Supreme Court E-Library
Information At Your Fingertips

  View printer friendly version

CALL TO ORDER

At 5:14 p.m., the President of the Constitutional Commission, the Honorable Cecilia Muñoz Palma, called the session to order.

NATIONAL ANTHEM AND PRAYER

The National Anthem was sung followed by a prayer led by Mr. Cirilo A. Rigos, to wit:

Most loving and gracious God, by Whose goodness we are gathered here today, we pause to invoke Thy blessings upon us.

Grant us the courage to change what can be changed, the humility to accept what cannot be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish one from the other.    
In Jesus' name, we pray.

Amen.

ROLL CALL

Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary-General of the Commission called the Roll and the following Members responded:

Abubakar, Y R.	Nolledo, J. N.
Alonto, A. D.	Padilla, A. B.
Aquino, F. S.	Muñoz Palma, C.
Azcuna, A. S.	Quesada, M. L. M.
Bacani, T. C.	Rama, N. G.
Bennagen, P. L.	Regalado, F. D.
Bernas, J. G.	De los Reyes, R. F.
Rosario Braid, F.	Rigos, C. A.
Brocka, L. O.	Rodrigo, F. A.
Calderon, J. D.	Romulo, R. J.
De Castro, C. M.	Rosales, D. R.
Colayco, J. C.	Sarmiento, R. V.
Concepcion, R.R.	Suarez, J. E.
Davide, H. G.	Sumulong, L. M.
Foz, V. B.	Tadeo, J. S. L.
Garcia, E. G.	Tan, C.
Guingona, S. V. C.	Tingson, G. J.
Jamir, A. M. K.	Treñas, E. B.
Lerum, E. R.	Uka, L. L.
Maambong, R. E.	Villacorta, W. V.
Monsod, C. S.	Villegas, B. M,
Nieva, M. T. F.

With 43 Members present, the Chair declared the presence of a quorum.

The following Members appeared after the Roll Call:

Bengzon, J. F. S.	Natividad, T. C.
Gascon, J. L. M. C.	Ople, B. F.
Mr. Laurel was absent.

Mr. Tadeo, who was on official mission, was inadvertently listed among those absent in the previous day's session.

READING AND APPROVAL OF THE JOURNAL

On motion of Mr. Calderon, there being no objection, the reading of the Journal of the previous session was dispensed with and the said Journal was approved by the Body.   

REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

On motion of Mr. Calderon, there being no objection, the Body proceeded to the Reference of Business.

REFERRAL TO COMMITTEES OF RESOLUTIONS

Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary-General read, on First Reading, the titles of the following proposed Resolutions which were, in turn, referred by the Chair to the Committees hereunder indicated:

Proposed Resolution No. 256, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION A PROVISION INSTITUTIONALIZING THE PRINCIPLE OF PEOPLE POWER IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS THROUGH THE METHOD OF INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM

Introduced by Honorable Garcia and Gascon

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE LEGISLATIVE

Proposed Resolution No. 257, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROVIDING IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION FOR A PRESIDENTIAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT SPECIFYING THEREIN THE TERM, QUALIFICATIONS AND MANNER OF ELECTION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE EXECUTIVE

Proposed Resolution No. 258, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE IN THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION SECTION TWENTY, ARTICLE FOUR, OF THE 1973 CONSTITUTION WITH MODIFICATION TO MAKE THE PROTECTION EFFECTIVE

Introduced by Honorable Treñas

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 259, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE IN THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION A PROVISION REQUIRING APPROVAL BY THE SUPREME COURT OF RULES CONCERNING PLEADING, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE PROMULGATED BY QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES BEFORE THESE RULES CAN BECOME EFFECTIVE

Introduced by Honorable Treñas

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

Proposed Resolution No. 260, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE IN THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION A PROHIBITION AGAINST PUBLIC OFFICERS HOLDING TWO OR MORE PUBLIC OFFICES AT THE SAME TIME

Introduced by Honorable Treñas

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 261, entitled:

RESOLUTION STRENGTHENING THE LIBERTY OF ABODE AND TRAVEL PROVISION OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Introduced by Honorable Natividad, de los Reyes, Jr., Maambong and Ople Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 262, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE CONTINUOUS VALIDITY OF ALL EXISTING LAWS, PROCLAMATIONS, DEGREES, ORDERS OR INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVIDING FOR THE EXERCISE AND TERMINATION OF THE LAW-MAKING POWERS OF THE INCUMBENT PRESIDENT

