Q. Dear Atty. I read your column on dual citizenship and land ownership recently. Sir, I want to ask if a person born in foreign country who was recognized as Filipino citizen (dual) can acquire real estate property in the Philippines. This person is a family friend. He was born in Germany by a German father and Filipina mother.
From the records of the Bureau of Immigration (BI), an Order was issued my friend stating among others, that he is entitled to all the rights and privileges as a Filipino citizen. Is land ownership and
Acquisition among those rights mentioned in the Order?
We are confused. My friend acquired a real property through purchase. When we registered the documents at the Registry of Deeds, the lawyer in that office hold the issuance of the title because of his findings which runs this way: “Vendee is not a natural-born Filipino citizen. He is disqualified from acquiring real property”.
I argue with him that my friend is an already a recognized Filipino citizen… but he still insist that my friend is not qualified. Atty, can you please provide me the provisions/laws pertaining thereto?
Hope you can provide me some information on this sir…
Thank you very much and more power!! Respectfully yours. V
Ans: Dear Ms V. Yes, a person with a dual citizenship as a Filipino citizenship has all the rights of and privileges of a natural-born Filipino citizen, more so that he was born with a Filipino citizen mother, (regardless of the country where the said person was born) . Under the law, he is considered a natural-born Filipino citizen. As such he is entitled to the rights and privileges of being a Filipino citizen, including among others, the right to own and acquire real properties in the Philippines, pursuant to law.
What you should do it to present to the Register of Deeds the “Order of Recognition” issued by the Bureau of Immigration (BI) as proof of his/her Filipino Citizenship. In fact even in the absence of the Dual Citizenship Act or RA 9225, following the leading and landmark decision of the Supreme Court on the issue of Dual Citizenship, in the of : Ernesto S. Mercado vs. Eduardo Barrios Manzano and the Commission on Election. G.R.135083 , May 26,1999, and assuming the facts you presented fits the above-jurisprudence, then your friend is indeed a natural-born Citizen.
Further to the above and in support of the this submission on the issue of Philippine citizenship, the reference material hereunder could provide further insights. The 1987 Constitution, Article IV, Section 1 provides:
Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:
Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and
Those who are naturalized in accordance of law.
In our jurisdiction, natural-born citizens are those who are citizens from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with the Constitution shall be deemed natural-born citizens.
There are two (2) generally recognized modes of acquiring Philippine citizenship, namely:
1) by birth;this is applicable to your friend as in the case of Ernesto S. Mercado vs. Eduardo Barrios Manzano and COMELEC aforesaid), as at the time of your friend’s birth his/her mother was in fact a Filipino citizen; and
1) Jus soli (right of soil) which is the legal principle that a person’s nationality at birth is determined by the place of birth (i.e., the territory of a given state).
2) Jus sanguinis (right of blood) which is the legal principle that, at birth, an individual acquires the nationality of his/her natural parent/s. The Philippines adheres to this principle.
2) by naturalization which is the judicial act of adopting a foreigner and clothing him with the privileges of a native-born citizen. It implies the renunciation of a former nationality and the fact of entrance into a similar relation towards a new body politic. (2 Am.Jur.561, par.188)
Kindly take note that naturalized Filipino citizen who have lost their citizenship cannot avail of the Dual Citizenship Act or RA 9225, as only natural-born Filipino citizen can avail of this law.
Moreover, even assuming that your friend who was born a natural-born Filipino Citizen may have lost his Philippine Citizenship by becoming a citizen of another country, he could still own a land( not under RA 9225-Dual Citizenship Act) pursuant to Section 8, Article XI1 , Philippine Constitution , as Implemented by Batas Pambansa Blg. 185, a former Filipino citizen who lost his/her citizenship may be entitled to own land in the Philippines to certain extent ,to wit:
a) That the transferee of this land should have been a former natural-born Filipino citizen. Implying therefore that naturalized Filipino citizen, who have lost their Filipino citizen cannot qualify to this privilege.
b) That the aggregate ownership of the land that may be owned by the concerned transferee do not exceed the 1,000 square meters for real property in Urban Centers and to a maximum one(1) hectare for rural lands , respectively; and
c) That the ownership of this land, whether Urban or Rural , should be for residential purposes only.
However, on the basis of the facts you have mentioned, Batas Pambansa Blg. 185 mentioned above, may not be applicable to your friend following the provisions of the 1987 Constitution aforesaid and the case of, : Ernesto S. Mercado vs. Eduardo Barrios Manzano and the Commission on Election. G.R.135083 , May 26,1999, cited above.
Lastly , should the Register of Deeds would not still reconsider the refusal for the registration of the property in question, notwithstanding that on the basis of foregoing, the subject individual is a natural-born Filipino citizen, and therefore qualified to own real properties in the Philippines, pursuant to law, then it is recommended that you your friend confer with his lawyer in the Philippines for further professional guidance and appropriate legal action if only to protect and uphold his rights .
Looking forward you’ll find the above in order.
# # #
Disclaimer: Batas Pinoy Corner Not Legal opinion:
Material placed on this corner is for the purpose of providing information only. It is not intended as practice of law or legal services. Although the writer believes this information to be accurate at the time it is first provided or as relayed by the person asking or soliciting the information from the writer. Such circumstances or understanding of the facts as conveyed to the writer by the sender may not actually reflect the ultimate facts or circumstances earlier represented and as understood by the writer.
This writer makes no representation, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the information provided in this writing. The content provided by Batas Pinoy Corner is not meant to be a substitute for legal opinion. Always consult your lawyer or other legal professional for legal advice as regards to the information obtained in this column.
* * *
Readers who may have legal concerns affecting their persons, property, rights,title and related interest concerning Philippine laws and jurisdiction, are welcome to e-mail their query either in English or Pilipino for comments to: attyrw@gmail.com .
