Practice question
Ramon was a natural-born Filipino, later lost Philippine citizenship, and subsequently completed valid statutory repatriation of the kind considered in Bengson III v. HRET. An opponent argues that taking a repatriation oath necessarily makes him naturalized because he performed an act to regain citizenship. Which conclusion follows from the main decision?
- He remains an alien regardless of lawful repatriation.
- Repatriation restores his original natural-born status rather than necessarily converting him into a naturalized citizen.
- Any naturalized alien can become natural-born simply by calling an oath repatriation.
- Every act of documenting citizenship is legally identical to first naturalization.
- Only the place where the oath was taken determines his classification.
Legal references
- Bengson III v. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001, main decision, recovery of original status through repatriation: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/18/58613
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.