There is no longer any point defending the Constitution

Judicial ActivismSo Sen. Grace Poe Llamanzares (GPL) has been cleared to run for the presidency of the Philippines by the Philippine Supreme Court. We may not agree with the decision but I think it is time to move on. The majority of the gods of Padre Faura have spoken. Who cares if the clear text of the law and the weight of evidence against GPL shows that she cannot be considered as a natural born Filipino? GPL has won. Logic, as well as the sanctity of the Constitution, has lost.

Fr. Rannie Aquino, Dean of the San Beda Law School, clearly explained the simple logic behind why GPL ought not to be considered a natural born Filipino, therefore not qualified to run for the Presidency. He states:

To be President of the Philippines, one must be a natural-born Filipino.

Therefore: Owing to the necessity of the requirement, the very possibility that a candidate is not a natural-born Filipino should be excluded.

Under the 1935 Constitution, one was natural-born only if one was born of a Filipino father. (For purposes relevant to the present discussion).

Ms. Poe is POSSIBLY natural-born, but AS POSSIBLY not natural-born, precisely because she is a foundling.

A foundling is one whose parentage is unknown and whose birth circumstances are unknown, who is found, as an infant.

Since one cannot argue from POSSIBILITY (she is possibly a natural-born Filipino) to NECESSITY (she is necessarily a natural-born Filipino), then she does not comply with the requirement of the Constitution.

How the “brilliant” nine gods of Padre Faura missed this simple logic is anybody’s guess. Perhaps this is not a matter of logic but simply a matter of emotions trumping logic. This seems to be very evident in how Chief Justice Sereno has argued her seeming inclination during the argument period. She stated:

“If we rule against the rights of foundlings, will there be a disincentive?

“There are more parents who want to adopt. More times they do not understand the problems. What this court will say will speak to them how we view the constitutional duty, that the language is silent so that the rights of foundlings are completely silent…”

Never mind the big red herring in her argument when she magically shifted the original issue of the constitutionality of GPL’s candidacy for the presidency to the rights of foundlings. (Would someone now argue for the rights of those who cannot read or write and those who are 39 years old and below, as the Constitution seems to be discriminatory of their rights to run as the Chief Executive of the country as well?) Let us focus on how the emotional argument has all of a sudden trumped the clear text and intent of the law.

The problem with interpreting the law based on emotion, popular sentiment, or any shades of Argumentum ad misericordiam, is that it opens the gate for treating the Constitution as a living document. One of the biggest criticism of treating the Constitution as a living document is being prone to seek legislation from the bench. In this case of the Constitutionality of GPL’s candidacy, the Court effectively changed the law on citizenship. Such function rests with the legislature, not the judiciary. Surely the law can be changed through amendments but such changes have to be done through the proper process, through the legislature. This certainly looks like a case of judicial overreach where an arbitrary intervention is made by the judiciary into the legislature’s domain. This is certainly a case of judicial activism.

One may argue that the Supreme Court did not overreach but merely performed its judicial review duty. But the Court’s authority for judicial review is to examine an executive act (or legislative act) and to invalidate that act if it is contrary to constitutional principles. When assessing an act according to constitutional principles it is important to look back at the original intent of the law. I think the late SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia offered the best argument (as described by Judge Andrew Napolitano):

Justice Scalia argued that the Constitution means what it says; it says it is the supreme law of the land; and all American judges have taken a solemn oath to be subject to what it says. It is superior to the jurists who interpret it. It is what it says, not as they might wish it say. Thus, all judges are bound by the text. Hence the word “textualism.”

So “no law” means no law. “Due process” guarantees fair process, not substance. A constitutional guarantee is a real guarantee. The exercise of rights articulated in the Constitution cannot be subject to popularity contests.

If the text of the Constitution is ambiguous, it then becomes the duty of the jurist to ascertain the original public meaning of the words that form the ambiguity. Hence the word “originalism.” Ascertaining original public meaning often requires the skills of a historian; yet, thanks to James Madison, the historical record is ample.

The rejection of this line of thinking permits jurists to interpret the Constitution in novel and creative or even destructive ways, according to their own ideologies. It permits them to adapt a meaning in the text that they wish had been there to fortify contemporary societal attitudes. Justice Scalia argued that that is not the job of jurists.

Federal judges have life tenure because they represent the anti-democratic part of the federal government. Their job is to preserve constitutional norms and structures and guarantees from interference by the popular branches of the federal government or the States, even when those branches or the States command popular support.

The job of the jurist, he argued, is not to adapt the text of the Constitution to public trends or cultural changes. That is the job of the Congress and the States through legislation.

In the Philippine setting, the same principle has appeared time and again. In 2012, there was an issue regarding what seemed like a Constitutional ambiguity regarding congressional membership on the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC). The issue back then was whether Congressman Tupas should be part of the JBC together with Senator Escudero as the Constitution states that a member of Congress shall sit as a member of the JBC. (The Philippines has two chambers of Congress – the Lower House where Tupas belongs and the Upper House where Escudero belongs.) The Court ruled that having both Tupas and Escudero sit as members of the JBC is unconstitutional. It arrived at this ruling by looking at the original intent of the law, citing the 1986 constitutional deliberations to demonstrate the intent of the framers. How come this principle in interpreting the Constitution was suddenly abandoned for the privileged GPL?

Yes, GPL’s counsel tried to argue for her case using excerpts from the 1934 Constitutional Convention regarding the natural born citizenship status of foundlings hoping to convince the Court that the intent of the framers of the 1935 Constitution was to treat foundlings as natural born citizens. But his argument was a clear misrepresentation of the collective intent of the framers! In fact, the proposed amendment favoring natural born status to foundlings was put to a vote and was rejected. The fact that it was discussed and voted upon does not mean that the framers collectively intended to favor foundlings such as GPL regarding natural born status. The fact that the proposal lost the vote means that the prevailing original intent of the majority of the framers did not support GPL’s case.

grace_poe_49

This landmark ruling by the Philippine Supreme Court may give a very chilling effect on the way the Constitution is regarded. The moment the Philippine Supreme Court ruled in favor of GPL, the solemn oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution has lost its meaning to the prevailing winds of politics and the whims of emotion.

[Top image taken from buzzle.com.]

print

87 Comments on “There is no longer any point defending the Constitution”

  1. I am very curious as to how the SC decided that you can be natural-born without positive proof that you are. Where did this presumption come from?

    Certainly not the constitution, that’s for sure.

    1. if somebody who’s parents are chinese, japanese, or whatsoever, if you’re born on Philippine soil, you’re a natural born Pilipino. but their citizen ship is the parents citizenship.

    2. Hi Tank,

      Yes I am curious too. As of this moment the rationale of the 9 justices who gave the go-ahead to GPL is anybody’s guess. Basing things on the Constitution, I really cannot see how their judgment can be justified. But we’ll see. Thanks for reading!

