citizenship in the philippines essay

• Subscribe Now

Philippine citizenship: From jus soli to jus sanguinis

Already have Rappler+? Sign in to listen to groundbreaking journalism.

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

The recent Supreme Court decision on Grace Poe has made many legal minds raise the question of whether or not they still knew the law as they had learned it in law school. Although the High Court’s decision is acceptable to a majority of the electorate as a recent survey reveals, many lawyers find it hard to accept the decision, which they believe throws the book on citizenship out the window. For instance, that foundlings are presumed natural-born Filipinos is unprecedented. This case reminds us that citizenship is not a static, but rather a dynamic, political concept. New legislation may be enacted – such as, in 2003, RA 9225, “An Act Making the Citizenship of Philippine Citizens Who Acquire Foreign Citizenship Permanent” – which changes the rules of political membership. But the law need not be changed for a different reading to surface. The same law can be interpreted differently under a new set of circumstances. Today, we take it for granted that the Philippines follows the principle of jus sanguinis (law of the blood) to determine citizenship, but in the first half of the 20th century, the principle of jus soli (law of the soil) was once regnant. In fact, the 1899 Malolos Constitution enunciated jus soli as the principle of citizenship, declaring that Filipinos included “all persons born on Filipino territory.” Malolos was remarkably inclusive. However, the US military invasion of the Philippines truncated the Malolos Republic and left no opportunity to probe its tenets on citizenship before a court of law. The invention of Philippine citizenship came with the Philippine Bill of 1902, signed into law on July 1, 1902, to become the country’s “first organic act.” Section 4 stipulated that the “inhabitants” of the Philippine Islands who were Spanish subjects on April 11, 1899, the date when the Treaty of Paris was proclaimed as duly ratified by both Spain and the United States, became “citizens of the Philippine Islands” (unless one opted for Spanish nationality). Philippine citizenship was a direct successor to Spanish subjecthood. The diverse populations in the country at that time thus acquired Philippine citizenship, a political status they could pass on to their children – suggesting jus sanguinis as one of the means to determine Philippine citizenship.

The Supreme Court first enunciated jus soli citizenship in the case of Benito Muñoz, who was born in Camalig, Albay, on January 17, 1880. Muñoz was denied admission in January 1911 as he returned to the Philippines from China, where his Chinese father and Filipina mother had sent him when he was 11 years old.

Muñoz asserted he was a “native and citizen” of the Philippines and “presented satisfactory proof that he would have returned sooner to the Philippine Islands had it not been for certain financial difficulties, and that he had never intended to expatriate himself and had never taken any active steps to that end.”

The Court ruled on November 23, 1911, that Muñoz was a Philippine citizen. The Court also emphasized that Muñoz, who stayed in China for some twenty years until he was 31 years old, had the “honest” intention to return to the Philippines (“the animus revertendi existed”). Tranquilino Roa, who was born in Luculan, Mindanao, on July 6, 1889, was similarly denied entry as he returned to the Philippines from China in October 1910.

Roa’s father went to China in 1895 and died there 5 years later. His “Filipina” mother later sent him to China to study “and always with the intention of returning” to the Philippines, which he did in 1910 before he reached his 21st birthday.

In its October 30, 1912 decision, the Supreme Court declared Roa a citizen of the Philippine Islands “and never having expatriated himself, he still remains a citizen of this country.” We note that in these two cases, being in a foreign country did not mean expatriation. The Supreme Court’s decision on Roa’s case advanced an interpretation of Section 4 of the Philippine Bill that “the doctrine or principle of citizenship by place of birth which prevails in the United States was extended to the Philippine Islands, but with limitations.” The Court argued that Section 4 “must be read according to its spirit and intent….It is to be given that construction which best comports with the principles of reason and justice.” The Court cited approvingly a previous US Supreme Court decision that “no principle has been more repeatedly announced by the judicial tribunals of the country, and more constantly acted upon, than that the leaning, in questions of citizenship, should always be in favor of the claimant of it.” Following this principle, the Supreme Court of the Philippines espoused a compassionate reading of Section 4 of the Philippine Bill. It asserted that to construe this provision as preventing Roa’s return to the Philippines “would have the effect of excluding the appellant from his native country, from home and all that home means, from his mother, brothers, and sisters, and compel him to live in practically a strange country and among strange people.”

