SC: Dual citizens can’t run for elective posts

Dual citizens cannot run for any elective local position. 

This was the ruling of the Supreme Court as it dismissed a petition filed by Arlene Llena Empaynado Chua, a candidate for councilor of Manila's Fourth District who won in the 2013 local elections but later disqualified.

In her petition, Chua contested the Commission on Elections (Comelec) resolutions dated October 17, 2013 and January 30, 2015 that annulled her proclamation as councilor and directed the Board of Canvassers to reconvene and instead proclaim her rival, respondent Krystle Marie Bacani, as councilor for having garnered the next highest number of votes.

But in a 19-page decision penned by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the high court sitting en banc said Chua was "correctly disqualified" for being a dual citizenship at the time of her filing of certificate for candidacy. 

"They [dual citizens] cannot successfully run and assume office because their ineligibility is inherent in them, existing prior to the filing of their certificates of candidacy," ruled the SC.

"The certificates of candidacy of dual citizens are void ab initio, and votes cast for them will be disregarded. Consequently, whoever garners the next highest number of votes among the eligible candidates is the person legally entitled to the position,” it added.

The SC said Chua cannot claim that she has renounced her American citizenship by taking the Oath of Allegiance, because the oath and the sworn and personal renunciation of foreign citizenship are separate requirements, the latter being an additional requirement for qualification to run for public office. 

The SC added that under Section 40 of the Local Government Code, Chua was disqualified to run for councilor being a dual citizen at the time of her filing of her COC.

Manila's Fourth District is entitled to six seats in the Sangguniang Panlungsod. Chua garnered the sixth highest number of votes and was proclaimed winner on May 15, 2013. 

On the same date, a certain Imelda Fragata filed a petition to declare Chua a nuisance candidate, arguing Chua was unqualified to run on two grounds: that she was not a Filipino citizen, and that she was a permanent US resident. 

Chua gave a defense of alibi and argued that Fragata’s petition was belatedly filed, whether it was treated as one for declaration of a nuisance candidate or for denial of due course or cancellation of certificate of candidacy. 

She further argued she had already been proclaimed and that the proper remedy was to file a petition for quo warranto.

Subsequently, respondent Bacani filed a motion to intervene with manifestation and motion to annul Chua's proclamation. Bacani ranked seventh among all candidates, next to Chua. 

She contended that while Chua took an Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines on September 21, 2011, Chua allegedly still continued using her American passport and did not execute an oath of renunciation of her American citizenship.

The Comelec eventually ruled the petition for disqualification was filed within the prescribed period since it was filed on the same date of Chua’s proclamation. 

The poll body found Chua was a dual citizen when she filed her COC. It held that although Chua reacquired her Filipino citizenship in 2011 by taking her Oath of Allegiance to the Republic, she, however, failed to take a sworn and personal renunciation of her American citizenship required under Section 5(2) of the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003.  — RSJ, GMA News