      1. @ HECTOR, Using the 1935 Philippine Constitution to propel a legal argument is absurd. The document has been discarded and no longer has any bearing on any legalities in the country. GPL lawyer’s are clearly counting on the idiotic Filipino people to not be able to figure out that when GPL’s representatives say “the Constitution’ that they are referring to the 1987 document and not the one that is the law of the land today.

        What an idiotic country.

        1. The 1935 Constitution was relevant to GPL’s case because that was the operative Constitution in 1968 when GPL was found. They were analyzing her Natural Born status. But to your point, even the current Constitution does not give GPL Natural Born Filipino status because her biological parents are unknown… well… I guess the Sereno Court changed that. Thanks for reading!

  2. Wasn’t the general theme of the last few posts that one should judge people on their actions and abilities, not on their blood?

    Given the general consensus that the pure-blood Filipinos in Congress are all thieves, cheats and liars, maybe it’s time for a “non-Filipino” to take a turn at the wheel.

    1. Exactly! Why would any half-intelligent filipino want more of the same bs they’ve been copping for decades from the vast majority of filipino politicians (really mostly dumbass celebrities and actors) who are nothing but corrupt to the hilt? I say they should change the contitution to disallow any filipino from entering politics in the Philippines…ever! Then we may see some progress….just sayin’

    2. Hi marius,

      Just speaking for the article, I don’t think there was any judgment on the people involved (GPL included). The article offers a critique on what appears to be a case of judicial overreach and judicial activism that transpired on the GPL case. I have no problem if a “non-Filipino” would take the helm of power, provided that the Constitution allows for it. If it currently is not allowed (i.e. a foreigner President), then the people can change the Charter through the legislature to allow for it to happen. This should not be the judiciary’s function. Thanks for reading!

    3. Surely pointing out logical flaws in a the constitution is the purpose of the judiciary?

      As someone pointed out elsewhere, the older constitution suggests that if your mother doesn’t know the identity of your father, you’re automatically stateless. That’s just stupid. The 1987 constitution, for all its faults, fixes this:

      The following are citizens of the Philippines:
      [1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
      [2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
      [3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;
      [4] Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

      An adoptive parent is (legally speaking) still a parent. Grace Poe is obviously as Filipino as, well, Noynoy Aquino. If Filipinos need to have the courts arbitrate on common sense, I suggest the country’s problems run far deeper than anyone suspected.

      This whole debate reminds of redneck ‘birthers’ in the US when Obama was elected president. It also has a nasty smell of racial-purity rhetoric about it, which is one thing no country needs.

      1. Surely pointing out logical flaws in a the constitution is the purpose of the judiciary?

        I don’t know, is it? That doesn’t seem to be mentioned as a (the) purpose in the Constitution.

        As someone pointed out elsewhere, the older constitution suggests that if your mother doesn’t know the identity of your father, you’re automatically stateless. That’s just stupid. The 1987 constitution, for all its faults, fixes this:

        Stupid as it may have sounded in the 1935 Constitution, that was the case. You are correct that the 1987 Constitution fixed that. The problem with GPL is that there is no information available regarding her biological parents which can help her meet our jus sanguinis principle. If this whole thing sounds stupid, I can agree with that. However, the means to change that is to amend or change the charter through the legislature, not the judiciary.

        An adoptive parent is (legally speaking) still a parent. Grace Poe is obviously as Filipino as, well, Noynoy Aquino. If Filipinos need to have the courts arbitrate on common sense, I suggest the country’s problems run far deeper than anyone suspected.

        No one is disputing whether GPL is a Filipino or not. The point in contention is whether she is a “natural born Filipino” or not. One can be a Filipino without being a “natural born Filipino” (by virtue of naturalization). The Constitution is clear on what a “natural born Filipino” is and GPL does not have proof to meet the jus sanguinis principle that the Philippines embraces.

        This whole debate reminds of redneck ‘birthers’ in the US when Obama was elected president. It also has a nasty smell of racial-purity rhetoric about it, which is one thing no country needs.

        Well, the birther case was not really exactly the same. The US embraces the jus soli principle. The birthers argued that Obama was not born in the US (I think they argued that he was born in Kenya). This was demolished when Obama finally showed his birth certificate. It would have been nice if GPL were successful in her attempts to prove her case through DNA testing (which the justices at the SET seem to have favored). But she wasn’t able to get favorable results from her attempts.

      2. >> I don’t know, is it? That doesn’t seem to be mentioned as a (the) purpose in the Constitution.

        That’s a pretty major omission then, and suggests the people who wrote it weren’t qualified to do so. In the US, for example, the courts are often called upon to make judgements upon the intent and wording of the Constitution.

        The fundamental purpose of any Constitution is to form the basis for other laws. If it contains logical faults then these must be corrected, otherwise those faults propagate throughout the entire legal system.

        >> However, the means to change that is to amend or change the charter through the legislature, not the judiciary.

        Fair enough, but the judiciary need to get the ball rolling: remember many of the sitting legislators are not qualified lawyers, don’t understand how the law works, and probably don’t care.

        >> The Constitution is clear on what a “natural born Filipino” is and GPL does not have proof to meet the jus sanguinis principle that the Philippines embraces.

        OK, I get that. Nevertheless, in most countries the law does not work on proof but on balance of probabilities. This is a pragmatic compromise: proof is rarely available.

        In this case, the chances that Grace Poe was born in (say) Singapore and then smuggled into the country is virtually zero. How on earth would that even happen? Of course there are some (highly implausible) scenarios: she might have been born of a pregnant refugee who arrived in a fishing boat. Purely practical considerations suggest that a baby turning up in a Philippine orphanage was – with 99.9% probability – born on Philippine soil of at least one Philippine parent, especially if she looks Filipino. Ordinarily speaking, that level of confidence satisfies the requirements of law.

        DNA tests would not prove anything: DNA testing is also subject to certain probabilities, depending on what it is you’re examining.

  3. just wondering, did Cory swear her allegiance to protect the 87 constitution or the 72 constitution? is there a referendum on february 1987 for the people amending the 87 constitution?

    1. Hi martin,
      This was Cory’s pledge:
      “I, Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties as President of the Philippines, preserve and defend its fundamental law, execute its just law, do justice to every man, and consecrate myself to the service of the Nation. So help me God.”

      https://youtu.be/vGigIwcUY-c

      The law at that time was the 1973 Constitution. But her government started out as a Revolutionary government (technically speaking she was not the duly elected President) so I’m not sure if her pledge to preserve and defend the law really had any substance behind it.

      Thanks for reading!

  4. It’s about the law and only the law. It is most certainly not about if she capable or anything else.

    So what ever people say about her ability is something that has no place in this discussion.

    The law has been broken and ANYONE in favor of following the law of the land, should NOT vote for her.

    Even the Lawyers Association of the Philippines was of the clear opinion that she has not right to run.

    This is another case of IN THE PHILIPPINES ONLY and this Supreme Court seems to be bought and paid for.