Introduced by Honorable Maambong, de los Reyes, Jr., Natividad and Ople

TO THE COMMITTEE ON AMENDMENTS AND TRANSITORY PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 265, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO INCORPORATE THE STUDY OF THE LIFE AND WORKS OF OUR NATIONAL HERO, JOSE RIZAL, IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 266, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO INCORPORATE THE STUDY OF THE CONSTITUTION IN THE NEW CHARTER

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 267, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING A PROVISION IN THE CONSTITUTION CREATING THE COUNCIL OF RELIGIOUS LEADERS TO BE APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISION

Proposed Resolution No. 268, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE RETENTION THE U.S. MILITARY BASES ON PHILIPPINE TERRITORY AS PART OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 269, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO INCLUDE IN THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES OF THE CONSTITUTION A PROVISION ON MORAL COMMITMENT

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Proposed Resolution No. 270, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE INCLUSION OPTIONAL RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 271, entitled

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION A PROVISION CALLING FOR THE DISMANTLING OF PRIVATE ARMIES AND THE CIVILIAN HOME DEFENSE FORCES (CHDF)

Introduced by Honorable Sarmiento and Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 272, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION A SEPARATE ARTICLE ON THE PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY

Introduced by Honorable Nieva, Bacani, Muñoz Palma, Rigos, Gascon and Guingona

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

COMMUNICATIONS
Communication No. 45 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Communication from the Honorable Neptali A. Gonzales, Minister of Justice, referring a letter of Mr. O. L. dela Cuesta of Vancouver, B. C., Canada, requesting a dual citizenship provision in the Constitution

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Communication No. 46 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Letter from the Financial Executives Institute of the Philippines signed by Mr. Ricardo G. Librea, submitting a paper proposing that the Central Bank be made a constitutional body

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS AND AGENCIES

Communication No. 47 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Communication from Mr. Pablo B. David of Betis, Guagua, Pampanga, suggesting a form of government, the separation of church and state and social services provisions, among others

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Communication No. 48 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Communication from Mr. Jose V. Macavinta of 2321-A Kusangloob, Sta. Cruz, Manila, submitting proposals on the preamble, the national identity, the national flag and the national seal

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Communication No. 49 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Communication from Mr. Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr., Deputy Executive Secretary, transmitting proposals of Mr. Virgilio S. Omamalin of Dipolog City, nominee to the Constitutional Commission

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Communication No. 50 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Communication from Mr. Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr., Deputy Executive Secretary, transmitting a letter of Mr. Hipolito Montebon of Tuburan, Cebu, suggesting a presidential form of government, among others

TO THE COMMITTEE ON EXECUTIVE

Communication No. 51 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Letter from Mr. Mariano Melendres, Jr., of 370 S. Antonio Avenue, Pasig, Metro Manila, submitting suggestions on the national territory and the declaration of principles, among others

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Communication No. 52 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Letter from Mr. Delfin R. Manlapaz of 1707 E. Rodriguez, Sr. Avenue, Cubao, Quezon City, suggesting a provision creating an entity to serve as the main credit source for the people

TO THE COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL JUSTICE AND SOCIAL SERVICES

COMMITTEE REPORT
Committee Report No. 4 on Proposed Resolution No. 7, as reported out by the Committee on Citizenship, Bill of Rights, Political Rights and Obligations and Human Rights, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON CITIZENSHIP,

recommending its approval with amendments.

Sponsors: Hon. Laurel, Jr. and Davide, Jr.

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

The Chair suspended the session.

It was 5:27 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 5:28 p.m., the session was resumed, with the Honorable Regalado E. Maambong presiding.

COAUTHORS

On motion of Mr. Calderon, Messrs. Alonto, de los Reyes, Nolledo, Regalado, Rigos, Romulo, Rosales, Tingson, Treñas and Uka were made coauthors of Proposed Resolution No. 255.

AMENDMENT TO THE RULES

Upon request of Mr. Calderon, the Chair recognized Mrs. Nieva who reiterated the motion she had presented the previous day to change the nomenclature of the Committee on Social Justice and Social Services to Committee on Social Justice.

