Do you honestly believe Grace Poe got elected senator because of her own merits? And not because she is FPJ's daughter? She also used and is still using necro politics.
The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines
- Forums
- Discussions
- Events
- Community
Results 1,061 to 1,080 of 1435
-
maverick34
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Posts
- 2,997
November 21st, 2015 12:52 PM #1061
-
Tsikot Member Rank 2
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 1,326
November 24th, 2015 10:06 PM #1062a little belated reading...
No international law conferred Philippine citizenship on Poe
No international law conferred Philippine citizenship on Poe | Opinion, News, The Philippine Star | philstar.com
hmm....SEN. Grace Poe Llamanzares and her supporters have gone to town with their notion that, if not the Constitution, international law had conferred on her, a foundling, the status of a natural-born citizen.
The three Supreme Court justices in the nine-member Senate Electoral Tribunal hearing a petition to unseat Poe argued away that idea, but they were outnumbered by five senators in the panel.
As things stand now, the SET has upheld the claim of Poe that she satisfies the requirement of the Constitution that she be a natural-born Filipino to validly sit as senator.
Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, SET chairman, summed up in his dissenting opinion that there is no international treaty to which the Philippines is a contracting party that provides expressly or impliedly that a foundling is deemed a natural-born citizen of the country in which he/she is found.
There is no dispute that Poe is a Filipino citizen, Carpio said, but the Constitution asks more than that. It requires that a would-be senator be a natural-born citizen, or one who does not have to do anything to acquire or perfect her citizenship.
The 1935 Constitution, which was in effect when Poe was born in 1968, did not include foundlings (whose biological parents and their citizenship are unknown) in its enumeration of who are Filipino citizens at birth.
Opinion ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
• Why international conventions don’t apply
SAYING that every independent state has the right to determine who are its citizens, Carpio shot down the international conventions or treaties that the Poe camp kept citing until some innocent bystanders started to believe them.
1. The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Philippines signed the convention on Jan. 26, 1990, and ratified it on Aug. 21, 1990.
Its Article 7 says: “The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.”
Since Poe was born in 1968, or more than 20 years before the convention came into existence, it could not have applied to the status of her citizenship at the time of her birth.
The convention guarantees a child the right to acquire a nationality and requires the contracting states to ensure the implementation of this right, in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless.
But the convention does not guarantee a child a nationality at birth, much less a natural-born citizenship at birth as understood under the Constitution.
2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Philippines is a signatory to this international treaty that was adopted on Dec. 16, 1966, and entered into force on March 23, 1976.
Its Article 24 says – “Every child has the right to acquire a nationality.” The covenant does not guarantee a foundling a nationality at birth, much less natural-born citizenship at birth as understood under the Constitution.
3. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948, whereby “member states (including the Philippines) pledged to achieve the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human fundamental freedoms.”
However, such a right guaranteed by the UNHR does not obligate states to automatically confer nationality to a foundling at birth, much less natural-born citizenship at birth as understood under the Constitution.
4. The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws.
Its Article 14 says: “A child whose parents are both unknown shall have the nationality of the country of birth. If the child’s parentage is established, his nationality shall be determined by the rules applicable in cases where the parentage is known.”
Until the contrary is proved, a foundling is presumed to have been born in the territory of the state where it was found.
Article 15 says: “The law of that state shall determine the conditions governing the acquisition of its nationality.” The contracting parties have to enact legislation prescribing the conditions for the acquisition of citizenship by a foundling.
But the Philippines is not a signatory to this convention and therefore not bound by it.
5. The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. Its Article I says “A contracting state shall grant its nationality to a person born in its territory who would otherwise be stateless.”
Again, the Philippines is not a signatory to this convention and thus is not a contracting state.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
a little belated reading...
No international law conferred Philippine citizenship on Poe
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2015/11/24/1525276/no-international-law-conferred-philippine-citizenship-poe
hmm....SEN. Grace Poe Llamanzares and her supporters have gone to town with their notion that, if not the Constitution, international law had conferred on her, a foundling, the status of a natural-born citizen.