  5. As Randy David said before, let’s just appoint Estelito Mendoza (legal counsel extraordinaire to the who’s who of Philippine super crooks) as the supreme arbiter of the entire Philippine judicial systems and do away with the Supreme Court, so everyone who has the money just pays a fee for the decision they want. Less expensive for the taxpayers.

    1. @ V.V., Yes ,do it the easy way and dont dress it up as if it is some sort of legitimate entity.

      Also, confiscate the wealth of the Marcos family and give it back to the people.Let the Marcos thieves go live on ‘OLD SMOKEY’ and confiscate the wealth of Binay,Aquino,Estrada and the rest of the thieves and send them there as well.Binay,Aquino,Marcos,Estrada,Arroyo….
      they are all criminals.

  6. Answer these 3 questions please. 1. It is the year 2016, why not use a simple scientific DNA test to prove whether a person is natural born Filipino or not? 2. If a foundling found in the Filipinos is not a natural born citizen of the Philippines,then what country is that child a citizen of? 3. I have seen many women who have children that do not know who the fathers are. What is done with these children citizenship? Does anyone understand that this is the year 2016 and that eventually the law must change to adapt to the environment. Even the SCOTUS has done this many times in the course of its history. Most recently taking away of the right of the states to decided who can and cannot be married to pass the same sex marriage law in the USA.

    1. Hi Bill,
      Okay I’ll answer your questions.

      1. It is the year 2016, why not use a simple scientific DNA test to prove whether a person is natural born Filipino or not?

      That is correct! I think GPL’s problem, being a foundling, is that she has to find a candidate who is potentially in her biological family tree. I believe she has tried it with a few people but her results still showed negative. So technically speaking, she has not proven her Filipino blood yet.

      2. If a foundling found in the Filipinos is not a natural born citizen of the Philippines,then what country is that child a citizen of?

      I think you are confusing the definition of “natural born citizenship” and just “citizenship”. A person can be a Filipino without being a natural-born Filipino (by virtue of naturalization). So the foundling GPL is a Filipino citizen (primarily owing to international laws) but her Filipino citizenship is by virtue of naturalization. You have to remember that the Philippines follows the “jus sanguinis” (or right of blood) principle where citizenship is not determined by place of birth but by having one or both parents who are citizens of the state. GPL’s biological parents are unknown so the most she can argue is the presumption of having Filipino parents. However, as Fr. Rannie Aquino argued, one cannot really argue from possibility (or presumption) to necessity. Under the law, the natural born citizenship status is a necessity to qualify to be President.

      3. I have seen many women who have children that do not know who the fathers are. What is done with these children citizenship? Does anyone understand that this is the year 2016 and that eventually the law must change to adapt to the environment. Even the SCOTUS has done this many times in the course of its history. Most recently taking away of the right of the states to decided who can and cannot be married to pass the same sex marriage law in the USA.

      If you are talking about the Philippines, here is what the law says:

      “Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens.”

      Paragraph 3, section 1 says:

      “Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;”

      So for foundlings in the Philippines, at least according to the Constitution, are not considered “natural-born citizens”. But they can still be Filipinos by virtue of naturalization and this is primarily owing to international laws (Convention of Statelessness). The problem is, the Constitution of a sovereign nation like the Philippines is supreme over international laws. GPL is still a Filipino citizen, but not necessarily a “natural born citizen” according to the law – at least until March 8. 2016.

      As far as the SCOTUS is concerned, just because the SCOTUS has done it doesn’t mean that it is necessarily right. That is why a lot of the decisions of cases that are attributed to judicial activism and judicial overreach have been controversial.

      Thanks for reading!

    2. Hector: you seem to misunderstand the whole point of the constitution. The aim of restricting the presidency to Philippine citizens is to ensure loyalty to the country. It has nothing whatsoever to do with genetic purity (at least, I really hope it doesn’t). A DNA test would not be able to show that Grace Poe is “pure Filipino” because the difference between “Filipino” and (say) Indonesian is undetectable.

      Grace Poe’s features, in my opinion, are half-Filipino. But so what? If you’re suggesting that people tainted by “foreign” blood shouldn’t be president, that’s a disgusting idea of the kind that (fortunately) died when Hitler shot himself.

      1. Hector: you seem to misunderstand the whole point of the constitution. The aim of restricting the presidency to Philippine citizens is to ensure loyalty to the country. It has nothing whatsoever to do with genetic purity (at least, I really hope it doesn’t).

        Well, I think you are partly there. Yes, the point of the jus sanguinis principle is to ensure loyalty to country and the prevailing thought at that time was that this is established by blood. Basically the whole point of the restriction of the Philippine Presidency to “natural born Philippine citizens” (not just Philippine citizen but “natural born citizen”) is to protect the nation from foreign influence. The US has the same principle for its natural born citizens clause. However, the US embraces the jus soli principle and the Philippines embraces the jus sanguinis principle.

        A DNA test would not be able to show that Grace Poe is “pure Filipino” because the difference between “Filipino” and (say) Indonesian is undetectable.

        If GPL were to be successfully DNA tested with a “candidate relative” who is a Filipino, then this will close the case. She even attempted this DNA testing to at least a couple of “candidate relatives” already. Unfortunately she was not successful. Besides, the justices at the SET seem to be favorable with this means of proof.

        Grace Poe’s features, in my opinion, are half-Filipino. But so what? If you’re suggesting that people tainted by “foreign” blood shouldn’t be president, that’s a disgusting idea of the kind that (fortunately) died when Hitler shot himself.

        Not at all. I am not arguing on the “ought”, my argument is on the “is”. It doesn’t matter what I think what “ought” to be the case with regards to natural born citizenship, the Constitution states what “natural born citizenship” is. If we don’t like what the current definition is, then this can be changed through the legislative process.

      2. >> the whole point of the restriction of the Philippine Presidency to “natural born Philippine citizens” is to protect the nation from foreign influence.

        OK, I see the difference. However this is a foolish goal. All nations are influenced by foreign nations, one way or another. It’s how nations progress. What you mean, I think, is harmful foreign influence; and thus we come back to loyalty, which has little or nothing to do with one’s DNA, but with one’s parents (adopted or otherwise) and one’s upbringing. Hence the 1987 revision to the definition of Citizenship.

        >> I am not arguing on the “ought”, my argument is on the “is”.

        What “is” in the Philippines today is an unmitigated failure. Everything, from the judiciary to the common man in the street, is broken. Lawyers seem to get so obsessed with this kind of navel-gazing that they forget what the law is for: to maintain a stable and prosperous society. Under the circumstances, Filipinos need to be talking far more about “ought” and a lot less about “is”, or the country is going nowhere.

        Add noted below that Grace Poe might be a stooge of the US, and that some strings have been pulled. Personally I don’t think she is; Add mentions a good reason she might actually be a member of the ruling classes. Still, it’s a faint possibility. It wouldn’t be the first time the US has interfered in another country’s politics. I would still say, “so what?”. The Filipino paranoia about foreigners and their depraved cultures is weird and unhelpful. I’m no fan of the US in general, but of all the possible alternatives, American string-pulling here might actually be a positive outcome.

