FACTS:

Jose Ong, Jr. won the congressional election for the second district of Northern Samar
was and was proclaimed the duly elected representative. The losing parties then filed an
election protest against Ong on the following grounds:

1. Not a natural born citizen of the Philippines;

2. Not a resident of the second district of Northern Samar

HRET declared that respondent Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born Filipino citizen and a
resident of Laoang, Northern Samar for voting purposes.

ISSUE: Whether or not HRET acted with grave abuse of discretion.

HELD: NO

ONG’s family history goes as follows:

 ONG TE (grandfather) arrived from China in 1895, established residence in

SAMAR and was able to obtain a CERTIFICATE OF RESIDENCE under the
Spanish Colonial Administration
o ONG TE qualified as a Filipino citizen under the PHILIPPINE BILL of
1902
 JOSE ONG CHUAN (father) was brought to the Philippines in 1905 and married a
natural born Filipina (mother)
o the CFI of Samar, after trial, declared JOSE ONG CHUAN a Filipino
Citizen

 JOSE ONG, JR. (respondent) was born in 1948, under the 1935 Constitution
 EMIL ONG (brother) was a delegate of the 1971 Constitutional Convention, which
affirmed his citizenship and other qualifications as a member of the said body

The SC held that Section 1(3), Article IV, which provides that those born of Filipino
mothers before the 1973 Constitution took effect, who elect Philippine citizenship
upon reaching the age of majority, shall be Filipino citizens applies to:

Those who elect Philippine citizenship before or after the 1973 Constitution took
effect

Moreover, persons who have exercised such right of election conferred by the 1935
Constitution shall be considered natural-born.

In this case, JOSE was born of a Filipino father and mother and, thus, there is no
question that he was a Filipino citizen
The SC also held that the “right of election” is both a formal and informal process.
The Court recognizes peculiar situations for those who cannot be expected to have
“elected” citizenship through by the filing of a sworn statement or formal declaration, as
they were already citizens and, thus, affirmed other acts of deliberate choice:

 Entering a profession open only to Filipinos

 Serving in public office where citizenship is a qualification
 Voting during election time
 Running for public office

In this case, even assuming that he was born merely to a Filipino mother under the
1935 Constitution and that he would have to elect or choose to be a natural-born
Filipino citizen, ONG still satisfied the requirement, even not expressly.

ONG exercised his right to vote, lived in the Philippines since birth and established a life
here, held sensitive positions in the government (Central Bank), exercised a profession
(CPA) reserved only to Filipinos, embraced the Philippine customs and values, and was
overwhelmingly voted for by his constituents

The “election” of Philippine citizenship presupposes that

a) the person electing is an alien or

b) his status is doubtful because he is a national of two countries

In this case, there is no doubt that ONG was a Filipino when he turned 21. Last but
not the least, the SC held that an attack of a person’s citizenship may only be done
through a direct action for its nullity. Thus, the attack on ONG TE’s citizenship
cannot stand.