The three Supreme Court justices in the nine-member Senate Electoral Tribunal hearing a petition to unseat Poe argued away that idea, but they were outnumbered by five senators in the panel.
As things stand now, the SET has upheld the claim of Poe that she satisfies the requirement of the Constitution that she be a natural-born Filipino to validly sit as senator.
Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, SET chairman, summed up in his dissenting opinion that there is no international treaty to which the Philippines is a contracting party that provides expressly or impliedly that a foundling is deemed a natural-born citizen of the country in which he/she is found.
There is no dispute that Poe is a Filipino citizen, Carpio said, but the Constitution asks more than that. It requires that a would-be senator be a natural-born citizen, or one who does not have to do anything to acquire or perfect her citizenship.
The 1935 Constitution, which was in effect when Poe was born in 1968, did not include foundlings (whose biological parents and their citizenship are unknown) in its enumeration of who are Filipino citizens at birth.
Opinion ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
• Why international conventions don’t apply
SAYING that every independent state has the right to determine who are its citizens, Carpio shot down the international conventions or treaties that the Poe camp kept citing until some innocent bystanders started to believe them.
1. The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Philippines signed the convention on Jan. 26, 1990, and ratified it on Aug. 21, 1990.
Its Article 7 says: “The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.”
Since Poe was born in 1968, or more than 20 years before the convention came into existence, it could not have applied to the status of her citizenship at the time of her birth.
The convention guarantees a child the right to acquire a nationality and requires the contracting states to ensure the implementation of this right, in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless.
But the convention does not guarantee a child a nationality at birth, much less a natural-born citizenship at birth as understood under the Constitution.
2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Philippines is a signatory to this international treaty that was adopted on Dec. 16, 1966, and entered into force on March 23, 1976.
Its Article 24 says – “Every child has the right to acquire a nationality.” The covenant does not guarantee a foundling a nationality at birth, much less natural-born citizenship at birth as understood under the Constitution.
3. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948, whereby “member states (including the Philippines) pledged to achieve the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human fundamental freedoms.”
However, such a right guaranteed by the UNHR does not obligate states to automatically confer nationality to a foundling at birth, much less natural-born citizenship at birth as understood under the Constitution.
4. The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws.
Its Article 14 says: “A child whose parents are both unknown shall have the nationality of the country of birth. If the child’s parentage is established, his nationality shall be determined by the rules applicable in cases where the parentage is known.”
Until the contrary is proved, a foundling is presumed to have been born in the territory of the state where it was found.
Article 15 says: “The law of that state shall determine the conditions governing the acquisition of its nationality.” The contracting parties have to enact legislation prescribing the conditions for the acquisition of citizenship by a foundling.
But the Philippines is not a signatory to this convention and therefore not bound by it.
5. The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. Its Article I says “A contracting state shall grant its nationality to a person born in its territory who would otherwise be stateless.”
Again, the Philippines is not a signatory to this convention and thus is not a contracting state.
-
BANNED BANNED BANNED
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
- Posts
- 4,580
November 24th, 2015 11:19 PM #1063i read the dissenting opinions of justices carpio, leonardo-de castro, and brion. now, i am convinced that GP is not a natural-born filipino citizen. she is a filipino citizen, yes, but never a natural-born filipino citizen. what i don't understand why senator pia cayetano voted in her favor. i'm no conspiracy theorist, but i hope she wouldn't reverse herself in the resolution of david's MR, otherwise it would just bolster everyone's suspicion.
-
Verified Tsikot Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Posts
- 2,515
November 25th, 2015 06:29 AM #1064Like in an impeachment trial, the SET is a political-legal body. Simply put, politics won over legality. Takot din siguro balikan sila ni GP if ever she becomes PGP
Originally Posted by Juan Martinez
-
Verified Tsikot Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2015
- Posts
- 220
November 25th, 2015 01:09 PM #1065Filipino citizen, but not natural-born filipino citizen ......unless he can really show her biological mother saka pala mag iiba ang status nya
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
- Posts
- 2,450
November 25th, 2015 05:27 PM #1066I think no one is denying the Filipino citizenship to Grace Poe. The discussion will be natural-born vs naturalized.