  7. In my humble opinion, the Supreme Court , decided the right decision of foundlings. If an abandoned child, is found on your doorstep; would you believe, it came from China or Indonesia?

    A DNA test, can confirm…Grace Poe had Filipino parents. This can put the matters, to rest.

    This case, is a political strategy of Aquino and Mar Roxas, to cancel every candidate on their way. And, make Mar Roxas, the only remaining candidate.

    Let the Filipino people decide, if Grace Poe, is not a Filipino or not. If the people reject her: she is not, indeed a Filipino. If people, elect her: she is a Filipino. Not, the Supreme Court. Not legal technicalities. But, the will of the people.

    I am not endorsing Grace Poe. You can vote any of the candidate; except Mar Roxas, who is the clone of Aquino. who is incompetent and a thief.

    1. Hi Hyden,

      In my humble opinion, the Supreme Court , decided the right decision of foundlings. If an abandoned child, is found on your doorstep; would you believe, it came from China or Indonesia?

      For me, it doesn’t matter what I believe. The only thing that should matter is what I can prove. For GPL’s case, I don’t think she was able to prove that she was indeed a natural born Filipino. (Presumption is not proof.)

      A DNA test, can confirm…Grace Poe had Filipino parents. This can put the matters, to rest.

      I agree.

      This case, is a political strategy of Aquino and Mar Roxas, to cancel every candidate on their way. And, make Mar Roxas, the only remaining candidate.

      Perhaps. But regardless of the motive, GPL still had to prove her qualification to run for the Presidency as defined by the Constitution.

      Let the Filipino people decide, if Grace Poe, is not a Filipino or not. If the people reject her: she is not, indeed a Filipino. If people, elect her: she is a Filipino. Not, the Supreme Court. Not legal technicalities. But, the will of the people.

      Well, technically speaking the Constitution was ratified by the people, thus it is the will of the people. The Philippines is not a purely democratic country where majority rules in a pure sense – that would be mob rule. Technically speaking we are still a Republican State where the country is under the Rule of Law. (At least I thought so.)

      I am not endorsing Grace Poe. You can vote any of the candidate; except Mar Roxas, who is the clone of Aquino. who is incompetent and a thief.

      I know you weren’t endorsing GPL, buddy. You were just giving your thoughts on the matter.

      Thanks for reading!

      1. @Hector Gamboa:

        How can you prove, she is a Filipino? She was found in the Philippines. I don’t think, that in minutes; she could be transferred from China or Indonesia to the Philippines. Unless, you have a transport vehicle, operating , at the speed of light.

        Since, we cannot at this time and space; go back in time, to see what really happened. We have to use presumptions. DNA or Genetic Science is the only Modern Science, we have , at hand. Unless, you have discovered a better one.

        More proof? A DNA test.

        We were not there , when she was born. We were not there; when , she was placed on the doorsteps.

        Even you, where you conscious, when you were born? So, I can argue, that your parents were not your parents.
        And, you are a foundling.

        However, if we use DNA testing…we can prove that you are a child of your parent.
        So, everything is debatable, and on presumptions. Lawyers argue cases. And, I am not a Lawyer. I am a Technical Man. I work on Technologies, Science, Theories and Proof.

        Whatever, legal technicalities that can be argued, by Lawyers. It is up to the Constitutional lawyers, to argue them.

        I firmly believe that the Supreme Court rendered the Right Verdict.

        1. How can you prove, she is a Filipino? She was found in the Philippines. I don’t think, that in minutes; she could be transferred from China or Indonesia to the Philippines. Unless, you have a transport vehicle, operating , at the speed of light.
          Since, we cannot at this time and space; go back in time, to see what really happened. We have to use presumptions. DNA or Genetic Science is the only Modern Science, we have , at hand. Unless, you have discovered a better one.
          More proof? A DNA test.

          You are correct. A DNA test would prove that she is of Filipino blood. Unfortunately, she was not able to obtain this proof.

          There is no question about the high probability (or the high likelihood) that her biological parents were Filipinos, especially given the circumstances during the time when she was found outside a church in Jaro, Iloilo. The problem is – probability (or presumption) is not proof. Philippine jurisprudence from Paa v Chan states:

          “It is incumbent upon a person who claims Philippine citizenship to prove to the satisfaction of the Court that he is really a Filipino. No presumption can be indulged in favor of the claimant of Philippine citizenship, and any doubt regarding citizenship must be resolved in favor of the State.”

          (http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1967/oct1967/gr_l-25945_1967.html )

          Besides, as Justice Carpio argued:

          “The 1935 Constitution clearly required blood relations to the father to establish the natural-born citizenship of a child. The 1935 Constitution did not contain any provision expressly or impliedly granting Filipino citizenship to foundlings on the basis of birth in the Philippines (jus soli or law of the soil) with the presumption of Filipino parentage as to make them natural-born citizens… Only those citizens at birth because of jus sanguinis, which requires blood relation to a parent, are natural-born Filipino citizens under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitution… It is also the height of absurdity to presume that all foundlings found in the Philippines, by sole reason that their parentage is unknown, are not only Filipino citizens but also natural-born Filipino citizens. To illustrate, if in 1968, on the same day that respondent was found in a church in Jaro, Iloilo, three infants were also found in front of the Manila Cathedral in Intramuros, will all the three infants be considered natural-born Filipino citizens? … “(this would lead to a ) preposterous situation which could not have been intended by the framers of the 1935 Constitution … If the first infant was an African black, the second a Caucasian white, and the third infant with Chinese features, would all three infants be automatically considered natural-born Filipino citizens with the conclusive presumption that their parents were Filipino citizens? … If at all the framers intended a strict interpretation of the term natural-born citizen, considering that they limited the term natural-born citizen to those who fathers were Filipino citizens and did not extend it to those who were born of Filipino mothers and alien fathers.”

          We were not there , when she was born. We were not there; when , she was placed on the doorsteps.

          We do not need to be there. The burden of proof is with her, for this case. (According to Philippine jurisprudence.)

          Even you, where you conscious, when you were born? So, I can argue, that your parents were not your parents.
          And, you are a foundling.

          But my case is different. I have proper documentation. There were witnesses when I was born (e.g. the doctor who attested that my mother gave birth to me.) Unfortunately, GPL does not have proper documented evidence for the circumstances of her birth. I didn’t need to be conscious about my birth. That is where documented evidence comes to play.

          However, if we use DNA testing…we can prove that you are a child of your parent.
          So, everything is debatable, and on presumptions.

          For GPL’s case, DNA testing is pretty much her only way. But for others with known parents, witnesses with supporting documented evidence would suffice. The thing about GPL is that no one knows the circumstance of her birth.

          Lawyers argue cases. And, I am not a Lawyer. I am a Technical Man. I work on Technologies, Science, Theories and Proof.

          Same here. I am not a lawyer and my profession is also in the sciences. As with science, theories are validated with proof.

          Whatever, legal technicalities that can be argued, by Lawyers. It is up to the Constitutional lawyers, to argue them.

