Should dual citizens be allowed to run for public office?

THE problem confronting Senator Grace Poe had its antecedents in certain provisions of the Dual Citizenship Law, RA 9225, that Filipino-Americans objected to, even as we lobbied hard for its passage.
I was part of a group that met with both President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and then Senate President Franklin Drilon to appeal for the deletion of the provisions in the law that required renunciation of foreign citizenship in order to run for public office or to accept a key government post.
Section 5(2) of the RA 9225 states: Those seeking elective public office in the Philippines shall meet the qualifications for holding public office as required by the Constitution and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy, make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath;
Section 5(3) states: Those appointed to any public office shall subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to the assumption of office; Provided, that they renounce their oath of allegiance to the country where they took that oath.
We felt that these restrictive provisions would result in a waste of valuable human resources: potential public servants imbued with the values, work ethic, civic spirit and training developed from living in more advanced countries like the US.
Quite frankly, much as we were eager to serve the land of our birth, few of us were prepared to renounce our US or foreign citizenship. We had our reasons, most of them valid.
The pseudo-nationalists and Facebook patriots who read this piece will likely criticize us for (a) “turning our backs on the Motherland” and (b) “wanting to have our cake and eat it too.” But, hypocrisy aside, I bet that many of them would jump at the opportunity to get a green card and US citizenship – and not necessarily due to lack of love for the Philippines.
In this regard, those who have severely criticized Poe for renouncing her US citizenship “in order to get appointed chairman of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB)” should get a reality check. The decision she made was not an easy one and only a few would have done what she did.
I frankly think that she should be given credit for making that difficult decision. I doubt that she had any inkling at the time that she would run for senator and, subsequently, for president.
At any rate, President Arroyo, prevailed upon our lobby group to accept the proposed bill in spite of the restrictive provisions based on the “half a loaf” principal (Half a loaf is better than no loaf at all). She pointed out that it was our best chance to have such a law passed. “You can always have it amended later,” she said. “But, at least, you will have an existing law to work on.” Drilon said as much.
All of us in the original lobby group still believe that RA 9225 should be amended to allow dual citizens to run for public office or to occupy key government posts without having to renounce our foreign citizenship, as long as we have retained or reacquired our Philippine citizenship. There are many international precedents to support this position.  Israel, for one, does not require renunciation of US citizenship to serve in the Israeli government and the military.
The reverse is even more common, namely, Israeli-American citizens occupying sensitive posts in the US government without having to renounce their Israeli citizenship, among them, former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Chertoff who headed the Department of Homeland Security and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.
Of course, the most prominent dual citizen of them all is Arnold Schwarzenegger, who retained his Austrian citizenship when he became governor of California.
The problem with retaining the restrictive provisions in RA 9225 may be likened to the oft-rejected proposal to pass a Divorce Law. Many of those who cannot legally separate from their Number One resort to “the next best thing” which is to maintain a Number One-A and even a Number One-B. Even the Church has provided “a way around divorce” by allowing annulment – an option that only the wealthy and influential can avail of.
In the case of the restrictions imposed by RA 9225, there have been many instances when those determined to run for elective office in the Philippines have “complied” with the law by renouncing their foreign citizenship before a Philippine official. However, that is not valid under US law. Renunciation of US citizenship has to be made before an American consular officer outside of the United States.
This must have been why Poe, after having renounced her US citizenship before a Philippine official, decided to do it again before a US consular officer.
Some would question why “foreigners” should be allowed to run for public office or be appointed to key government posts in our country. That begs another question: Why not?
Aren’t we one of the main reasons for the “booming” Philippine economy? Shouldn’t we have a say in the governance of a country that we are supporting with our hard work and long distance devotion?
Another question that invariably follows that first one is, “Aren’t there enough competent and qualified Pinoys available locally for those positions?”
If I were to answer that question in a truthful and forthright manner, some folks would be insulted. Suffice it to say that those “competent and qualified” individuals are not managing the Department of Transportation & Communication, as well as a number of government agencies.
The fact is that there are thousands of overseas Filipinos who, after having assumed foreign citizenship, have retained or reacquired their Philippine citizenship because of a sincere desire to help their Motherland.
To cite a current example, the protests against China’s bullying incursions into the South China Sea gained momentum because of the aggressive and relentless efforts of US Pinoys for Good Governance, led by FilAms Loida Nicolas-Lewis, Rodel Rodis, Ted Laguatan and Charito Benipayo.
These are the same committed individuals, along with the late Alex Esclamado, who lobbied long and hard for the passage of the Overseas Absentee Voting Act and RA 9226. They did it out of love for the land of their birth.
I don’t think it is fair for anyone to question their sincerity. Neither should they challenge Poe’s motive for renouncing her US citizenship. What social or economic advantage could she have expected from assuming a low-paying mid-level government job?
The truth is that, when Noynoy Aquino won the presidency, several leading FilAms expressed interest in serving in his government. I did, too.
It was not for lack of love for America, a country to which we owe much of what we have become and where we have raised our children and grandchildren. It was because of a fervent desire to be of service to our Motherland.
If I have been critical of Sen. Grace Poe, it has only been because of her dogged determination to push ahead with her presidential aspirations, in spite of being clearly handicapped and restricted under our Constitution.
She could have chosen the elegant option which was to, at least, wait for one handicap – residency – to be mitigated by time. And, in the spirit of the “half-a-loaf” principle, as a senator, she could also have chosen to push for a more humane definition of “natural born citizen” to include foundlings.
Hillary Clinton waited out two terms of President Barack Obama to once more aspire for the presidency of the United States. Grace Poe has time on her side. Maybe she should stop listening to her Rasputin, whoever that scheming adviser might be. ([email protected])