Opinions of the Secretary of Justice

Title

Language

English

Source

The Lawyers Journal Volume XIX (Issue No.6) June 30, 1954

Year

1954

Subject

Tuason, Pedro

Department of Justice -- Philippines

Rights

In Copyright - Educational Use Permitted

Abstract

[This article contains the opinions of Secretary Pedro Tuason, Secretary of Justice, on various cases in 1954.]

Fulltext

OPINIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE / OPINION NO. 61 OPINION NO. 62 (Opinion· as to whcthn· Santiago C. Phua ay be cons'iderecl a F ilipino citizen.) 1st lndorsemcnt March 11, 1954 Respectfully returned te the Chairman, Board of Accountancy, Bureau of Civil Service, Manila. Opinion is requested whether Santiago C. Phua may be considered a Filipino citizen, of having elected Philippin~ citizenship on J une 21, 1951, pursuant to Artirle IV, Section 1<4', of the Constitution of the Philippines a.11d Commonwealth Act No, 625. For Santiago C. Phua to be entitled to elect Philipt:iine citizenship, he must establish by c0mpetent and ~atisfactory proof that his mother was a Filipino citizen before he1· marriage to an alien. Santiago was born on August 12, 1926, in the City of Cebu, the legitimate son of Cosme Laitimosa Phua., a Chinese, and S:i.lud Carbonell, a Filipino woman. In view of the destruction of the church records in Cebu City <See annex "A"J, Suntiago cannot present the baptismal certificate of his mother. 1'o prove that his mother was a citizen of the Philippines prior to her marriage to an alien, he ha.s adduced the S\'fOrn statements of Oscar A. Kintanar, Special Council for the province of Cebu and Don Filemon Sotto, practicing attorney in Cebu City (see Annexes "C" and "D", respectivdy) , wherein each declared that Santiago's mother, Salud Carbonell, is the daughter of spouses Santiaga Carbonell and P11.uhi. Ni.:ila, both Filipinos. This assertion is substantiated by Messrs. Juan Svlidad and Teodoro Fiel, both resi<lcnts of Sibonga, Cebu, who declared in their joint e ffidavit <Anne:< ''E"> that being neighbors of the Carbonell family they know personally that Salud Carbonell was a Filipino citizen before her marriage to her alien husband, she being the legitimate daughter of Filipino parents, Santiago Carbonell and Paula Niala, both residents of the same town, Sibonga, Cebu, These sworn statements, especially the first two, being those of well-known, distinguished and l'E'Spectable citizens, deserve weight and credence and may be accepted as 82..tisfactory proof that Salud Carbonell, applicant's mother, wns a Philippine citizen before hf'r marriage to her Chinese husband That the herein petitioner is the Santiago C. Phua who is thf' legitimate son of Salud Carbonell and who took the CPA examinations in June, 1953, is confirmed by Messrs. Buenaventura Veloso and Filemon Sotto, who both declared that they stood as sponsors dm·ing Santiago's baptism and confirmation respectively Csee Annexes "F" and "D"l . It having been established that he is the legitimate son of a Filipino woman, Santiago has the right, upon reaching the age of majority or within a reasonable time thereafter, which period has been fixed to three years, to elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with the aforecited constitutional provision and Commonwealth Act No. 625. Petitioner was already twenty-four years, ten r.ionths and nine days old when he made his election on J une 21, 1951, ten months and nine days beyond the proper period. He alleg~s that the delay in making his election waS due to the fact that he honestly and firmly believed that he is a Filipino because he was born in the Philippines of Filipino mother; he did not register in any foreign ccnsulate or embassy; and he had never gone to China since his birth. To bolster his claim, he cited the fact tha.t he had taken the ROTC basic course; and that he participated in the general elections in 1953, a duty and privilega extended only to Filipinos. In the opinion of this Department, the foregoing circumstances may be considered sufficient justificat.ion for the petitioner's delay in making his election of Filipino citzenship. Hi~ election may therefore be considered as having been made within the proper period end should be accorded legal effect. Accordingly, Santiago C. Phua hus become invested with Philippine citizenship and the result of his examination for CPA in June 1953, maybe released. <Sgd . J PEDRO TUASON Secretary of Justice (Opinions of the Depa'1'trn.ent of Justice not binding upon. tM eourts of Justice. It is the policy of said department not to render opin.imis on questions sitb-;udice.) 1st Indorsement Marcl1 12, 19?4 Respectfully returned to the Honorable, the Executive Secrdary, Manila. Inviting attention to the opinion of this Department dated June 1, 1946, a copy of which is herewith attached for i·eady reference. Herein it was held that permanent appointments mad~ by the President under Section 10 of the Commonwealth Act No. 357, the fc.rmer Ele<:tion Code, need the confi1mation of the Commission on Appointments. Section 21 of the Reovised Election Code, Republic Act No. 180, is substantially similar to Section 16 () f Commonwealth Act No. 357. This office is informed that it is an actual case pending before the Court of First Instance of Batangas C Lipa City Branch> invclving the mayorship of Rosario, Batangas, wherein one of the the principal issues raised is the necessity of confirmation by the Commission on Appointnwnts of the appcintment of the municipal mayor extended by the President under Section 21 of t...l1.t Hevised Election Code. In view of the established policy not to Jt'nder opinion on questions snb ;udic<; and considering that the opinion of this Department is not binding upon the courts of justice; the undersigned deems it prudent to refrain from ~xi.oressing cases of appointments made by the President under Section 21Cbl of the Revised F.le.~tion Code, it 1 s suggested that, unless otherwise ruled by competo.:Ht courts, action thereon may be taken in accordan<'e with the ruling of this Department mentioned above, Sgd. PEDRO TUASON Secretary cf Justice ---000-OPINION NO. 65 -----(Opinion on the question 1111 to u•fr.ttlier a dec,,.ec of divorce ob. t11tned in " S u.ioon court b11 two F ilipinu nationals may be recognized in the Philippit1es). 2nd Indor.sement March 18, 1954 Respectfully returned to the Honorable, the U11dersecretary of Foreign Af!airs, Manila. The undersigned concurs ln the views embodied in tht- proposed dispatch of the Department to the Philippine Minister to Bangkok, Thailand regarding the validity of a. decree of divorce granted by a Saigon Court to two Filipino nationals residing in Saigon. It is true that no law expressly pr?vicles that a decree of divorce obtained in a foreign court would be recognized in th~ Philippines. By the suppression of the pro~ision relative to absolute divorce and the retentir>n of only those pertaining to legal separation in the r>riginal draft of the present Civil Code, Republic Act No. 386, nnd the abrogation of Act No. 2710, otherwise known as the Divorce Law, affirms the clear intention of the legislature to abolish the existence of absolute divorce in this country as a matter of public policy. The family is a basic institution which public policy cherises and protects (Art, 216, Ci'Yil Code).' All presumptions favor the solidarity of the family .::rnd every intendment of law or fact leans toward the validity of maniage and the indissolubi!ity of the marriage bonds (Art. 217, Ibid) , Laws r elating to·fanuly rights and duties, or to the status, condition and the legal capa.city of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abro:i.d <Art. 15, Ibid). Prohibitive laws governing persons, their ads or 9roperty, and those which have for their objfct public order, Jiublic policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffel!tlve by 312 THE LA WYERS JOURNAL June 30, 1954

pages

312

Media