AZNAR V. COMELEC G.R. No. 83820 May 25, 1990 Petitioner: Jose B.

Aznar (as Provincial Chairman of PDP Laban in Cebu) Respondents: Commission on Elections Emilio Mario Renner Osmea

Facts: Private respondent filed his certificate of candidacy on 19 November 1987 with the COMELEC for the position of Provincial Governor of Cebu for the 18 January 1988 local elections. On 22 January 1988, Cebu-PDP Laban, represented by petitioner, filed with the COMELEC a petition for the disqualification of private respondent as he allegedly is not a Filipino citizen but a citizen of the United States of America. Petitioner submitted a certificate issued by then Immigration and Deportation Commissioner Miriam Defensor-Santiago certifying that private respondent is an American citizen and a holder of Alien Certificate of Registration and Immigrant Certificate of Residence. Private respondent maintained that he is a Filipino citizen: legitimate child of Dr. Emilio Osmea, a Filipino and the son of the late President Sergio Osmea Sr.; a holder of a valid and subsisting Philippine passport; residing in the Philippines since birth and had not gone out of the country for more than six months; and a registered voter in the Philippines since 1965. COMELEC, on 11 June 1988, dismissed the petition for not having been timely filed and for lack of sufficient proof that private respondent is not a Filipino, hence this petition.

Issues: 1. Whether or not the petition for disqualification have not been timely filed 2. Whether or not private respondent is a citizen of the Philippines and thus is qualified to hold the public office to which he has been proclaimed elected

Held: 1. Two instances whereby a petition questioning the qualifications of a registered candidate to run for office can be raised under the Omnibus Election Law: (1) before election pursuant to section 78 thereof, petition may be filed not later than 25 days from the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy; and (2) after election pursuant to Section 253 thereof, petition for quo warranto within 10 days after the proclamation of the results of the election. As it was filed beyond the 25-day required period, said petition was filed out of time and cannot be accepted. Furthermore, it cannot be treated as a petition for quo warranto as it is premature for private respondent had been proclaimed the Provincial Governor of Cebu on 3 March 1988.

2. Private respondent remains a Filipino and the loss of his Philippine citizenship cannot be presumed. There are 3 modes by which a person will lost his citizenship and these are (1) naturalization in a foreign country; (2) express renunciation of citizenship; and (3) by subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution or laws of a foreign country. There is no direct proof that private respondent had lost his citizenship in any of the modes mentioned above or by any other mode of losing Philippine citizenship. That private respondent has been naturalized as a citizen of the United States of America is of no concern to the Court as the paramount concern is if he is a Filipino citizen or not. As he is the son of a Filipino father, the presumption is that he is a Filipino as well. Being an American citizen and a holder of Alien Certificate of Registration and Immigrant Certificate of Residence does not mean that he is not a citizen of the Philippines. There is no proof that private respondent expressly renounced his Philippine citizenship nor was it in any way implied nor was there proof that he took an oath of allegiance. In fact, private respondent vehemently denied having taken such oath of the United States and had maintained that he is a Filipino as shown clearly by his valid and subsisting Philippine passport and continuous participation in the electoral process in the country since 1963 up to the present, both as a voter and a candidate.