G.R. No. 206916 - People vs. San Jose y Gregorio

On December 31, 2003, Ronald Allan Kelley Poe a.k.a. Fernando Poe, Jr. (respondent) filed his Certificate of Candidacy for President.
He declared under oath that he is a natural-born Filipino citizen, born on August 20, 1939 in Manila.

On January 9, 2004, Victorino X. Fornier (petitioner) filed a verified petition to cancel respondent’s Certificate of Candidacy under Section 78, Omnibus Election Code.
Grounds alleged by petitioner:

Respondent’s father, Allan F. Poe, was a Spanish citizen; his grandfather was Spanish, thus the father never was Filipino.
Respondent was born out of wedlock (parents married September 16, 1940, one year after his birth), rendering him illegitimate and following his American mother’s citizenship.

Petitioner offered as exhibits: birth certificates, alleged marriage contract of Allan Poe and Paulita Gomez, affidavits, and Archive Office certifications.

On January 16, 2004, respondent denied all material allegations, insisting he is a natural-born Filipino citizen by jus sanguinis.
He presented:

Certified true copies of his own birth certificate and his parents’ marriage contract showing Filipino citizenship of his father.
Death certificate of grandfather Lorenzo Pou stating him as Filipino.
Certificates and records of his father’s and grandfather’s residency, land titles, tax declarations, and military service records evincing Filipino citizenship.
A declaration by respondent’s aunt attesting to paternity and legitimacy.

Held it had jurisdiction under Section 78, Omnibus Election Code, to cancel a certificate of candidacy for false material representation.
Found petitioner’s evidence not substantial or convincing to show respondent’s citizenship claim was false.
Provisional finding: grandfather and father were Filipino by operation of law (Treaty of Paris, Philippine Bill of 1902, jus sanguinis).
Concluded respondent did not commit a material misrepresentation; his Certificate of Candidacy was proper.

Denied motion for reconsideration for lack of merit.
Reiterated that Section 78 requires only proof that a material representation is false, not proof of intent to mislead.
Affirmed dismissal because petitioner failed to show respondent was not a natural-born citizen.

G.R. No. 161434 (Tecson et al.) and G.R. No. 161634 (Velez): petitions directly invoking original jurisdiction under Article VII, Section 4(7) of the Constitution to disqualify respondent Poe as presidential candidate.
G.R. No. 161824 (Fornier): petition under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 assailing the COMELEC En Banc resolution for grave abuse of discretion.

Do G.R. Nos. 161434 and 161634 invoke a ripe controversy or are they premature?
Does this Court have original jurisdiction under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 to review the COMELEC En Banc resolution in G.R. No. 161824?

Does the COMELEC have authority to deny due course to or cancel the certificate of candidacy of a presidential candidate under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code?

What constitutes a material representation in a certificate of candidacy under Section 78?
Must there be proof of deliberate intent to mislead to cancel a certificate of candidacy?

Is respondent Poe a natural-born citizen under the applicable law at the time of his birth (1939)?
Is an illegitimate child of a Filipino father and alien mother a natural-born Filipino citizen?
Did respondent Poe’s undocumented paternity preclude his qualification as a natural-born citizen?