          Yes, but we are just engaged in a discussion; an exchange of ideas.

          I firmly believe that the Supreme Court rendered the Right Verdict.

          I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. But in any case, any arguments or discussions about GPL’s case is moot and academic. The majority of the gods of Padre Faura have spoken and Filipinos have no choice but to suck it up.

    1. Hi Kari,

      Thanks for the link but realistically speaking, the majority of the gods of Padre Faura have spoken and we really cannot do anything about it. If we don’t like GPL or if we think the 9 gods were wrong, then we just have to make sure we don’t vote for GPL. Thanks for reading!

  8. She looks as typical a Filipino as anyone you see walking in Megamall – so she must be Filipino. Case closed.

    No blond hair – check
    No blue eyes – check
    No towering stature – check

    Pinoy logic at its best

    1. Hahaha. You’re really funny man, zaxx, you know that? You always make me laugh, and I needed that on a Sat morning.

      Cheers.

    2. Glad to be of service to your six pack abs guys. Why these magistrates took so long to come up with their dud of a decision is equally laughable.

      Grace’s Indonesian parents must be laughing their hearts out over what a joke of a country PH has become.

      And Toilet paper with PH constitution printed all over it may soon become common household consumables. It’s definitely more “funny” in PH.

  9. Can I ask something else but I am sure the question itself is also a stupid one.

    I am just wondering why the biological mother never came forward and stated that she was/is the biological mother (this claim can be tested otherwise even I can step forward). Same about the biological father.

    Why is this a stupid question? Bec it didnt happen. If it did, I am sure one of you had mentioned it.

    After all these years, I am sur ethe biological mother must feel some sense of pride about her own daughter and maybe wanting her “back”. Again same for the father.

    Or is it maybe a taboo to claim a child what once was put in this world many years ago? Shame? Hiya? It could have saved a lot of agony if one of the parents came forward.

    1. The Philippines has never allowed a President who does not belong or does not have very good connection, to the 50 Top dynastic families of the top one percent. Events are engineered so that such holds.

      There are rumours GP is the daughter of Senior Marcos and a pretty actress, Rosemarie Sonora, who also happens to be the sister of the mother who adopted GP. That no one could be found as the biological mother allows the rumour to persist. If rumour is true, that makes GP one within the top one percent. Maybe true, because she got all kinds of support coming from invisible hands. They see her as one of them.

      1. Add,
        what I still dont understand is why members of that 1% are so “horny” (pardon me my French) to get into PH politics.
        In corporate enterprising, I can make much more money (through legal channels). Its easier to keep a low profile. This – at least – applies to my country. Do politicians in PH can make more money than a CEO running a corporate business? Salaries of Dutch politicians are capped and public knowledge (not only those who work for the national government but als province and city (LGU)).
        I can find my own reason to go into politics (and it wont be money) but I just dont like to see my own face in the newspapers and on TV.

        1. The 1% themselves are not into politics directly. They control mostly the big businesses. They want also to control the government so that they get preferential treatment that ranges from special tariff for their imports, tax incentive if they are entering into new biznes, be the preferred company in building infrastructure, etc etc. Relatives they do NOT need in their business, they throw them into politics, like PNoy. Hehehe.

    2. Bob,

      The quick answer to your original question is – the 1987 Constitution now recognizes both father and mother in establishing natural born citizenship status. The 1935 Constitution which applied to GPL’s birth case only mentions about being born of a Filipino father.

      With regards to the question of why GPL’s parents don’t want to come forward? It can be for reasons other than “hiya”. Perhaps both of them are dead now. That is certainly possible.

      Thanks for reading!

      1. Hector,
        what are you suggesting? That both her biological parents were killed instantly in a plane crash? What is Poe’s age today? Statistically, I dont think both are dead.

        Like I said, my initial question was stupid to begin with. But I think, I would/will come forward and I would do it in a silent way (not getting all the media over me).

        Thanks for replying,
        Robert

        1. No, Bob. I was merely suggesting that there could be other possible explanations (other than “hiya”) on why GPL’s biological parents have not come forward.

    3. Philippines is exactly the same as 15th and 16th Century Europe. Feudal lords and war lords. Political intrigues. High taxes. Wide inequality. People venturing into the outside of the territory. Traditional thinking but confused by infux of new ideas. Good education limited to a few. Church has the same power as the secular. Then the overarching power of the Holy Roman Empire (USA) Threats coming from the outside (Islam of the 15th century) This is China, in case of PHL. Power play in who gets to sit as emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (thus President needs blessing of US)

      Mar is connected to several old rich and some nouveau riche. Duterte, to nouveau riche and one old rich. Poe, to old rich. Binay, to Chinese Taipans. All pawns of feudal lords.

      Europe got out when more and more middle class got very interested in science, industries, history, philosophy, and sociology. But, that middle class came from a very strong agricultural economy.

      For PHL, education should be geared to science, engineering, technology balance with strenght in world history, the whole span of philosophy all the way to Greece, and modern sociology, plus modern economics. But, quality of education cannot be forced because the demand for critical thinking comes only from the needs of companies and industries. Quality of education deteriorated with the exodus of multinational corporations. So, somehow, there should be a move to make the Philippines a hub of multinationals again, if only for the sake of quality in education.
      Agriculture should be number one focus too to grow the middle class

      It is all about having a large middle class, a real middle class, not the kind which appears in the window dressed statistics of government. Any policy not directed towards this end should simply be thrown out of the window. If all efforts of government could just be directed towards this just one end, then it will always be heading in the right direction. But, that means government should have an inter-generational mentality, not the six years it has now. It took Europe one and half century before it started to move in the right direction. Maybe shorter for PHL because of modern communication and technology and the global village has really become compact. But, PHL will still need focus and hard work, and a leader who could verbalize a vision understandable even by the lowest. No vision that attracts the imagination of people, then people will just move in their own selfish ways as today.

      At the same time, Church should start thinking like a minority. Strictly avoid meddling in secular affairs and just concentrate in biblical and theological teaching and charity works. All other kinds of teachings should be left to the laymen. Priests with inclination towards science should be encouraged to provide metaphysical balance and to avoid deterioration to scientism. All it needs is soft power, and should kick out all the bishops who think they are also feudal lords.

      1. “Agriculture should be number one focus too to grow the middle class”

        What are you thinking of when mentioning agriculture? To focus on only one major industry, makes that industry very fragile. Crops and harvests get ruined bec of drought, bec of typhoons. And maybe in the future other countries will use better (more sophisticated) technologies (equipment) for higher, faster output (more efficient production systems).

        1. I am not talking of big corporate farms, which are already okay as they are making money. I am talking of labor intensive small farms (2 to 4 hectares),but supported by local government with credit, technical know how, marketing, etc. based on rules dictated by national govt.

          1/3 of labor in the Philippines are in agri, but this sector is neglected by govt. The farms make little profit because they are beholden to middlemen. If a system could be found to get rid of these middlemen then the farms would likely make more money. Very hard to get rid of these guys as they are mostly well connected with the mayor, if it is not the mayor himself who is the middleman.

