Natural-born citizenship is acquired at birth without any act required, while naturalized citizenship is acquired through a legal process after birth. The most significant legal consequence is that only natural-born citizens may become President, Vice-President, Members of Congress, Justices of the Constitutional Commissions, and certain other officials. While both enjoy the full panoply of civil rights, this distinction imposes a constitutional qualification for specific sovereign and policy-making roles.
III. APPLICABLE LAWS AND PROVISIONS

The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines:

Article IV, Sections 1-4: Defines citizens of the Philippines, including natural-born citizens.
Article VII, Section 2: Requires the President and Vice-President to be natural-born citizens.
Article VI, Section 6: Requires Senators to be natural-born citizens.
Article VI, Section 9: Requires Members of the House of Representatives to be natural-born citizens.
Article VIII, Section 7 (1): Requires a majority of the Supreme Court to be composed of natural-born citizens.
Article IX (B), Section 1 (1): Requires the Chairman and Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission to be natural-born citizens.
Article IX (C), Section 1 (1): Requires the Chairman and Commissioners of the Commission on Elections to be natural-born citizens.
Article IX (D), Section 1 (1): Requires the Chairman and Commissioners of the Commission on Audit to be natural-born citizens.

Commonwealth Act No. 63 , as amended: Governs the manner in which citizenship may be lost or reacquired.

Republic Act No. 9139 , The Administrative Naturalization Law of 2000: Provides for administrative naturalization.

Presidential Decree No. 725: Provides for the naturalization of alien women married to Filipino citizens.

Jurisprudence: Supreme Court decisions interpreting citizenship provisions.

IV. DEFINITION OF NATURAL-BORN CITIZEN
Under Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution , natural-born citizens are:

Those who are citizens from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship; and

Those who elect Philippine citizenship pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution (e.g., those born of Filipino mothers before January 17, 1973, who elected citizenship upon reaching the age of majority).

The key jurisprudential principle is that natural-born citizenship is acquired ipso jure (by operation of law) at the moment of birth, provided the constitutional requirements of blood relationship (jus sanguinis) are met at that time. There is no subsequent act needed to confer the status; it is automatic.
V. ACQUISITION OF NATURALIZED CITIZENSHIP
Naturalized citizens are those who acquire Philippine citizenship through a formal legal process after birth. This is not automatic and requires a positive act. Modes include:

Judicial Naturalization: Under the Revised Naturalization Law ( C.A. No. 473 ), culminating in a court grant of citizenship.

Administrative Naturalization: Under R.A. No. 9139 , for certain qualified aliens.

Legislative Naturalization: By a direct act of Congress (rare).

Naturalization by Marriage: Under P.D. No. 725, where an alien woman married to a Filipino may be naturalized by taking an oath of allegiance before any civil registry.

Naturalization results in the same civil rights as a natural-born citizen, except for the constitutional disqualifications from specific public offices.
VI. KEY JURISPRUDENTIAL DISTINCTIONS
The Supreme Court has consistently upheld the constitutional barrier. In Fransisco v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261 , November 10, 2003, the Court emphasized that the qualifications for President are fixed by the Constitution and cannot be altered by statute. The case of Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434 , March 3, 2004, is pivotal. The Court ruled that a “natural-born citizen” is one who is a citizen from birth without any act to acquire citizenship. It further held that a foundling is presumed natural-born, as the alternative would be to render the child stateless, in keeping with international conventions. This highlights that the inquiry focuses on the legal circumstances at birth.
VII. LOSS AND REACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP
Both natural-born and naturalized citizens may lose citizenship by: (1) naturalization in a foreign country; (2) express renunciation; (3) subscribing to an oath of allegiance to a foreign state; or (4) serving in a foreign military ( C.A. No. 63 ). However, upon reacquisition:
A natural-born citizen who lost citizenship may reacquire it through repatriation (under R.A. No. 9225 , the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act) and restore their natural-born status for the purpose of running for public office, provided they meet the residency requirements.
A naturalized citizen who loses citizenship and subsequently reacquires it does not regain natural-born status; they remain a naturalized citizen.
VIII. BURDEN OF PROOF AND CHALLENGES TO STATUS
In any challenge to a candidate’s eligibility, the burden of proof lies with the party challenging the status. A person is presumed to be a natural-born citizen if their citizenship is not questioned for a long period. However, for naturalized citizens, the certificate of naturalization is the primary proof. A naturalization decree, once final, is generally binding but may be impugned for extrinsic fraud or if it was obtained illegally or improperly.
IX. PRACTICAL REMEDIES

For Citizenship Clarification or Establishment:

Petition for Judicial Confirmation of Citizenship: File a petition in the appropriate Regional Trial Court to declare one’s status as a Filipino citizen, particularly for those claiming natural-born status based on Filipino parentage but lacking documentation.
Administrative or Judicial Naturalization: For those not qualifying as natural-born, pursue the appropriate naturalization pathway under R.A. No. 9139 or C.A. No. 473 .

For Reacquisition of Lost Citizenship:

Repatriation under R.A. No. 9225 : Former natural-born citizens may reacquire citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance before the Philippine Consulate. This process restores natural-born status for political purposes.
Direct Act of Congress: A private bill for repatriation may be filed, though this is less common since R.A. No. 9225 .

For Election Candidates:

File a Certificate of Candidacy (COC): A candidate must state under oath that they are eligible for the office, including citizenship qualification. A false statement may be grounds for a disqualification case.
Quo Warranto Proceedings: After election, an elected official’s citizenship may be challenged via a quo warranto petition filed with the Electoral Tribunal (for Congress) or the Supreme Court (for President/Vice-President).

Pre-Election Remedies:

Petition for Disqualification: Filed with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) against a candidate allegedly lacking the natural-born requirement.
Petition to Deny Due Course or Cancel Certificate of Candidacy: Filed with COMELEC on grounds of material misrepresentation regarding citizenship.

Documentary Preparation: Individuals aspiring to public office should proactively secure and preserve documents proving natural-born status (e.g., birth certificates of self and Filipino parents, marriage certificates of parents, old Philippine passports). In cases of missing records, secondary evidence and family history may be presented in a judicial confirmation proceeding.