Pa DNA test na lang siya kau Susan Roces. Di ba ang tsismis naman ay anak siya nung kapatid ni Susan.
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 54,619
November 25th, 2015 06:00 PM #1067- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ganito ba yan...?
she was born a foundling, and therefore (arguably, depending on what is rule quoted), a natural-born filipino.
then she applied for and got an american passport.. presumably, the americans concluded she was a natural-born filipino at the time of application.
then she gave up that US passport, and became a (naturalized? natural-born?) filipino again..? natural or naturalized..?
-
BANNED BANNED BANNED
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
- Posts
- 4,580
November 25th, 2015 06:12 PM #1068no, doc. GP was born under the 1935 constitution. under the latter (or even the 1987 constitution) a foundling was not one of those enumerated as a natural-born filipino citizen. in latin, we call it EXPRESSIO UNIOS ET EXPRESSIO ALTERIUS or what has been excluded cannot be included. Originally Posted by dr. d
she couldn't have given up something she didn't have in the first place (or nemo dat quod non habet)
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 54,619
November 25th, 2015 06:14 PM #1069thanks po.
i wonder... what was the citizenship status of foundlings then, based on?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
thanks po.
i wonder... what was the citizenship status of foundlings then, based on?
-
BANNED BANNED BANNED
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
- Posts
- 4,580
November 25th, 2015 06:34 PM #10701) naturalized filipino citizen Originally Posted by dr. d
2) customary international law
this is lifted from the dissenting opinion of justice carpio:
“Sixth, a foundling has to perform an act, that is, to prove his or her status as a foundling to acquire Philippine citizenship. This being so, a foundling can only be deemed a naturalized Filipino citizen because the foundling has to perform an act to acquire Philippine citizenship. Since there is no Philippine law specifically governing the citizenship of foundlings, their citizenship is addressed by customary international law, namely: the right of every human being to a nationality, and the State’s obligations to avoid statelessness and to facilitate the naturalization of foundlings.”
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 54,619
November 25th, 2015 06:40 PM #1071- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
..i'm drowning in the legalese... Originally Posted by Juan Martinez
next time na lang po..
-
BANNED BANNED BANNED
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
- Posts
- 4,580
November 25th, 2015 06:48 PM #1072legalese is an understatement, doc. :D tawag ni Biazon niyan goobledygook Originally Posted by dr. d
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 54,619
November 25th, 2015 06:59 PM #1073- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
senator biazon's choice of word approximates a turkey's (?) cry... and we don't understand what the turkey meant to say, also. so i suppose the term is appropriate. Originally Posted by Juan Martinez
i actually read and re-read your input several times.. and i couldn't understand it..
staphylococcus.. cremasteric.. pterygoid.. gastrointestinal.. those are easy words..
-
BANNED BANNED BANNED
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
- Posts
- 4,580
November 25th, 2015 08:01 PM #1074that's the reason why i put there "this is lifted from. . ." after i answered your question, baka pagkamalan pang akin yan. but, in all candor, that is how most of us do things-- convoluted-- and they (or we) thrive on that. :D Originally Posted by dr. d
-
Social Dementia
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 25,189
November 28th, 2015 10:59 AM #1075The presidential race getting stranger...
Susan Roces urged to run if Poe disqualified | Inquirer News
-
Tsikot Member Rank 2
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 10,309
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Posts
- 764
November 28th, 2015 05:51 PM #1077Susan Roces listening to Grace Poe listening to Chiz Escudero (allegedly)?
WTF will that be, a game show?
-
Verified Tsikot Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2014
- Posts
- 5,246
December 1st, 2015 07:23 PM #1078
-
nag-memeron
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Posts
- 18,996
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
- Posts
- 3,650
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Juan Martinez
