1. Discriminatory Nationality Laws
A population affected by statelessness in the Philippines are persons of Japanese descent who were born in the Philippines between the 1930’s and 1970’s (as well as their descendants). Previous discriminatory barriers that existed in the citizenship law of the Philippines limited the ability of Filipino mothers to transfer their nationality to their children that were born to Japanese fathers. Children were also unable to gain Japanese citizenship as administrative procedures requiring household registration were not met due to the impact of the Second World War (including the death of their father or deportation). The statelessness of this population has since been largely resolved. In August 2023, the Philippine government waived the fines (at times amounting to tens of thousands of dollars) previously imposed on the group as a result of decades of being deemed illegal residents, which have prevented many nikkei-jins, especially of the older generation, from being able to travel to Japan. As of September 2023, it is estimated that around 400-500 second generation nikkei-jins may still be left in the Philippines. Surveys and interviews for nikkeijins’ Japanese citizenship acquisition are planned to be conducted in early 2024.
Currently, there are calls to review Commonwealth Act No. (CA) 473 or the Revised Naturalization Law which provides for what is known as “derivative naturalization”. Under this law, any woman who is married to a citizen of the Philippines and who might herself be lawfully naturalized shall be deemed a citizen of the Philippines. Hence, an alien woman marrying a Filipino, native born or naturalized, becomes a Filipina by operation of law provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines under Section 4 of CA 473. Likewise, an alien woman married to an alien who is subsequently naturalized here follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his oath as a Filipino citizen, provided that she does not suffer from any of the disqualifications under said Section 4. Therefore, foreign women who are married to Philippine citizens do not need to prove that they possess other qualifications for naturalization at the time of their marriage nor do they have to submit themselves to judicial naturalization. There does not appear to be any law granting similar ability for Philippine women to confer nationality to a foreign spouse.
2. Lack of Legal Safeguards Against
Childhood Statelessness
In May 2022, the Philippines introduced a law providing that foundlings discovered in the Philippines and/or in Philippine embassies, consulates and territories abroad are to be presumed natural-born Filipino citizens. This law can have a notable impact due to its retroactive application on thousands of children registered as foundlings in the years prior to the enactment. As of December 2021, the Philippine Statistics Authority has recorded 6,580 certificates of foundlings. Given the retroactive nature of the foundling law, this would mean that at least 6,580 formerly stateless children are now considered natural-born citizens.
On September 9, 2022, the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) Secretary, Erwin T. Tulfo, and the National Authority for Child Care Undersecretary led the signing of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Republic Act No. 11767 or the Foundling Recognition and Protection Act. The IRR Act institutionalizes the process and mechanism to be followed once a foundling is discovered. Under the measure, diligent and exhaustive efforts must be undertaken in determining the foundling’s facts of birth and parentage through inter-agency cooperation and the use of quad-media. The IRR Act also recognizes foundlings as presumed natural-born citizens, and, thus, accorded all the inherent rights of being a Filipino, including the benefit of expedited adoption. However, there remains to be no explicit protection for stateless children (who are not foundlings) born in the Philippines to access citizenship through administrative proceedings, which are deemed to be much simpler, inexpensive, and more expeditious.
3. Citizenship Stripping
While the citizenship status of the majority of the population has been largely resolved, it has been reported that there remains a small number of persons of Indonesian descent who resided in the Philippines and were stripped of their Indonesian citizenship. Under the operation of Indonesia’s Law of the Republic of Indonesia on Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia (2006), persons residing outside of Indonesia for a period of more than five years without registration lost their Indonesian citizenship (with no inbuilt protection from statelessness). In 2006, Indonesia’s citizenship law was reformed to make sure that statelessness would no longer occur in this way and to offer those who had lost Indonesian nationality a way to reacquire it. However, a mapping study conducted by UNHCR and the governments of Indonesia and the Philippines in 2012 and 2013 revealed that more than 6,000 people of Indonesian descent still had undetermined nationality in the southern Philippines. The status of almost all identified population has been resolved, still leaving as many as 4,000 persons not reached or identified yet for the mapping of their citizenship status.
4. Administrative Barriers
Administrative and practical barriers to accessing birth registration have placed as many as 130,000 Sama Bajau (Bajut Laut) community members at risk of statelessness. As noted previously in our Malaysia chapter, the sea-faring populations’ semi-nomadic lifestyle and residence across the borders of multiple countries combined with their lack of civil registration documentation places them at risk of statelessness. Birth registration rates have been recorded to be as low as 38% in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao – compared to the reported national rate of 92% as of 2017 — with children in this region, especially those displaced due to armed conflict in the region at risk of statelessness. It must be noted that birth registration is not a mode of acquiring citizenship. Birth registration is evidence of citizenship. Birth certificates are accorded high evidentiary value and are a vital marker of identity3011, especially citizenship acquired by birth.
Philippine law provides that acts and events concerning the civil status of persons, including birth and nationality, must be recorded in the civil register, through the local civil registrar. Birth is registered upon the declaration of the physician or midwife in attendance at the birth or, in default thereof, the declaration of either parent of the newborn child. Such declaration is sent to the local civil registrar not later than 30 days after the birth, by the physician, or midwife in attendance at the birth or by either parent of the newly born child. One of the facts declared by such persons and contained in a birth certificate issued upon registration is the infant’s nationality. Upon registration, the local civil registrar issues the birth certificate, which already contains information regarding a person’s nationality, rather than a separate citizenship certificate. Birth registration is a prerequisite in acquiring a certification of a person’s citizenship, i.e., the birth certificate.
Philippine citizenship may be determined by birth on the basis of blood relationship. The Philippine Constitution provides that those whose father or mother are citizens of the Philippines or those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority, are Filipino citizens. A prima facie proof of a person’s filiation is his or her birth certificate. Therefore, while birth registration may not be vital in acquiring citizenship, it is a piece of supporting evidence of acquiring citizenship. Consequently, children with unregistered births are at risk of being stateless due to lack of evidence as to proof of their filiation.