          National government should have the political will to step in in behalf of these little people.

          Anyway, this problem needs long term solution and with a govt that has a six year term, said govt does not have the motivation to look at things that require long term view. BIG BIG PROBLEM.

        2. Another thing. If the small farms are given help, and they start making money, that is a sure way of decongesting the urban areas.

  10. Who said that Sereno Court and Supreme Court are synonymous. There was a Supreme Court and there is a Sereno Court.

    Outcome should not have come as a surprise in the way things were moving in the last 2 or 3 months. 1st, the line of questioning coming from Leonen and Sereno, appointees of PNoy. 2nd, Solgen comes out in defense of Poe, The very lawyer of government. That means the very government came out using the weight of the government 3rd, CHR, out of nowhere, invites itself to the case. Strange.

    She may be the Manchurian candidate of the US. PNoy needs a saving grace because Mar is not gonna make it. No Grace, then it’s hello jail, or mental asylum, here I come for PNoy. Needs of PNoy and US, it is called convergence of events.

    What I was expecting was news some one was bribing the Justices to NOT DQ Poe. Instead, the headline the morning Sereno Court was to announce decision, it was about a bribe to DQ Poe. That is called deception and disinformation to soften the public re the the decision about to be made in 4hours.

    Might as well accept it guys. Election 2016 is over, but the shouting. Grace Poe is the President. First President, not only to be sworn in by a CJ, but also installed by a CJ.

    My Crystal Ball, chaos in the next 5 years. Lawyers will attempt to put PNoy in jail bcuz of DAP and SAF44. Lawyers will attempt to impeach Poe. Lawyers will attempt to impeach Sereno. All IFFY situations. BBM wins VP. If Poe gets impeached, BBM takes over. They will burst the economy, which easily could be done bcuz it is a bubble economy afterall — can be done bcuz of the chaos already built in, media will just amplify the chaotic situation.

    All above plan, only bcuz of the paranoia of PNoy re jail. Watch the one trillion in the budget still unspent. If they manage to take that out, then indeed the KKK,i.e. Abad, Abaya (and Mar), Alcala, Dinky, plus of course PNoy, will of course be too big to be sued.

    If surveys are correct, BBM will win. That means the end of the yellow era. You think the yellow will allow that without the fireworks. The question is what kind of fireworks will that be.

    If all that true, BBM has to steel himself. Problem is he does not have the oomph and chutzpah of his father. But, they will dare him up to that point, assuming need for him to take over seat vacated by Poe, to declare Martial Law to prove Yellows correct. If he goes thru chaos without need of ML, BBM wins. Then, that should usher in new era, hopefully for the better.

    We are witnessing an incredible power play in the making, and the front lines just give us a hint. The real power play is going on under the radar of the media. BBM should now be sending his lobby group to DC to find allies there he could call his friends.

    In fact, such should have been what PNoy should have been doing, instead of just following whatever DC says. DC should see Spratlys and Mindanao the way majority of Filipinos see it, and there are definitely many people in DC who can be persuaded. Problem is PNoy even allowed the MILF to take the upper hand even in DC, that is why he looks like a slave to MILF. A clear vision of a Strong Philippines that serves as a better partner for the US should be developed. Heavy, forceful lobbying should accompany such vision.

  11. SCOTUS has been into judicial activism since the 1970s. The latest was the Obergefell on SSM. the feeling the legal minds are having just now is the same as the Americans legal minds had just after Obergefell. It is definitely an over-reach.

  12. You know it helps by actually linking the official SC decision and debating what SC officially wrote rather posting this nonsense article.

    Your point is you want that one must prove innocence before proven guilty? So If I accuse you of murder, you must prove yourself before I prove yourself? If I accuse the website of terrorism the website owners must be guilty because they could not prove innocence?

    Rights only fits whenever you say so. But if you dislike a decision it doesnt fit them.

    That debates are all about conjectures and use links of unofficial site?

    But hey, you are a type of person who doesn’t even make an effort to scan the official copies, reading even at least the 47 pages of SC decision summary, so we can debate about the decision but rather make media sensationalism because you have a hidden agenda to discredit Poe in your 2nd Poe Hate article.

    1. You know it helps by actually linking the official SC decision and debating what SC officially wrote rather posting this nonsense article.

      When I wrote the article, the separate opinions of the justices weren’t available yet. So I wrote about how I felt the case was based on the information available to me. I’m sorry if you think that my article is non-sense, other people seem to have liked it though.

      Your point is you want that one must prove innocence before proven guilty? So If I accuse you of murder, you must prove yourself before I prove yourself? If I accuse the website of terrorism the website owners must be guilty because they could not prove innocence?

      Nope. The point of the article is about critiquing what appears to be a case of judicial overreach and judicial activism.

      Rights only fits whenever you say so. But if you dislike a decision it doesnt fit them.

      Not sure where this is coming from but I believe rights are defined by the laws of the land. It doesn’t matter what I believe or say, what matters is what the law of the land says.

      That debates are all about conjectures and use links of unofficial site?

      Again, not sure where this is coming from. The article is merely about my personal critique of what I perceive to be a case of judicial overreach and judicial activism. My use of links, official or not, were for the purpose of showing where I got the information from and to support points.

      But hey, you are a type of person who doesn’t even make an effort to scan the official copies, reading even at least the 47 pages of SC decision summary, so we can debate about the decision but rather make media sensationalism because you have a hidden agenda to discredit Poe in your 2nd Poe Hate article.

      Like I said, when I wrote the article, the official separate opinions of the justices (especially the majority justices) haven’t been released yet (at least I wasn’t aware of them yet). And I don’t have a hidden agenda to discredit GPL. The purpose was a critique of what I perceive to be a case of judicial overreach and judicial activism. I am not a fan of Poe, but I don’t hate her. My articles that seem to criticize Poe does not equate to hatred of her. Afterall, can’t we criticize without hating?

  13. More candidates for one position means numbers will be easier to tweak come election time for a chosen one to win.

    For the presidency we do not need the vote of the majority, to win one just needs more than 25% of the votes.

    1. You just gave me an ‘ooohh yeaahh, how come I did not think of that’ moment. Scary predicament though if your analysis prove to be true.

  14. Okay guys, a friend of mine just informed me of the link of the summary jurisprudence regarding GPL’s case. (The 47 page document DT was referring to.) I have read it and my impression of the judgment is, as I suspected, judicial activism. I will try to write about why I think so next time.

    I also find it interesting that the majority opinion seems to have based their decision on GPL’s citizenship status on international laws (which in cases, are not applicable to natural born status conferment as defined by our laws, as well as being not binding to the Philippines). The “anti-discriminatory” reasoning behind the judgment on GPL’s citizenship status was smacking of Argumentum ad misericordiam. The rationale behind the majority’s judgment on GPL’s natural born Filipino status, I think, is severely wanting.