Responding to Mr. Davide's objection thereto, Mrs. Nieva stated that the motion was based on the consensus reached in the Committee that social justice encompasses social services and other facets of life. She explained that the Committee adopted the definition of the Chairman of the Philippine Commission on Human Rights which refers to social justice as the "coherent intelligible system of law, made known to us, enacted by a legitimate government freely chosen by us, and enforced by a courageous, honest, impartial and competent police force, legal profession and judiciary that 1) respects our rights and our freedom both as individuals and as a people; 2) seeks to repair the injustices that society has inflicted on the poor by eliminating poverty as far as our resources and ingenuity permit; 3) develops a self-directed and self-sustaining economy that distributes its benefits to meet, at first, the basic material needs for all, then to provide an improving standard of living for all, but particularly for the lower income groups, with enough time and space to allow them to take part in and to enjoy our cultures; 4) changes our institutions and structures, our way of doing things and relating to each other, so that whatever inequalities remain are not caused by these institutions or structures, unless inequality is needed temporarily to favor the least favored; and 5) adopts means and processes that are capable of attaining these objectives."

She also stated that in view thereof, the Committee agreed to propose a separate Article on Social Justice which would cover several areas of concern, namely agrarian reform; urban land reform; which includes rural and urban community development, housing and shelter; labor; health; education; and roles and rights of people's organizations.

Finally, she stated that it is the Committee's opinion that social justice would be more expressive of the task and concerns of the Committee.

WITHDRAWAL OF OBJECTION

Thereafter, in view of the explanations, and in the light of the proposal to incorporate a separate Article on Social Justice which will include provision on social services, Mr. Davide withdrew his objection to the motion.   

RESTATEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE MOTION

Thereupon, on request of the Chair, Mrs. Nieva restated her motion to change the name of the Committee on Social Justice and Social Services to Committee on Social Justice.

There being no objection, the motion was approved by the Body.

MANIFESTATION OF MR. GUINGONA

Thereafter, adverting to an article in the June 21, 1986 issue of Midday Malaya, on the summary of the proposed budget of the Constitutional Commission which he furnished, Mr. Guingona stated that although it accurately reported out the substance of the summary, certain typographical errors had to be corrected.

He pointed out that the P2,250,000 allocated for per diems of the Commissioners corresponds to 90 days of actual attendance in sessions and/or committee meetings and/or public hearings at the rate of P500.00 a day per Commissioner. He stated that the amount was even reduced by P48,000 because during the first weekend, there was no session, meeting or hearing, thus the Commissioners did not receive any per diem for said days.

On the statement that the Filipino people may end up paying P1,356,145 a day for the Commission Mr. Guingona observed that this would amount to over PI00 million for three months; on the contrary he explained that the Commission would be saving P4 million from the P20 million budget and would spend only P14,143,110 which is equivalent to only P157,000 a day.

Finally, on the item “losing operation” as reported out in said newspaper, which implies a Commission that is profit-oriented, he clarified that it should be an allocation for “Lounge Operations”.

The Chair then suggested that the Committee on Public Information furnish the newspaper concerned the said corrections, with the cooperation of the Commission's liaisons with media, Messrs. Rama and Foz.

FREE-WHEELING DEBATE ON CITIZENSHIP

Thereafter, on motion of Mr. Calderon, the Body proceeded to the continuation of the free-wheeling debate on citizenship.

REMARKS OF MR. GUINGONA

Adverting to his previous proposal changing the phrase "those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines" to "those born of Filipino fathers", Mr. Guingona stated that he had no intention of proposing the application of jus soli, but that on the other hand, the words "of Filipino fathers" manifested his intention of adhering to the principle of jus sanguinis.

He conceded, however, that if the child is born abroad, for instance in the United States, he becomes a citizen of that country, applying the principle of jus soli.

He stated that the phrase "those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines" would be a source of confusion since it would make the citizenship of the child dependent upon the citizenship of the father, so that any change in the father's citizenship during the child's minority could adversely affect the child’s Filipino citizenship.

He expressed conformity with the proposal to subject to "judicial confirmation" the naturalization of aliens under a decree of the previous regime, stating that it would be better than “judicial review” which, in a strict sense, is the power of the court to pass upon the constitutionality of acts of other departments of government and to declare null and void those which are in contravention of the Constitution.

