On April 10, 2013, Philstar:
Regina Ongsiako Reyes, through her lawyer Gregorio Larrazabal, said the ruling of the Comelec's First Division was not yet final.
Larrazabal, who was a Comelec commissioner, pointed out that “the ruling is simply premised on the supposition that Reyes is not a Filipino citizen.”
“The simple fact is that Regina Ongsiako Reyes is a natural-born Filipino and had never renounced nor lost her Filipino citizenship at any point in her life,” Larrazabal stressed in a statement. - Philstar, Disqualified Congressional bet in Marinduque continues campaign)
 |
| Hate to eat your words in Court? |
Regina O. Reyes' Ever-Changing Claims:
“I’m married, I’m not married”
Well, well, well, Regina O. Reyes has repeatedly claimed being the wife of a Cong. Mandanas even after having made her own statement under oath before the Comelec that there is “no existing valid marriage” between Mandanas and herself. In her Answer before the Comelec dated Nov. 9, 2012, to the Tan petition to deny due course or to cancel certificate of candidacy, Reyes stated:
“…Respondent does not want to flaunt the truth, but considering the circumstance obtaining, she feels it necessary to disclose that in truth and in fact, there is no existing valid marriage between Cong. Mandanas and respondent...” (page 3 of Reyes’ Answer to Tan v. Reyes (SPA No. 13-053 DC)
“…Respondent was constrained to state in her Certificate of Candidacy the truth that in so far as her civil status is concerned, she is single and not married.” (page 4).
Then you wonder what any legal basis existed at the time when she officially used the name “Regina Victoria O. Reyes-Mandanas” and assumed public office under the said name as Provincial Administrator on January 18, 2011, an undeniable fact that she would even later use as evidence before the court to prove ‘oath of allegiance’ to the Republic.
‘Different dates of birth don’t matter’.
On the intriguing puzzle of different dates of birth such as July 3, 1958, July 3, 1959, July 8, 1959, July 3, 1960 and July 3, 1964 appearing on certain records presented by Tan, Reyes stated in her Memorandum before Comelec dated December 28, 2012, thus:
“Suffice it to say, that should it be necessary, she will move for the appropriate correction of any error in her records of birth.” (page 17).
On the other hand, Mandanas, in a privilege speech before Congress, came to her defense and on the matter of different dates of birth called it mere ‘vanity’, nothing to be concerned about. No one cried ‘falsification of public documents’.
U.S. Citizenship and Residence
Reyes to Comelec: ‘Am Filipino’; then ‘Am U.S. Citizen’, then ‘Am Dual Citizen’; but that ‘Requirements of RA 9225 are not applicable to me!'
Reyes to Media AFTER final Comelec and SC decisions: ‘I have proof of compliance with RA 9225 pala!’
But look closely on the matter concerning these issues. On November 9, 2012 she stated under oath before Comelec:
“Respondent proudly stresses the truth that she is a Filipino having been born of Filipino parents. This fact cannot be challenged by a simple declaration that respondent is an American citizen.” (page 18 of Reyes’ Answer to Tan v. Reyes (SPA No. 13-053 DC).
February 7, 2013 – Tan submitted, among others, (1) a copy of an article published on the Internet authenticated by the author; (2) an original copy of a Certification of Travel Records of Reyes, issued by Simeon Sanchez, Acting Chief, Verification and Certification Unit of the Bureau of Immigration indicating that Reyes used a U.S. Passport in her various travels abroad until June 2012 (or just four months before filing her COC in October 2012).
Reyes did not object to the documentary evidence submitted by Tan; neither was any evidence presented to controvert Tan’s allegations on her citizenship.
March 27, 2013 – Comelec First Division issued a Resolution cancelling Reyes’ COC. It stated among others that:
“… It is evident that for respondent to reaquire her Filipino citizenship and become eligible for public office, the law requires that she must have accomplished the following acts: (1) take the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines before the Consul-General of the Philippine Consulate in the USA; and (2) make a personal and sworn renunciation of her American citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath.
"In the case at bar, there is no showing that respondent complied with the aforesaid requirements. Early on in the proceedings, respondent hammered on petitioner’s lack of proof regarding her American citizenship, contending that it is petitioner’s burden to present a case. She, however, specifically denied that she has become either a permanent resident or naturalized citizen of the USA.
