NICOLAS-LEWIS, et al. vs. COMELEC

NICOLAS-LEWIS, et al (Petitioners) vs. COMELEC (Respondent)

G.R. No. 162759, August 4, 2006

FACTS:

Petitioners are successful applicants for recognition of Philippine citizenship under Citizenship Retention and Re‑Acquisition Act of 2003 (R.A. 9225). The Citizenship Retention and Re‑Acquisition Act accords to such applicants the right of suffrage, among others. Long before the May 10, 2004 national and local elections, petitioners sought registration and certification as "overseas absentee voter" under the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003 (R.A. 9189). The COMELEC advised that the applicants do not have the right to vote in such elections because they lack the one-year residence requirement prescribed by the Constitution for regular voters. The COMELEC argued that dual citizens under the Citizenship Retention and Re‑Acquisition Act must first establish their domicile in the Philippines through positive acts before they can avail of themselves of the Overseas Absentee Voting Act.

ISSUE:

Whether or not petitioners and others who retained and / or reacquired Philippine citizenship pursuant to R.A. 9225 may vote as absentee voter under the Overseas Absentee Voting Act.

HELD:

The Court granted the petition that those who retain or re‑acquire Philippine citizenship under the Citizenship Retention and Re‑Acquisition Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9225), may exercise the right to vote under the system of absentee voting according to the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9189).

Section 5, Paragraph 1 of the R.A. 9225 states that “Those intending to exercise their right of suffrage must meet the requirements under Section 1, Article V of the Constitution, Republic Act No. 9189, otherwise known as "The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003" and other existing laws.

There is no provision in the dual citizenship law requiring dual citizens to actually establish residence and physically stay in the Philippines first before they can exercise their right to vote. On the contrary, the law acknowledged that dual citizens are most likely non-residents and granted them the same right of suffrage as that granted an absentee voter under the Overseas Absentee Voting Act. The Overseas Absentee Voting Act, in essence, aims to enfranchise as much as possible all overseas Filipinos who, save for the residency requirements, are qualified to vote as an ordinary voter under ordinary conditions.

OTHER RELEVANT LAWS:

Section 1 of Article V of the Constitution prescribes residency requirement as a general eligibility factor for the right to vote. On the other hand, Section 2 authorizes Congress to devise a system wherein an absentee may vote, implying that a non‑resident may, as an exception to the residency prescription in the preceding section, be allowed to vote. In response to its mandate, Congress enacted the Overseas Absentee Voting Act.

NOTE:

Though the petition was rendered moot and academic because the May 2004 elections had been concluded before a decision on the petition had been issued, the Court still took on the case because of the broader and transcendental issue in the petition, the propriety of allowing dual citizens to participate and vote as absentee voter in future elections.