Although naturalization is widely accepted and presumably imposed on most, if not all, countries, Mr. Guingona stated that he is against liberalizing the naturalization process because liberalization could have an adverse impact on the welfare and security of the country. He recalled that Mr. Concepcion had invited attention to the many irregularities attendant to the grant of citizenship by the Executive during the Marcos rule and had expressed fear that opening the door too widely for the entry of aliens could one day find the country with more naturalized than natural-born Filipinos.

On the concern expressed by Mr. Regalado that the many cases of grants of naturalization by the Executive at the time of Mr. Marcos could clog the court dockets, Mr. Guingona suggested the creation of a de facto court similar to the People's Court created after liberation, with the sole jurisdiction to try such cases.

Mr. Guingona reiterated that he is against the liberalization of the naturalization process, particularly having in mind that a naturalized citizen would, with a few exceptions, enjoy the same full civil and political rights as those enjoyed by natural-born citizens. It is for this same reason, he said, that he also favors the proposed proviso stipulating that admission to Filipino citizenship is a privilege which could be revoked any time in the manner and for causes provided by law.

Mr. Guingona then posed two questions, the first addressed to Mr. Davide, whether the confirmation or non-confirmation of the naturalization of aliens under the decree of the previous regime would have a retroactive effect, particularly on the citizenship of a minor born after the irregular naturalization; and the second, directed to both Messrs. Davide and Bernas, whether the legislature would have the power to delegate to the President the authority to lay down rules concerning the qualifications of aliens who wish to acquire Philippine citizenship or concerning the procedure for the acquisition thereof.

REMARKS OF MR. REGALADO

At this juncture, Mr. Regalado made the clarification that when he made the statement adverted to by Mr. Guingona, he was merely expressing the concern of some Members that judicial confirmation could clog the court dockets and could give rise to a problem of security. He explained that on these two grounds, he premised his query to Mr. Bernas on whether the Committee had ascertained the number of aliens who were granted Philippine citizenship under the liberalized legislative procedure of the previous regime.

He then reiterated that he would favor judicial confirmation through summary proceedings as may be authorized or laid down by the legislature so that those who were not qualified to be Filipino citizens may be denaturalized.

MOTION OF MR. CALDERON

At this juncture, Mr. Calderon moved that the Body proceed to the free-wheeling discussion on national territory.

INQUIRY OF MR. DAVIDE

Mr. Davide, however, inquired whether he should first reply to the queries posed by Mr. Guingona or to defer the answers thereto to the time when the Body considers the Committee Report on citizenship, in reply to which, the Chair stated that it would be in order for Mr. Davide to answer the questions before consideration of Mr. Calderon's motion. For the purpose, the Chair suggested that Mr. Calderon defer his motion to proceed to the discussion on national territory.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

On motion of Mr. Calderon, the session was suspended.

It was 5:57 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 6:11 p.m., the session was resumed.

Upon resumption, Mr. Calderon withdrew his motion.

REPLY OF MR. DAVIDE

Responding then to the first query of Mr. Guingona, Mr. Davide stated that the effects of non-confirmation of citizenship by decree would retroact to the moment the citizenship was granted, hence, the children of a denaturalized citizen would not only lose their Filipino citizenship but also the properties acquired by virtue thereof through escheat proceedings in favor of the State.

On the second query, Mr. Davide affirmed that the legislature would have the power to delegate to the President the authority to lay down rules for the qualifications of aliens who wish to acquire Philippine citizenship or for the procedure therefor.

MOTION OF MR. BENGZON

At this juncture, Mr. Bengzon moved for a special order to consider Committee Report No. 4 on Proposed Resolution No. 7 on Second Reading, covering the sponsorship and interpellations with the consideration of the amendments after July 7 as agreed upon.

Reacting thereto, Mr. Davide adverted to Section 18(a) of the Rules which provides for the disposition of the unfinished business before the Body could proceed to consider the motion for a special order to take up a new business.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

At this juncture, the Chair suspended the session.

It was 6:17 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 6:20 p.m., the session was resumed.

TERMINATION OF THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Upon resumption, on motion of Mr. Bengzon, there being no objection, the Body terminated the free-wheeling discussion on citizenship.   

SPECIAL ORDER TO CONSIDER COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 4 ON PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 7

Thereafter, on motion of Mr. Bengzon, there being no objection, the Body approved the special order for the consideration, on Second Reading, of Proposed Resolution No. 7 (Committee Report No. 4), on the understanding that it would only cover the sponsorship and interpellations and that amendments thereon would be presented after July 7.

