The Supreme Court refused to disqualify Poe, on, inter alia, the ground that it
would be tantamount to exclusion from the exercise of a political right based on
impermissible discrimination on account of civil status.^76
In another election-related case, the court held that a repatriated Filipino – who
was born Filipino, was naturalized elsewhere, and then reacquired his Filipino
citizenship – is deemed “natural-born” because repatriation merely restores the
“original nationality” and does not confer a “new citizenship.” The repatriated
native is therefore natural-born, not being required to undergo naturalization to
reacquire citizenship, and is required only to take an oath of allegiance and register
in the proper civil registry.^77
Foreign-based Filipinos – including immigrants and permanent residents abroad –
have also been allowed to vote. The court upheld the Overseas Absentee Voting Act,^78
citing the express constitutional clause allowing absentee voting and which necessar-
ily dispenses with the actual residency requirement for overseas Filipinos.
79
Despite the constitutional clause that “[d]ual allegiance of citizens is inimical to
the national interest and shall be dealt with by law,”
80
the Citizenship Retention
and Re-acquisition Act
81
has in fact allowed dual citizenship, as upheld by the
Supreme Court.
82
These statutes and judicial interpretations show the transformation of the notion
of allegiance to the motherland to recognize the reliance of the national economy
on remittances by migrant workers. The old tests of blood (based on parentage),
place (based on physical presence in the country), and formal oaths (based on
naturalization) have given way to the test of commitment to the welfare of “the old
country.” The old tests were seen as largely symbolic, while the new tests would be
both principle-based and functional.
v. the impeachment of a chief justice and the populist
backlash against formalism83
In May 2010 , a new president was elected on an anticorruption and anti-impunity
campaign,^84 and, armed with a widely popular mandate in contrast to his
(^76) Tecsonv.Commission on Elections, G.R. No 161434 (March 3 , 2004 ).
(^77) BengsonIIIv.House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, G.R. No 142840 (May 7 , 2001 ).
(^78) Rep. Act No 9189 ( 2003 ).
(^79) Macalintalv.Commission on Elections, G.R. No 157013 (July 10 , 2003 ).
(^80) Const. Art.iv§ 5. (^81) Rep. Act 9225 (August 29 , 2003 ).
(^82) Advocates and Adherents of Social Justice for School Teachers and Allied Workersv.
Secretary of Justice, G.R. 160869 (May 11 , 2007 ).
(^83) This section is based on the author’s Malcolm Professorial Chair Lecture (January 31 ,
2013 ), “Counter-majoritarianism and the Populist Backlash in Philippine Constitutional
Law.”
(^84) Inaugural Address of President Benigno S. Aquinoiii(June 30 , 2010 ).