Re: application for admission to the bar Vs.Vicente D. Ching, applicant.

Bar matter no. 914, October 1, 1999

Facts:
Vicente D. Ching, a legitimate son of the spouses Tat Ching, a chinese citizen,
and Priscila Dulay, a Filipina, was born in Tubao, La Union on April 11, 1964. Since
birth, Ching has resided in the Philippines. On July 17, 1998, Ching, after graduated
of Bachelor of Laws course at St. Louis University in Baguio City, filed an application
to take the 1998 bar exam. The Supreme Court allowed him to take the Bar
Examinations, provided that he can produce proof of his Philippine Citizenship. In
compliance with said requirements, Ching submitted the following documents:
A.) Certification from board of accountancy of the PRC showing that he is a
certified public accountant.
B.) Voter certification from COMELC Tubao La Union.
C.) Certification that showing that Ching was elected as a member of the
Sangguniang Bayan of Tubao, La Union.
On April 5, 1999 Ching was included as one of the successful bar
examinee and the schedule of their oath taking was on May 5, 1999 but he was not
allowed to take his oath due the questionable citizenship issue. The OSG filed its
comment stating that Ching, being the "legitimate child of a Chinese father and a
Filipino mother born under the 1935 Constitution was a Chinese citizen and
continued to be so, unless upon reaching the age of majority he elected Philippine
citizenship.
Issue:
1. WON Ching is a filipino citizen?
2. WON his election to Philippine citizenship within the reasonable time
prescribed by the law?
Ruling:
1. No. Since the applicant was born on 1964, the governing charter with regards
to citizenship issue is the 1935 constitution. Therefore as what is provided by
the said constitution, which said that the citizenship of a legitimate child
born of a Filipino mother with an alien father followed the citizenship of the
father unless upon reaching the age of majority which is 21 years of
age elected Philippine citizenship.
2. In the case at bar, Ching did not elect his citizenship when he reach 21 years
old but instead in 1999 which is 14 years after reaching the age of majority
which the court considered as not within the reasonable period of time
considering the length of 14 years after he reaches 21 year sold. In addition
to that, the court said that Philippine citizenship can never be treated like
commodity that can be claimed when needed and suppressed when
convenient. In view of the foregoing, the court denies Vicente D. Chings
application for admission to the Philippine bar.
The Supreme Court Resolves to DENY Vicente D. Ching's application for
admission to the Philippine Bar.