Thereupon, upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary-General read the title of Resolution No. 7, to wit:

Resolution to incorporate in the new Constitution an article on Citizenship.

On motion of Mr. Bengzon, there being no objection, the reading of the text of Resolution No. 7 was dispensed with, without prejudice to its insertion into the Record of the Constitutional Commission.

SPONSORSHIP REMARKS OF MR. BERNAS

Mr. Bernas adverted to his previous remarks on the subject as part of his sponsorship.

However, on the sections of Proposed Resolution No. 7 he had not touched on, Mr. Bernas stated that on Section 2, the modification is simply in the "desexification" of the 1973 provision by omitting any mention of sex so that the provision would read:

Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their acts or omissions, they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced their citizenship.

On Section 3, Mr. Bernas stated that no change has been made from the 1935 and 1973 Constitution.

On Section 4, Mr. Bernas stated that the changes are in the number of the nouns and the corresponding verbs used and the addition of a proviso granting a natural-born citizen status to those who would elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with Section 1.

Mr. Bernas then manifested willingness to answer interpellations.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. AZCUNA

In reply to Mr. Azcuna's query on the applicability of the proviso in Section 4, Mr. Bernas stated that it would apply to any person who elected or would elect Philippine citizenship by virtue of the provision of the 1935 Constitution whether the election was done before or after January 17, 1973.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. REGALADO

On Mr. Regalado's observation that the proposed Section 2 does not distinguish whether it is a male or a female citizen who marries an alien, Mr. Bernas explained that the change was made to cover the possibility that a country; by its laws, would require any person who marries its citizen to acquire its citizenship.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. SUAREZ

In reply to Mr. Suarez' query on the use of "ratification" instead of the word "adoption" found in both the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions, Mr. Bernas stated that there is no substantial difference in meaning and that a change could be made later, if necessary.

With respect to Section 1(3), on the question why its applicability should be limited to those born before the adoption of the 1973 Constitution, Mr. Bernas explained that those born after the ratification of the 1973 Constitution could fall under Section 1(2).

Regarding the proposed Section 2, on whether there was any instance of a male foreigner who lost his citizenship on account of marriage to a Filipina, Mr. Bernas stated that he was not aware of any but the section was included as a cautionary clause to protect the males in the event any country might have such a requirement.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. NOLLEDO

In reply to Mr. Nolledo's query on whether the clause “unless by her act or omission she is deemed, under the law, to have renounced her citizenship” is self-executing, Mr. Bernas stated that the explicit or implicit act of renunciation could be cited if the citizenship is questioned in any proceeding.   

On Mr. Nolledo's observation on the lack of any law that would implement Section 2, Mr. Bernas stated that he himself was not aware of anything explicit but an implicit renunciation could be when one pledges allegiance to another country in which case, there is no need of any law for Section 2 to apply.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. RODRIGO

Replying to Mr. Rodrigo's query, Mr. Bernas affirmed that Section 2 would confer dual citizen ship upon a Filipino who marries an alien if according to the law of the alien's country he or she automatically acquires the citizenship of the spouse, unless the naturalization law would prescribe that at a certain point, the Filipino who has dual citizenship would have to make an election.

Mr. Bernas also affirmed that for the purpose of electing Philippine citizenship, the age of majority is 21 years; that such election must be made within a reasonable time; and that reasonable time could be flexible depending upon the factual circumstances of each case. However, he stated that the Committee would entertain concrete proposals along Mr. Rodrigo's suggestions to make more specific the time within which one may elect Philippine citizenship.

Mr. Rodrigo manifested his concern for Filipinos born before January 17, 1973 who may not be considered natural-born citizens while those born on that day or just a day after are considered so. He suggested that the Committee consider a more specific provision fixing the time within which a person may elect Philippine citizenship, in reply to which, Mr. Bernas stated that the Committee would entertain concrete proposals along that line.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. PADILLA

On Resolution No. 7, Mr. Padilla initially observed that Section 3 thereof proposes to adopt the old provision that Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law, the only law being Commonwealth Act No. 63, which speaks, among others, of express renunciation of citizenship, yet Section 2 of Proposed Resolution No. 7 does not provide for express renunciation but merely mentions acts and omissions, leaving an ambiguity as to what law is referred to. He suggested that the provision be clarified with the words "express or implied" renunciation.

In reply thereto, Mr. Bernas stated that the Committee would be willing to entertain an amendment at the proper time.

