Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Paul

Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003 (RA 9225)

Recommended Posts

NOSOCALPINOY

There are a few local BI Field Offices in different regions of the Philippines that will accept dual citizenship application forms and or whatever else.

Click on the link below and find which local BI field office near you has what transactions they provide (it's a year old, but still should help some). 

 

DIRECTORY OF TRANSACTIONS

http://www.immigration.gov.ph/images/DirectoryOfTransactions/22MAYDIRECTORY.pdf

 

 

NOTE: Uploaded file to your post. - Paul

 

22MAYDIRECTORY.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NOSOCALPINOY

My wife has been a dual citizen since 2010 and has yet to get a Philippine passport and her old RP passport has since been lost long time ago. She just uses her Identification Certificate aka "IC" letter entering and or leaving the Philippines. We just got back last week from our vacation in N. Calif and my wife only used her U.S. passport and "IC" letter to re-enter the Philippines for the 2nd time since she became a dual citizen. She will eventually get her RP passport one of these days. :idontknow:  

 

                                                         Operations Order NO. SBM-2014-015   

 
Republic Act No. 9225, otherwise known as the “Citizenship and Re-acquisition Act of 2003” declares that natural-born citizens of the Philippines who become citizens of another country shall retain of re-acquire Philippine citizenship upon taking an Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines subject to the conditions provided therein;
 
To be consistent with the spirit and intent of the said Act and in order to extend the full benefits to those who availed thereof, there is a need to streamline the rules and regulations implementing Republic Act No. 9225, particularly in the immigration processing at the international ports of entry and exit of passengers who retained or re-acquired Philippine Citizenship under Republic Act No. 9225
 
Administrative Order No. 91, Section 1, issued on 12 January 2004, designated the Bureau of Immigration as the implementing agency of the Republic Act No. 9225.
 
By authority of Section 2 of the same Administrative Order, the following rules and guidelines are hereby ordered:
 
Section 1. Proof of Retention or Re-acquisition of Philippine Citizenship
 
For purpose of this Operations Order, the following shall be considered as substantial proof of retention or re-acquisition of Philippine Citizenship:
 
1.Valid Philippine passport; or
2.Original copy of Identification Certificate issued either by the Bureau of Immigration (BI) or Foreign Service Posts of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) ; or
3.Original Copy of the Certificate of Retention/ Re-acquisition of Philippine Citizenship (CRPC) issued by the BI
 
Section 2. Immigration Processing During Arrival
 
1. Upon arrival at any international port of entry in the Philippines, a passenger who retained or re-acquired Philippine citizenship under Republic Act No. 9225 shall present to the Immigration Officer during immigration primary inspection both his/ her valid foreign passport and any of the substantial proof of Philippine Citizenship enumerated in Section 1 hereof.
 
2. Upon determination of the validity of the presented proof of Philippine citizenship, such passenger shall be admitted for an indefinite period of authorize stay. The Immigration Officer shall affix the “Arrival” stamp on the passenger’s foreign passport and indicate in the provision for “authorized Stay” therein the presented proof Philippine citizenship as follows:
 
a.“PP” – for valid Philippine passport; or
b.“RA 9225”- for IC or CRPC.
 
Section 3. Immigration Processing During Departure
 
1. A passenger using a valid foreign passport who retained or re-acquired his/ her Philippine citizenship under Republic Act No. 9225 shall be cleared for departure without surrendering any certificate, permit or proof of payment imposable immigration fees upon presentment of any substantial proof Philippine citizenship enumerated in Section 1 hereof.
 
2. Upon determination of the validity of the presented proof of Philippine citizenship, the Immigration Officer shall affix the “departure” stamp on the passenger’s foreign passport and indicate the presented proof Philippine citizenship as follows:
 
c.“PP”- for valid Philippine passport; or
d.“RA 9225”- for IC or CRPC.
 
Section 4. Failure to present Proof of Philippine Citizenship
 
A Passenger using a foreign passport claiming to have retained of acquired his/ her Philippine citizenship under Republic Act. No. 9225 but fails to present any of the substantial proof of Philippine citizenship may be admitted or allowed to depart in accordance with existing and applicable rules and regulations.
 
Section 5. Repealing Clause
 
This order repeals Memorandum Order No. Mcl-08-039 dated 21 October 2008. All other issuances that are inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed and/ or modified accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyMan

By authority of Section 2 of the same Administrative Order, the following rules and guidelines are hereby ordered:  

 

Section 1. Proof of Retention or Re-acquisition of Philippine Citizenship  

 

For purpose of this Operations Order, the following shall be considered as substantial proof of retention or re-acquisition of Philippine Citizenship:  

 

1.Valid Philippine passport; or

Keep the pp current, walay problema.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesMusslewhite

Typical paperwork BS. They state at the begining that they are still citizens, but then they require all the BS so they can still be a citizen.

If not than the Filipino can not vote, have restricted access to to the legal system, restricted to only being able to LEGALLY own land not exceeding 3-1/2 hectors total and and must comply to the 40%/60% rule if wanting to start a business here in the Philippines.

