AASJS (ADVOCATES AND ADHERENTS OF SOCIAL JUSTICE FOR SCHOOL

TEACHERS AND ALLIED WORKERS) MEMBER - HECTOR GUMANGAN

CALILUNG, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SIMEON DATUMANONG, in his oi!i"#
!"$"!i%& "s %h' S'!('%"(& o J)s%i!', Respondent.
G*R* No* +,-.,/ M"& ++, 0--1
FACTS2
Petitioner prays that a writ of prohibition be issued to stop respondent from implementing
Republic Act No. 9225, entitled An Act !a"ing the #iti$enship of Philippine #iti$ens %ho
Ac&uire 'oreign #iti$enship Permanent, Amending for the Purpose #ommonwealth Act No. (),
As Amended, and for *ther Purposes. Petitioner avers that Rep. Act No. 9225 is
unconstitutional as it violates +ection 5, Article ,- of the .9/0 #onstitution that states, 1ual
allegiance of citi$ens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
ISSUE2 2y recogni$ing 3 allowing dual allegiance, is RA 9225 unconstitutional4
HELD5
No. +ection 5, Article ,- of the #onstitution is a declaration of a policy and it is not a self6
e7ecuting provision. 8he legislature still has to enact the law on dual allegiance. ,n +ections 2
and ) of Rep. Act No. 9225, the framers were not concerned with dual citi$enship per se, but
with the status of naturali$ed citi$ens who maintain their allegiance to their countries of origin
even after their naturali$ation. #ongress was given a mandate to draft a law that would set
specific parameters of what really constitutes dual allegiance. 9ntil this is done, it would be
premature for the :udicial department, including this #ourt, to rule on issues pertaining to dual
allegiance.
8he intent of the legislature in drafting RA 9225 is to do away with the provision in the #A ()
which ta"es away Philippine citi$enship from natural6born 'ilipinos who become naturali$ed
citi$ens of other countries. %hat RA 9225 allows is dual citi$enship to natural6born 'ilipino
citi$ens who have lost Philippine citi$enship by reason of their naturali$ation as citi$ens of a
foreign country. *n its face, it does not recogni$e dual allegiance. 2y swearing to the supreme
authority of the Republic, the person implicitly renounces his foreign citi$enship. Plainly, from
+ec. ), RA 9225 stayed clear of the problem of dual allegiance and shifted the burden of
confronting the issue of whether or not there is dual allegiance to the concerned foreign country.
%hat happens to the other citi$enship was not made a concern of RA 9225.