    The most credit I can give to the majority decision is their explanation on why the COMELEC committed a grave abuse of discretion. But even this sets a dangerous possible scenario. In essence, it strips the COMELEC of authority to determine the disqualification of candidates. The ultimate decision for disqualification rests with the pertinent Electoral Tribunal (in GPL’s case, the PET). So in case GPL wins, her disqualification case can potentially go to the PET. Can we imagine the political chaos and instability that scenario may bring?

    Now I am very much interested in reading the dissenting opinions as well.

  15. Very good article, moreover, I like the exchanges in the comment section and how the writer clearly clarifies the issues about the Constitutional requirement for candidates to be natural born citizens.

    I completely agree with the points of the writer:-

    1. It’s what you believe/know that is important in courts, IT’S WHAT YOU CAN PROVE.

    2. The issue was never about GPL being a Filipino Citizen but about GPL being a NATURAL BORN Filipino Citizen, which she cannot prove at the moment due to lack of papers and DNA match

    3. The Constitution is very clear with its requirements, regardless if this is “logical” or not the only way to rectify it is not by bending or stretching it through SC but by Amending it through a legislative process.

    4. Pinoys need to realize the gravity of situation and the far reaching consequence of their decisions and actions. Maybe this failure to grasp the magnitude of these kind issues and the utter lack of foresight is why we are a basketcase of a nation right now.

    5. Some people right now tend to let this violation of the Constitutional requirement slide because it so happens that GPL is in the limelight. But what if in the near future a Chinese or Malaysian looking individual (who may have gained popularity) tried the same thing, would Filipinos then be more linient as they are now?

    Overall, great article. I hope you can come up with another one related to the Years of Residency Requirement and the possible Misrepresentation since I do believe those are the more backbreakers to GPL’s bid

  16. @Hector Gamboa:

    A foundling found in the Philippine soil, is born in the Philippine soil. Grace Poe cannot be born, outside the country. It is not a presumption, it is common sense.

    With regards to the documentation. Birth Certificates can be falsified. Witnesses can be bought. Some children in the Philippines, were born with the aid of “hilot”; not in hospitals, with doctors. I was born with the aid of a “hilot”…My “hilot” , who aided my birth, has already passed away.

    There was a case here, with Sen. John Edwards (D), who had a mistress; his videographer in his campaign as a Presidential aspirant.

    Edwards had a daughter, by his mistress. The Birth Certificate of her daughter, showed, the name of his Campaign Manager, as the father of his illegitimate daughter.

    You can easily buy fake documents, from falsifiers, in the Philippines, and elsewhere.

    So, I stand by my argument. Just use your common sense. Grace Poe was born in the Philippines; not elsewhere.The Supreme Court verdict was the right verdict.

    1. In a DNA test, a Geneticist, can give the result of Grace Poe:

      % Filipino gene –
      % Spanish gene –
      % Chinese gene-
      % American gene-

      It is an accurate genetic test, in our present era. However, common sense dictates, that Grace Poe, was born in the Philippines. I believe that if a DNA test is done: the result will concur the Right Verdict of the Supreme Court.

    2. Hello Hyden,

      A foundling found in the Philippine soil, is born in the Philippine soil. Grace Poe cannot be born, outside the country. It is not a presumption, it is common sense.

      I think that presumption or as you call it “common sense” may be relevant if the Philippines embraced the jus soli principle and not the jus sanguinis principle. Even if a child was born in the Philippines, it doesn’t follow that he/she is a natural born Filipino according to our laws (where natural born citizenship status is determined by the right of blood).

      With regards to the documentation. Birth Certificates can be falsified. Witnesses can be bought. Some children in the Philippines, were born with the aid of “hilot”; not in hospitals, with doctors. I was born with the aid of a “hilot”…My “hilot” , who aided my birth, has already passed away.

      As to authenticity of documents, I believe you. You are correct to say that documents can be forged or faked. Invalid documents can also fall through the cracks as in the case of GPL. Her birth certificates show a lot of discrepancies. Here’s an article about it.

      So, I stand by my argument. Just use your common sense. Grace Poe was born in the Philippines; not elsewhere.The Supreme Court verdict was the right verdict.

      Well, I don’t wish to change your stand on the issue. This is a free market of ideas anyway and everything we are discussing here is moot and academic. But I still am not convinced that GPL has been proven to be a natural born Filipino as defined by our laws.

      1. @Hector Gamboa:

        Common sense is common sense.It is not presumption…On all angles of views. There is No Way, that a foundling found in the Philippines, is not born in the Philippines… She cannot be born in China, America or Indonesia. And taken to the Philippines,in a moment of time, at somebody’s doorsteps.

        If you can show me how a foundling found in the Philippines; is not born in the Philippines. I may believe you…

        1. You don’t have to believe me. By all means stand firm on what you think is right. I was just suggesting that your point is a bit misplaced in GPL’s case because the jus soli principle does not apply in the Philippines.

          Take care!

        2. Common sense does not equate to proof. Common sense is just common sense and does not necessarily becomes valid in arguments all the time. Laws requires proof. Science requires proof. When it comes to Law of the Philippines, common sense without proof is utterly NONSENSE!

        3. @Mar:

          What do you mean “common sense does not equate proof”? In nature alone, do you see a group of animals ever being led by another animal? Have you ever seen a wolf pack led by a bear or a pod of orca led by a dolphin?

          That’s why I have my misgivings about Grace Poe becoming president of the Philippines because the Great Manny Pacquiao says to use our “common sense”!

          😉

        4. IMO, common sense doesn’t work all the time in the court of law.

          Just a simple thought exercise.

          Juan had two separate altercations between Pedro and Jose. Now Pedro and Jose separately planned to kill Juan, the former by poisoning and the latter by spraying bullets on his house.

          Pedro sent to Juan his favorite food item as a peace offering which is laced with Arsenic. Juan consumed the whole lot and died seated in a chair in his living room in the evening there were no witnesses.
          Moments later, Jose stands in front of Juan’s house with a semi-automatic and sprayed lead all over hitting a seated (already dead) Juan, a lot of people saw this and reported Jose.

          “Common sense” would likely point out that Jose killed Juan. But deeper investigation and autopsy would reveal proof that Juan was, in fact, killed by arsenic poisoning.

  17. all natural born Pilipinos are tainted with foreign bloods. only the Aetas are the real Pilipinos. the admin allies in the SC and comelec are creating chaos to save their king. another new news twisting the mind of the Pilipinos, the PDP-Laban is cory’s political party. why is it now accusing pnoy of something? is it mother now against the son? this scenario happening now is clear they want to stay in power by all means. these people in the executive, legislative, ang judiciary should not continue beyond after the 2016 May election if the Pilipinos are longing for a change.

    1. @Hector Gamboa:

      In that case, foundlings or abandoned babies in the Philippines, are not Filipinos. Who are they? Stateless? Where do you put them?
      Deport them to where?

      It is a possibility,they can be thrown into the China Sea. Or, evil people will use them for commercial purposes.