 

So if you do not think filling out a few forms, taking some photos, paying $50 and taking an oath is not worth the three hours to complete the process? Than certainly who am I to argue.

 

But in my case, I moved here with my wife in 2008. In 2002 my wife purchased 5-1/2 hectors of prime farmland but was only able to actually put 3-1/2 hectors of the farm in her name and the remainder in the name of a relative. She lived with me in the US for 22 years, became a naturalized citizen, and our son turned 14 years old just after we moved here. I took both my wife and son to Manila and the both took their oaths. We were then able to get the land documents redone, putting the 2 hectors of land in our son's name, it was done this way because the land had already been split in two lots on the original documents; but my wife could name our son as the benefactor as he can now own as much land as he wishes. This means if my wife were to pass the land would revert over to my son, and the land would not be forced sold. My wife can legally run any of the various business ventures I am starting, no additional partners are need or controlling interest assigned to outside parties. Once again if my wife is to pass than my son can legally take over control of these business interest. Both my wife and son have full access to the courts, can enter into any legal agreement and full rights to vote or even hold political positions. I can build my businesses, expand with confidence, and keep the total control of these interest or any future interests in my immediate family. If my wife dies than I will not be forced to sell and or be the victim of family vulturing and power-grabs. I can not be forced to relocate, sell property and assets, close businesses, etc. My son can legally maintain everything as is and my place here is secure, So for myself, and only speaking for myself and my own family, it was well worth the 3 hours of time and the $100 it took to guarantee this sense of security. Others can do what ever they choose, but we are quite happy with our decision as it allows me the flexibility and family security to invest and protect our interests which most expats really do not have living here. 

Edited by JamesMusslewhite
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cebulover2000

We did it last month, went to Vancouver after we filed the usual BS paperwork. We then applied for PP for both my wife and our son, they started with " you have to register his birth with us first" answer : "he was born in RP and has NSO birth cert", then, "he also has to take the oath", me : "no, because his mother was still sole RP citizen at his birth and he is Canadian citizen by birth". "OK sir, but i have to ask the consul to look it over and sign it". Of course he did, lol. Just BS to make some pesos, the act of 2003 clearly states that they allow dual citizenship but of course we are in the Pilippines and everything is up for interpretation. I told my wife to do it, she was back paddeling but I know deep inside she knew it was the right thing to do. Mostly not to take BS from anybody or run for counsellor, I know they will dig and question, lol.

Edited by cebulover2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyMan

James, that's because back when your wife naturalized in the US she lost her RP citz.  That's not the case any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesMusslewhite

James, that's because back when your wife naturalized in the US she lost her RP citz.  That's not the case any more.

Yes, anyone before 2003 which is probably still over 9 million Filipinos. I have an Ozzie mate who has been married only 4 years  and he and his wife both live and work in Oz, I know she has residency status but I am not sure if she has obtained Ozzie citizenship, yet three weeks ago while on a visit here to Dinagat Island they were trying to title some newly acquired land. The land office said it could not be titled as she can not have more than 3-1/2 hectors of land in her name and had to put it in her father's name. They were still imposing the rules before the 2003 legislation just as they did my wife back in 2002. This tells me either their is a total disconnect or their is some possible misunderstanding or mistranslation as to OWF's citizen rights among some members.

 

I hear what you are saying, but I also see what is actually happening here to OFW's when they return here to the Philippines. Oh, I am sure one can easily skirt around such land rules by simply being deceptive, but if one caught it just could have dire unexpected consequences or penalties. I personally of a certain murder case of a Canadian citizen who's wife if currently in Canada. She sold a property acquired with her husband who was murdered. On these documents she write single instead of widowed even though the title was in her name. The new buyer found that the title was then void do to this irregularity. He is now demanding his 500,000 php back but I believe the money was already spent. I am sure it is heading to the courts if the funds are not returned, or will be held in a state of limbo as a probate hearing concludes the legality of the title. Either way bad business. A classic catch-22

 

As with any bureaucracy there may be Reacquisition document requirements still on their books which may cause unknown legal snafu's and catch-22 issues. Perhaps this is the primary reasoning in Philippines for having their Bilakbayans to fulfill this process and acquire the document. Similar to the belief of  only needing a Baptismal document rather having a Birth certificate, unless you are applying for a Passport or Visa which then requires a NSO Certified Birth Certificate. Then you encounter that proverbial catch-22. Just a thought, perhaps it is simply easier to have Bilikbayans get the document so they can have certifiable proof that they have obtained the right, rather then having to completely revamp the whole system and thus having to revise, reprint and ship out the reissues of new bylaws, regulations and S.O.P's to all the various agencies that could possibly be effected by this law. Instead of spending millions or even billions of peso sending out convoys of new paperwork, they can just have them go to an office, pay $50 each and the document is then sent out to them. Far less issues, far more profitable and surely less of a hassle.

