IN a stout rebuttal of assertions made in a Philippine Daily Inquirer column by Filipino-American lawyer, Rodel Rodis, concerning the US citizenship of Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano and his subsequent renunciation of it, the following news item came out:
“Senator Alan Peter Cayetano on Thursday blasted an opinion piece questioning his citizenship, calling it ‘fake news’ and a ‘well disguised malicious article.’
“Cayetano took to Facebook his response to the column published by The Philippine Daily Inquirer, saying he acquired both Philippine and American citizenship at birth since he was born to a Filipino father, Renato Cayetano and an American mother, Sandra Schramm.
“’By law, by both the Philippine Constitution and US Constitution, I was both an American and am a Filipino nung time na pinanganak. At sabi nga po sa ibang court cases, hindi kasalanan ng bata yun,’he said in a Facebook video.
“In a separate post, Cayetano said he gave up his American citizenship even before he took the bar exams and ran for Congress.”
Indeed, the good senator is right in saying that he had both Filipino and American citizenship at birth. However, Cayetano’s assertion that “by both the Philippine Constitution and US Constitution, (he) was both an American and..a Filipino” is not entirely accurate.
What is accurate is that, under the Philippine Constitution, Cayetano was a natural-born Filipino citizen because of his Filipino father. And under the US Constitution he was entitled to US citizenship because of his American mother. But, at the time of his birth on October 28, 1970, dual citizenship was not yet recognized in the Philippines, as applied to Filipino citizens.
Cayetano had to subsequently elect one citizenship over the other. Apparently Cayetano chose US citizenship. About this, Rodis wrote:
“In his Comelec protest action against Cayetano, former Pateros Mayor Jose Capco, Jr, produced documentation from official government records showing that on January 23, 1985, Alan Peter Cayetano personally applied for and obtained an Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR) asserting that he was an American citizen. As Atty. Capco pointed out, the law required Cayetano to personally apply for this ACR and he dutifully complied.”
There is no denying that Cayetano elected to become a US citizen. There is also no denying that he renounced his US citizenship. The issue that Rodis has raised is whether or not Cayetano was still a US citizen when he ran for public office.
With due respect to Cayetano’s noble desire to be of service to the country of his birth, there’s another crucial issue: Was Cayetano a Filipino citizen when he ran for public office?
In a paper entitled “Philippine citizenship, dual citizenship, and dual allegiance: An evaluation of RA 9225, the Dual Citizenship Law,” lawyer James Benedict Panopio wrote: “The Dual Citizenship Law also amended the old citizenship law, Commonwealth Act No. 63, which provides that acquisition of foreign citizenship is a ground for the loss of Philippine citizenship.”
Did Cayetano lose his Philippine citizenship when he elected US citizenship? He apparently did. CA 63 enumerated the following, among the reasons for such a loss:
1. By naturalization in a foreign country
2. By express renunciation of citizenship
3. By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution of a foreign country upon attaining twenty-one years of age or more.
Note that Cayetano could have retained his Philippine citizenship, even after electing US citizenship, with the passage of RA 9225, The Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003 – also known as the Dual Citizenship Law. This law, approved on August 29, 2003, states:
“Section 2. Declaration of Policy - It is hereby declared the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of this Act.
Now, having lost his Philippine citizenship, Cayetano would have had to undergo a formal process if he wanted to reacquire Philippine citizenship. This, interestingly, is where his case and that of former Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay, Jr. appear to be the same.
A February 27, 2017 Philippine Daily Inquirer story by Juliet Labog-Javellana entitled, “Yasay: American, Filipino or stateless?” stated:
“A lawmaker privy to the pertinent documents said that after Yasay lost his Filipino citizenship in 1986, he has apparently not reacquired it as mandated by Philippine laws…The dual citizenship law requires filing a petition for retention/reacquisition of Philippine citizenship in the Bureau of Immigration and taking an oath of allegiance to the Philippines.”
In the case of Labo, Jr. vs Comelec, the Supreme Court held: “Philippine citizenship is not a cheap commodity that can be easily recovered after its renunciation. It may be restored only after the returning renegade makes a formal act of re-dedication to the country he has abjured and he solemnly affirms once again his total and exclusive loyalty to the Republic of the Philippines.”
In other words, to reacquire his Philippine citizenship, after renouncing his US citizenship, Cayetano would have had to comply with the provisions of RA 9225:
“Section 3. Retention of Philippine Citizenship - Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, natural-born citizens by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are hereby deemed to have re-acquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the following oath of allegiance to the Republic:
“I _____________________, solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines and obey the laws and legal orders promulgated by the duly constituted authorities of the Philippines; and I hereby declare that I recognize and accept the supreme authority of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and allegiance thereto; and that I imposed this obligation upon myself voluntarily without mental reservation or purpose of evasion.”
If Cayetano did not comply with the above requirements, then he and former Secretary of Foreign Affairs Perfect Yasay may have the same problem. In sum, I think the following questions are relevant:
1. Did Cayetano lose his Philippine citizenship upon electing to become a US citizen? The provisions of CA 93 indicate that he did.
2. Did Cayetano formally reacquire his Philippine citizenship as required by law? That is a question that Cayetano should answer – or something that can be determined by simply going through the records of the Bureau of Immigration.
We do not want to speculate on what the BI records will reveal or what Cayetano’s response will be (hopefully not another complaint about “fake news” and “a well disguised malicious article). But the implications could raise questions about the legitimacy of his election to the Senate, not to mention his candidacy for vice-president and his election to the House of Representatives, years back.
It is said that when you open a Pandora’s Box, you never know what unwelcome things will emerge from it. For instance, if Alan Peter Cayetano, born to an American mother, subsequently elected to become a US citizen and then renounced that citizenship, what about former Senator and now Taguig Congresswoman Pia Cayetano and other Cayetano siblings who may have occupied elected office? ([email protected]).