      The Cory Aquino Constitution is very inhuman and inhumane to abandoned babies…. It does not recognize foundlings, as its own children…

      And Cory Aquino, is pictured always kneeling and praying , before an Altar. Yet, her heart is very mean to abandoned Babies…

      No wonder, his son, Benigno Aquino III is showing the same inhuman and evil characteristics. “Ye shall know them by their fruits”…states the Christian Bible…

      1. Oh they are still Filipinos (by virtue of naturaluzation), but just not “natural born Filipinos”…at least until the Sereno Court changed the Constitution.

        1. @Hector Gamboa:

          I know that citizenship can be acquired by birth and by naturalization. Because the Philippines, does not embrace , citizenship by birth, of these foundlings. These foundlings are “Naturalized Filipino Citizens”. Automatically, these abandoned babies, are “Naturalized Filipino Citizens”…what a stupid law. Naturalized, means, they were born in foreign countries; and came to the Philippines, to become naturalized Filipino citizens. Maybe, they were born in some foreign countries, and the UFOs have transported them, to the Philippines…

          I believe this argument is tailored to disqualify , Grace Poe. Thanks to Supreme Court Verdict. They changed an idiotic/stupid ” naturalized Filipino citizenship law” into a rational by birth Filipino citizenship of abandoned Filipino babies. Kudos to the Sereno Supreme Court…I salute the rationality of their Verdict.

      2. These abandoned babies are the hellspawn of unwanted pregnancies made possible by teenage sex most likely brought by their listening to rock n roll aka the devil’s music.
        These little shits can suck it, have no place in the holy paradise known as catholic philippines because their parents were fuck-ups, they will inevitably grow up to be fuck-ups.
        That my friend, is pinoy logic at work

  18. Assumptions, presumptions, common sense and possibility when allowed in the court of law, this will create chaos over time. Law requires evidence to come up with a decision. Emotions are not allowed too. For the equality of everyone, what is written should be followed for consistency especially a person in running for the highest post in the Philippines. Criticisms does not equate to hatred. We are just expressing our opinions of what we logically think is right. Nice article Hector. Oh you did good in countering those need clarifications above. Very repetitious sometimes to read that some can’t understand the difference the “citizen” and “natural-born citizen”. Have a good day to every reader here!

  19. Question, why do so many of you argue about the DNA test for Grace Poe. It is not the point, but it would solve alot of issues. First thing you need to know is that a DNA test will tell you a person history accurately all the way to the great grandparents on both the mother’s and father’s side. This is a $200 USD test. I am pretty sure that Grace Poe, COMELEC, or the Supreme Court could have afforded to have this test done. Why was this test not done should be the question to all of the above. It would have helped settle this mess a long time ago. We could have even went farther down her lineage, but going farther than great grandparents is controversial. Here are facts and official reports from both the USA and UK top universities on the subject. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking/understanding-testing
    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/405384/tracing-your-ancestry/ and another page for proof.

  20. I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves ; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.

  21. XSaan kumuha ng batas sa foundling at natural born citizenship sina sereno, leonen, hilbay,perez, peralta, caguioa etal?? Di ba sa wala sa Constitution natin? Di ba nilabag pa nila ang Constitution natin???!!!

    Where in international law says that a foundling should be imposed classified as a natural born citizen? Ang sinasabi bigyan ng citizenship accordingly dependingly on the particular laws of the particular laws and particular nation, so ang susundin according to international law is how our constitution defined citizenship, because citizenship varies by law of particular nations, malinaw un, so bakit the deception of public na sinasabi ng international law na natural born citizen dapat ang foundling di ba wala at nagsisinungaling nanloloko ng ating Bansa, Konstitusyun at mamamayan ang maraming abugado na pinipilit ilusot si Poe who is a historical naturalized american citizen?

    Lol there is nothing holy on this what craps that a group of aquino and arroyo appointed magistrates in a court of people’s institution that should have guarded the nation should be followed when they decide to overthrow and jeopardize our people, our nation and our Constitution??

    #PoeOrals
    The Solicitor General employing the Prosecutor Fallacy in Poe?

    To be born as natural born citizen by presumption only would be like being born from fictional circumstances. Good for the movies.

    A lying Chief Justice appointee of Aquino and Leonen is a Security Disaster in the Philippines. Both Sereno and Leonen know they have to implement the Law not to circumvent the Constitution by half truths, the foundling issue is an issue of pros and cons, but security to the nation is paramount. There is good sense in a must priority of Perfect Citizenship as birthright of highest Leaders for the rule preserves and attempts to guard our nation from being usurped by other nationalities.
    Wt@ happened too to the solicitor general post?? They all in their most sensitive position opted dereliction of duty and obligation to follow and implement our Constitution. We listened to their arguments and we hoped, we examined their ideas for maybe there are facts of genuine noble causes but only found them implanting substances of deception and extreme prejudice wayward fallacious at best to the importance of the thing such as citizenship in question. Clearly these people exhibited bad faith and betrayals in their words, ideas and actions. I believe these people will continue their works in other forms against the nation. I believe that the Government and our Nation will be better if cleansed of people the likes of them. Simply emancipating principle that we must have people in those critical posts that genuinely defend the interest of our Nation and avoid appointments of people who undermines our National Security.
    Povs only
    – Danny Cascolan
    —-
    Pumasok na ang era sa pilipinas na wala nang tamang batas na susundin, really dangerous mabebenta lahat.

    Era uli ng kolonyal times, un maliit kawawa, un malaki at alyado sa malaki rules. But this time magevolve sa permanency of neoliberalist ownership ang bansa at walang lakas at titular na lang sovereignty ang citizenship ng masang pilipino.

    at ngaun krisis sa SC en banc, sure math 7 is not majority vote of 15.

    for a simple analogy, even if it is a natural born japanese citizen but became a chinese naturalized citizen in historical of citizenship, the japanese would never allow that naturalized chinese to become their prime minister, same to U.S.A., Russia, Vietnam etc.

    Dual citizens and americans here please do not meddle. Your interests are not our national interests.

    7 magistrates voting Poe is natural born and completed 10 year residency is a minority vote daw out of the 15 SC magistrates en banc says Carpio?

    On the natural born vote for Poe,

    Voted for Yes = 7
    Voted for No = 5
    Abstained = 3

    similar discrepancy in the residency votes.

    So if en banc is 15 magistrates, and 7 voted Yes for Poe, is that a minority or majority?

  22. Filipinos pride themselves when fellow Filipinos achieves or acquires high positions in other countries.

    But when their fellow Filipinos run for President they mock the decisions of their SC.

  23. Juan,

    The truth is Failipinos will take every opportunity to capitalize on their people’s individual achievements, by lumping them together into one heap and calling it “Pinoy Pride”—just to make up for their inability to live and work successfully together as one people. So this “Pinoy Pride” slogan is just a ‘word play’ to convince themselves–and to show the world–that Failipinos got their shits together as a nation, regardless of what the critics have to say. But we all know better than that.

    Aeta

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.