“Due to petitioner’s submission of newly-discovered evidence thru a Manifestation dated February 7, 2013, however, establishing the fact that respondent is a holder of an American passport which she continues to use until June 30, 2012, petitioner was able to substantiate his allegations. The burden now shifts to respondent to present substantial evidence to prove otherwise. This, the respondent utterly failed to do so, leading to the conclusion inevitable that respondent falsely misrepresented in her COC that she is a natural-born citizen. Unless and until she can establish that she had availed of the privileges of RA 9225 by becoming a dual Filipino-American citizen, and thereafter, made a valid sworn renunciation of her American citizenship, she remains to be an American citizen and is, therefore, ineligible to run for and hold any elective public office in the Philippines.”
In addition, Comelec ruled that Reyes did not have the one year residency requirement under the Constitution, because pursuant to the ruling on Japson v. Comelec, there being no proof that Reyes had renounced her American citizenship, it follows that she has not abandoned her domicile of choice in the United States, said Comelec.
April 8, 2013 – Reyes filed her Motion for Reconsideration stating under oath:
“28. What can only be surmised from the discussion is the Honorable Commission’s appreciation of the fact that respondent was married to an American citizen named Saturnino S. Ador Dionisio. Given this fact and in reference to Article IV of our Constitution and the pertinent U.S. citizenship laws, respondent acquired dual citizenship by virtue of her marriage to an American citizen.
xxx
“31. As sufficiently discussed in the previous paragraphs, respondent being a dual citizen, did not lose her status as a natural-born Filipino citizen. Not having lost her Filipino citizenship, there is no need to fulfill the twin requirements under R.A. 9225.
xxx
“34. “All told, when respondent filed her certificate of candidacy and swore to the oath of allegiance contained therein, she effectively elected Philippine citizenship, which equates to a renunciation of her allegiance to USA. Therefore, it is no longer necessary for respondent to make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenships before any public officer authorized to administer an oath.”
xxx
“37. The Honorable Commission stated that the issue in the case at bar is whether respondent had regained her domicile of origin in the Municipality of Boac, Marinduque after she lost the same when she was naturalized American citizen. However, as established from the discussion above, respondent never became a naturalized citizen…”
Thus, by asserting that she is a dual citizen, one could see that Reyes admitted that she is a U.S. citizen; by asserting that it is not necessary for her to reacquire or retain her Filipino citizenship, Reyes admitted that she did not comply with the requirements of RA 9225; by asserting that her status as a natural-born Filipino citizen is not removed by simply obtaining and using a U.S. passport, she also admitted that she was using an American passport in her travels.
May 14, 2013 – Comelec En Banc issued a Resolution affirming the First Division Resolution cancelling Reyes’ COC. This means that the Tan petition to deny due process (SPA 13-053) is no longer pending and had in fact been decided on the merits by the Comelec En Banc. On June 5, 2013, the Comelec En Banc issued a Certificate of Finality implementing the Tan Ruling.
June 10, 2013 - Reyes filed before the Supreme Court a Petition for Certiorari assailing the Tan Ruling denying Reyes’ MR and the corresponding June 5 Certificate of Finality.
June 25, 2013 – Supreme Court En Banc upheld through a Resolution the cancellation of Reyes’ COC. The Court also ruled, among others, that the Comelec retains jurisdiction to review the acts of the PBOC (see ‘Shotgun Proclamation’).
 |
| Reyes on media offensive, July 2013 |
July 11, 2013 – Reyes goes on media offensive by holding a press conference brandishing a copy of Identification Certificate purportely issued by the Bureau of Immigration showing that she complied with RA 9225 and a Philippine Passport. She blatantly claimed that the Comelec refused to receive these documents and that Comelec based its ruling solely on a blog article.
Reyes later withdrew her Motion for Reconsideration, apparently relying next on the House of Representatives Election Tribunal (HRET). However, it has already been firmly established before the start of the term on June 30, 2013 and before Congress opened its session on July 22, 2013 that:
Reyes is a U.S. citizen; Reyes' COC is void from the beginning'; Reyes is a non-candidate in the May 2013 elections; All votes cast in favor of Reyes are considered stray; and Lord Allan Velasco is the sole and only eligible candidate, hence the rightful winner as already proclaimed by Comelec.
But there must really be something about schemes to deliberately delay resolution of one's citizenship, grab a patently illegal and hasty proclamation, be instantly 'recognized', feed the media with half truths and half lies, and prolong the protest. Something intrinsically evil.
Also read:
No comments:
Post a Comment