 

Of course it is not now a needed requirement, but yet they still seem to be asking to have it done? those can do as they choose, and if unexpected shafu's do come up in the future, it could certainly make for some interesting threads in the future. :biggrin_01:

Edited by JamesMusslewhite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NOSOCALPINOY

Typical paperwork BS. They state at the beginning that they are still citizens, but then they require all the BS so they can still be a citizen.

And why are once Filipino citizens always described as former Filipinos under the Balikbayan Program? I believe that topic came up in other threads and was stated that, when a Filipino was naturalized as a U.S. citizen they lost their rights, where their original RP passport are no longer valid and the only way to get those rights back is under RA9225 Dual Citizenship and once again being a Filipino citizen, he/she has to apply for a new Philippine passport. Look at the Philippine passport application where it says applying for RP passport due to being a dual citizen under RA9225. Some of the threads I've read that Filipinos do not lose their citizenship when they become U.S. citizens, but I haven't read any laws pertaining to that statement. Each to their own interpretation of what the guidelines or laws are. I haven't a clue why it's written in some articles both ways and it's in other articles why and how a Filipino can prove Filipino citizenship other than under the two passport rule of thumb. 

Operations Order NO. SBM-2014-015   

By authority of Section 2 of the same Administrative Order, the following rules and guidelines are hereby ordered:  

Section 1. Proof of Retention or Re-acquisition of Philippine Citizenship     

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cebulover2000

Everybody who is thinking that they won't lose RP citizenship after becoming a citizen of another country AFTER 2003 may have a rude awakening. My wife became Canadian citizen in 2013 and she was not able renew her RP passport in Canada after that. She had to take oath first. This is how the law is interpreted by the RP government.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NOSOCALPINOY

Everybody who is thinking that they won't lose RP citizenship after becoming a citizen of another country AFTER 2003 may have a rude awakening. My wife became Canadian citizen in 2013 and she was not able renew her RP passport in Canada after that. She had to take oath first. This is how the law is interpreted by the RP government.

Well, that sure does settle the issue that when a Filipino citizen is naturalized in another country, they do lose the right to use their original RP passport and hence therefore also lose their Filipino citizenship, unless they become a dual citizen under RA9225 and then follow the guidelines under Operations Order No. SBM-2014-15 when entering and or leaving the Philippines.  

That's why these laws were implemented so that it could not be circumvented by a former Filipino citizen.

It seems that Immigration likes to drum up laws just to generate revenue! :idontknow:  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
riklynbor

It may have been mentioned but I hate reading to much :-)

 

Can my Daughter born in Australia to my wife Lyn a Filipino citizen apply for Filipino citizenship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul

 

 

Can my Daughter born in Australia to my wife Lyn a Filipino citizen apply for Filipino citizenship?

 

Yep. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NOSOCALPINOY

I read somewhere that the United States has not yet ratified dual citizenship into their constitution. They only allow it with a blind eye. Other foriegn countries do not recognize dual citizenship.

Edited by NOSOCALPINOY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cebulover2000

It may have been mentioned but I hate reading to much :-)

 

Can my Daughter born in Australia to my wife Lyn a Filipino citizen apply for Filipino citizenship?

 

 

As long as your wife is Filipino citizen and not Australian citizen, YES - without any other formal procedure OTHER THAN registering your daughters birth at the RP consulate or embassy in Australia. This is very important if your daughter was born in Australia in order to be able to get a NSO birth certificate.

 

After that, there is NO application for citizenship necessary, she can just apply for her RP passport.

Edited by cebulover2000
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salty Dog

I read somewhere that the United States has not yet ratified dual citizenship into their constitution. They only allow it with a blind eye. Other foriegn countries do not recognize dual citizenship.

 

Based on the U.S. Department of State regulation on dual citizenship (7 FAM 1162), the Supreme Court of the United States has stated that dual citizenship is a "status long recognized in the law" and that "a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both. The mere fact he asserts the rights of one citizenship does not, without more, mean that he renounces the other", Kawakita v. U.S., 343 U.S. 717 (1952). In Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163 (1964), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a naturalized U.S. citizen has the right to return to his native country and to resume his former citizenship, and also to remain a U.S. citizen even if he never returns to the United States.
 
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) neither defines dual citizenship nor takes a position for it or against it. There has been no prohibition against dual citizenship, but some provisions of the INA and earlier U.S. nationality laws were designed to reduce situations in which dual citizenship exists. Although naturalizing citizens are required to undertake an oath renouncing previous allegiances, the oath has never been enforced to require the actual termination of original citizenship.[28]
 
Although the U.S. government does not endorse dual citizenship as a matter of policy, it recognizes the existence of dual citizenship and completely tolerates the maintenance of multiple citizenship by U.S. citizens. In the past, claims of other countries on dual-national U.S. citizens sometimes placed them in situations where their obligations to one country were in conflict with the laws of the other. However, as fewer countries require military service and most base other obligations (such as the payment of taxes) on residence and not citizenship, these conflicts have become less frequent.[29] As a result, there has been a dramatic increase in recent years in the number of people who maintain U.S. citizenship despite residing in other countries

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Commercial Banner Advertisers

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..