Mr. Padilla observed that it would seem strange that the word "elect" is used in Section 1(3) and repeated in Section 4 when the 1973 Constitution does not even provide for election of citizenship inasmuch as it merged paragraphs (3) and (4) of Section 1 of the 1935 Constitution into Section 1(2). On whether it would be better to retain the two paragraphs of the 1935 Constitution, Mr. Bernas stated that the Committee subscribes to the change made in the 1973 Constitution that for a child to be a Filipino, it is not necessary that both the father and the mother be Filipino citizens.

On Mr. Padilla's contention that there should be a distinction between a child born of a Filipino father married to an alien and a child born of a Filipino mother married to a foreigner, Mr. Bernas replied that the Committee would consider any amendment at the proper time.

On Mr. Padilla's suggestion to include the phrase "and are born in the Philippines" in Section 1(4) of the 1935 Constitution, Mr. Bernas stated that the suggestion could also be taken up during the period of amendments.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. GUINGONA

In reply to Mr. Guingona's inquiry on the consensus among Committee Members regarding dual citizenship, Mr. Bernas stated that the Committee felt that the matter of dual citizenship could be dealt with in ordinary legislation.

On whether the Constitution could include a provision which would prevent or discourage dual citizenship, and require Filipinos with dual citizenship to renounce one of them within a specific period, Mr. Bernas informed that the Committee had not considered it because it felt that the matter is better left to ordinary legislation.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. OPLE

On whether the Committee would consider an amendment which would prohibit or regulate dual citizenship, considering its attendant risk to the country's sovereignty and national security, Mr. Bernas stated that the Committee would be amenable to it if the Commission so desires.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. CONCEPCION

On whether the Committee, in adopting its report, had considered whether or not the Constitutional Commission would maintain its nationalistic leaning relative to the conservation and utilization of the natural resources and the operation of public utilities, Mr. Bernas stated that the Committee did not explicitly discuss the matter, but he concurred with Mr. Concepcion's observation that there were aliens who acquired Philippine citizenship only with a view to exploiting the country's natural resources.

He cited the Constitutional provision on how citizenship may be acquired or lost, and maintained that any problem of such nature could be dealt with by ordinary legislation.

On Mr. Concepcion's query if liberalization of naturalization proceedings would affect the efficacy of the Constitutional policy on the conservation and utilization of natural resources and the operation of public utilities, Mr. Bernas opined that such liberalization would have that effect, but stressed that there is nothing in the proposal which seeks to liberalize the naturalization laws. Mr. Bernas disagreed with Mr. Concepcion's statement that the 1973 Constitution liberalized naturalization, maintaining that the 1973 Constitution did not affect the naturalization law except that provision that a Filipino woman loses her citizenship upon her marriage to an alien.

Mr. Concepcion then cited the fact that many Chinese nationals married Filipino women to avoid the law on the Filipinization of retail trade and that many others did so to avoid being under the government of the People's Republic of China, in reply to which, Mr. Bernas stressed — that liberalization of naturalization was not done in the 1973 Constitution but came about as a result of the adoption of liberal policies that enabled these foreigners to become Filipino citizens. Mr. Concepcion, however, maintained that the 1973 Constitution was made by Mr. Marcos and recalled that in 1971 there was a strong lobby for the liberalization of the citizenship provisions of the constitution.

In this connection, Mr. Concepcion suggested that the Committee adopt a restrictive policy on the exploitation of natural resources and on the operation of public utilities.

Mr. Concepcion urged that instead of requiring a Filipino woman married to a foreigner to declare her citizenship as that of her husband, she should instead state her marriage certificate whether she would retain her citizenship or not because logic and experience dictate that husband and wife are one.

On the policy that a child born of a Filipino mother and a foreigner father shall be deemed to be a citizen of the Philippines, Mr. Concepcion suggested that the Commission should not assume Filipino citizenship for the child because, at infancy, the child normally looks to the father as his world and in all likelihood would opt for the citizenship of the father upon reaching the age of majority.

ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION

Thereafter, on motion of Mr. Calderon, there being no objection, the Chair declared the session adjourned until five o’clock in the afternoon of the following day.

It was 7:22 p.m.

I hereby certify to the correctness of the foregoing.

(SGD.) FLERIDA RUTH P. ROMERO
Secretary-General

ATTESTED:

(SGD.) CECILIA MUÑOZ PALMA
              President

Approved on June 26, 1986