Value of passport

The Bureau of Immigration recently discussed the probative value of a Philippine passport in deportation proceedings.

The agency dismissed deportation complaints against a local business executive, saying that only aliens can be the subject of deportation, relying largely on the Philippine passport that has been issued to the executive by the government.

A complaint was earlier filed seeking the deportation of a board member of the influential Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), who is also president of a $20-billion local mining company, for allegedly faking his Filipino citizenship to legalize his mining investments in the country.

The complaint, filed with the Immigration bureau, was initiated by a certain Nestor Cas who accused PCCI board member and Global Ferronickel Holdings Inc. and Platinum Group Metals Corp. (PGMC) president Joseph Sy of falsifying public documents and simulating his birth so he could pass himself off as a Filipino. According to Cas, Sy faked his birth documents in order to control firms that are into mining, a partially nationalized industry where foreigners are not allowed to hold a controlling ownership stake.

In a recent decision approved unanimously by the three Immigration commissioners and dismissing the complaint, the BI said that Sy did not merely rely on the presumption of the validity of his birth certificate, but also submitted other documents to substantially establish his Philippine citizenship.

The three BI commissioners are chairman Siegfred Mison, Gilberto Repizo, and Abdullah Mangotara. The order was approved last Feb. 26, 2015, affirming a similar conclusion by the members of the Board of Special Inquiry of the Immigration bureau after evaluation of the evidence.

The order said that under Section 37 of Republic Act 2711, only aliens could be the subject of deportation proceedings.

The order also cited a previous Supreme Court decision in the case of Chua Hiong vs. Deportation Board that a citizen is entitled “to live in peace, without molestation from any official or authority, and if he is disturbed by a deportation proceeding, he has the unquestionable right to resort to the courts for protection.”

Upon receipt of a copy of the BI order from Sy, PCCI chairman Miguel Varela said that PCCI welcomed the Immigration order, congratulated Sy and added that PCCI never doubted Sy’s Filipino citizenship.

Cas earlier asked the BI to deport Sy not only for falsifying public documents, but also for allegedly violating other local laws, such as the Anti-Dummy Law, the Immigration Act and the Corporation Code.

Sy, through several companies, allegedly controls PGMC and Global Ferronickel, a company listed at the Philippine Stock Exchange with a market capitalization of over P20 billion as of the end of January 2015.

Sy acts as officer-in-charge for mining of PCCI, the country’s biggest business association and an influential advocacy group.

The complaint said Sy filed an affidavit for late registration of his birth on December 28, 2007.

But Cas, through his lawyer Renny Domingo, said the entries in the affidavit, executed 41 years after Sy’s alleged birth on October 10, 1966, were “incredible” and “proven false.”

Domingo observed that “the only time in recent memory of the country that a group of people did not possess birth certificates for a certain period of time [was] during the 1970s with the discovery of the Tasaday Tribe” in Mindanao.

Domingo added there is no showing that respondent Sy belongs to the Tasaday Tribe it so that it is more likely that he belongs to a Chinese tribe.

In the affidavit, Sy claimed that he is the son of Filipino couple Emilio Toledo Sy and Aida Samson Cue who married on June 18, 1964, in Balanga, Bataan.

But Cas countered Sy’s claims by showing a certification from the Office of the Civil Registrar of Balanga.

In the certification, the Civil Registrar of Balanga attested that, while its archived records of marriages in 1964 are intact, it has “no record of marriage” between persons named Aida Samson Cue and Emilio Toledo Sy.

In Sy’s affidavit, he also gave an address, 31 Visayas Avenue, Upper Santa Lucia, Novaliches, Quezon City, as his place of birth.

However, Domingo said the given address has been “a vacant lot since 1901” or for more than a hundred years. Moreover, people in Sy’s alleged neighborhood do not know Sy or his alleged parents, he added.

Domingo also said he found it strange that, based on the BI records, Sy has been traveling in and out of the country since 2001, although he presumably did not have a birth certificate, which is a requirement in getting a passport.

Sy was eligible to get a birth certificate only after he had executed the affidavit for late registration of birth, Domingo pointed out.

The lawyer saidd the only plausible explanation that respondent Sy executed  [his affidavit] “is to obtain Philippine citizenship in the most speedy and expeditious way in order to be allowed to own shares in mining companies, the latter being a partly nationalized industry which limits foreign ownership to 40 percent.”

But as it turned out, the Immigration bureau brushed aside the allegations. On the issue of whether or not Sy has substantial claim to Philippine citizenship, the BI ruled in the affirmative.

It noted that inspite of the fact that Sy had a belatedly registered birth certificate, this still enjoys the presumption of validity.

The agency noted that in addition to relying on the presumption of validity of his birth certificate, other documents substantially establish his Philippine citizenship, such as Philippine passports, voter’s certification, driver’s license, a Chinese visa showing that he is not a Chinese national, among others.

The BIR also explained the importance and probative value of a Philippine passport, saying that it is an official document of identity of Philippine citizenship, citing the Administrative Code of 1987, and that although it issued for travel purposes, only a Philippine citizen may be issued a Philippine passport, this time citing The Philippine Passport Act of 1996.

It added that since a Philippine passport is a proclamation of the citizenship of a Filipino, it is a document that is superior to all other official document. Its superiority is such that even the cancellation or withdrawal of a Philippine passport by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs or any authorized consular office would not result in a loss of doubt on the person’s citizenship.

And unless the validity of the documents submitted by Sy (including his passport) are successfully challenged before competent authorities, then his claim to Philippine citizenship cannot be disturbed, the bureau stressed. After all, the status of a person (as a Filipino citizen) cannot be collaterally attacked, in this case, in deportation proceedings.

For comments, suggestions, observations, e-mail at [email protected].