Facts:

• Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares was found abandoned as a newborn

infant in the Parish Church of Jaro, Iloilo by a certain Edgardo Militar (Edgardo) on
3 September 1968. Parental care and custody over petitioner was passed on by
Edgardo to his relatives, Emiliano Militar and his wife. When petitioner was five (5)
years old, celebrity spouses Ronald Allan Kelley Poe and Jesusa Sonora Poe filed
a petition for her adoption with the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of San Juan City.
• Having reached the age of eighteen (18) years in 1986, petitioner registered as a
voter with the local COMELEC Office in San Juan City. On 4 April 1988, petitioner
applied for and was issued Philippine Passport.
• On 27 July 1991, petitioner married Teodoro Misael Daniel V. Llamanzares
(Llamanzares), a citizen of both the Philippines and the U.S., at Sanctuario de San
Jose Parish in San Juan City. Desirous of being with her husband who was then
based in the U.S., the couple flew back to the U.S. two days after the wedding
ceremony or on 29 July 1991.
• On 8 April 2004, the petitioner came back to the Philippines together with Hanna
to support her father’s candidacy for President in the May 2004 elections. She
returned to the U.S. with her two daughters on 8 July 2004. After a few months,
specifically on 13 December 2004, petitioner rushed back to the Philippines upon
learning of her father’s deteriorating medical condition.
• Her father slipped into a coma and eventually expired. The petitioner stayed in the
country until 3 February 2005 to take care of her father’s funeral arrangements as
well as to assist in the settlement of his estate.
• The couple began preparing for their resettlement including notification of their
children’s schools that they will be transferring to Philippine schools for the next
semester and coordination with property movers for the relocation of their
household goods, furniture and cars from the U.S. to the Philippines; and inquiry
with Philippine authorities as to the proper procedure to be followed in bringing
their pet dog into the country.
• As early as 2004, the petitioner already quit her job in the U.S. In late March 2006,
petitioner’s husband officially informed the U.S. Postal Service of the family’s
change and abandonment of their address in the U.S.
• On 7 July 2006, petitioner took her Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines pursuant to Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9225 or the Citizenship Retention
and Re-acquisition Act of 2003. Again, petitioner registered as a voter of Barangay
Santa Lucia, San Juan City on 31 August 2006.40 She also secured from the DFA
a new Philippine Passport bearing the No. XX4731999.
• On 6 October 2010, President Benigno S. Aquino III appointed petitioner as
Chairperson of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board
(MTRCB). On 12 July 2011, the petitioner executed before the Vice Consul of the
U.S. Embassy in Manila an “Oath/Affirmation of Renunciation of Nationality of the
United States.”.
• On 9 December 2011, the U.S. Vice Consul issued to petitioner a “Certificate of
Loss of Nationality of the United States” effective 21 October 2010.
 • On 15 October 2015, petitioner filed her COC for the Presidency for the May 2016
Elections. Petitioner’s filing of her COC for President in the upcoming elections
triggered the filing of several COMELEC cases against her which were the subject
of these consolidated cases. Petitioner’s claim that she has been a resident for ten
(10) years and eleven (11) months on the day before the 2016 elections.
Issue:
Whether or not petitioner is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.
Ruling:
Yes. The fact is that petitioner's blood relationship with a Filipino citizen is
DEMONSTRABLE. The Solicitor General offered official statistics from the Philippine Statistics
Authority a statistical probability that any child born in the Philippines in that decade is natural-
born Filipino was 99.83%. Other circumstantial evidence of the nationality of petitioner's parents
are the fact that she was abandoned as an infant in a Roman Catholic Church in Iloilo City. She
also has typical Filipino features: height, flat nasal bridge, straight black hair, almond shaped eyes
and an oval face.
As a matter of law, foundlings are as a class, natural-born citizens. While the 1935
Constitution's enumeration is silent as to foundlings, there is no restrictive language which would
definitely exclude foundlings either. Because of silence and ambiguity in the enumeration with
respect to foundlings, there is a need to examine the intent of the framers.
Domestic laws on adoption also support the principle that foundlings are Filipinos. These
laws do not provide that adoption confers citizenship upon the adoptee. Rather, the adoptee must
be a Filipino in the first place to be adopted.
Foundlings are likewise citizens under international law. Under the 1987 Constitution, an
international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law either by transformation or
incorporation. The transformation method requires that an international law be transformed into a
domestic law through a constitutional mechanism such as local legislation. On the other hand,
generally accepted principles of international law, by virtue of the incorporation clause of the
Constitution, form part of the laws of the land even if they do not derive from treaty obligations.
Generally accepted principles of international law include international custom as evidence of a
general practice accepted as law, and general principles of law recognized by civilized nations.
International customary rules are accepted as binding as a result from the combination of two
elements: the established, widespread, and consistent practice on the part of States; and a
psychological element known as the opinionjuris sive necessitates (opinion as to law or
necessity).
The common thread of the UDHR, UNCRC and ICCPR is to obligate the Philippines to
grant nationality from birth and ensure that no child is stateless. That the Philippines is not a party
to the 1930 Hague Convention nor to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness
does not mean that their principles are not binding. While the Philippines is not a party to the 1930
Hague Convention, it is a signatory to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, Article 15(1)
ofwhich131 effectively affirms Article 14 of the 1930 Hague Convention.