The Court suggested that, in addition to birth in the territory, personal sentiments and affection and familial ties were implicated in the principle of political belonging.

Wong Kim Ark The Filipino and American justices of the Supreme Court exemplified liberality throughout the period of US colonial rule. The case decisions indicate that they were drawing from the “activist” or “reformist” edge of the US Supreme Court, exemplified in its March 1898 decision on the case of Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco in 1873 of Chinese parents who, although legal migrants, were ineligible for naturalization. The Court’s recognition of Wong’s US citizenship contradicted the prevailing public sentiment and anti-Sinicism that were fueling the Chinese Exclusion Laws at the time. The landmark case of Wong Kim Ark exerted a powerful jurisprudential influence on the Philippine Supreme Court, its invocation made all the more stark by the parallel exclusion laws that immigrants confronted in both the Philippines and the United States. The force of this jurisprudence moved justices in the Philippines to uphold “the principles of reason and justice” by insisting on the extension of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Philippines as the spirit of the law. The High Court thus contradicted the earlier stance of the US Congress and the executive branch, particularly the Bureau of Insular Affairs of the War Department. In the convention that was called to draft the 1935 Constitution there was spirited debate on the two principles of citizenship. Advocates of jus sanguinis raised the specter of those born in the country of foreign parentage who would use Philippine citizenship to steal the “national patrimony.” One’s real political sentiments, it was believed, resided “in the blood,” which gave one a set of immutable personal as well as political characteristics. The 1935 Charter enshrined jus sanguinis .

Sea change The tide of legal opinion was undergoing a sea change, which would culminate in 1947, when the Supreme Court closed Tan Chong’s case. Records indicate that Jose Tan Chong was born in San Pablo, Laguna, in July 1915, of a “Chinese” father named Tan Chong Hong and a “Filipino” mother named Antonia Mangahis. His parents took him to China in 1925 when he was 10 years old, and he returned to the Philippines on January 25, 1940, when he was 24 years old. He was denied entry for being a Chinese citizen, a decision affirmed by the Secretary of Labor who ordered his deportation. On October 15, 1941 the Supreme Court – with an all-Filipino bench but still under US jurisdiction – affirmed the judgment of the lower court that Tan Chong, “having been born in the Philippines before the approval of our [1935] Constitution, of a Chinese father and a Filipino mother, is a Filipino citizen.” The Court also noted that Tan Chong’s delayed return to the Philippines was due to “his father [who] would not allow him to come, and he did not have the means to pay for his transportation back to the Philippines until the date of his return.”

A week after the Court issued its decision, the solicitor general filed a motion for reconsideration, contending that Tan Chong was not a citizen based on the laws at the time of his birth. The war intervened before the case could be resolved, destroying the records that had to be reconstituted in 1946. On September 16, 1947, the Supreme Court – now of the formally independent Republic of the Philippines – proceeded to resolve the prewar motion for reconsideration.

It admitted: “In a long line of decisions, this Court has held that the principle of jus soli applies in this jurisdiction.” But after providing a different reading of previous case decisions, it proceeded to assert, “While birth is an important element of citizenship, it alone does not make a person a citizen of the country of his birth.” Jose Tan Chong, then 32 years old, was declared not a citizen of the Philippines. One could only speculate that, had the case been resolved prior to the war, Tan Chong would have been declared a Filipino citizen. In 1947, the Supreme Court argued that the US tenet of jus soli embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment was never extended to the Philippines. It rendered a different reading of Section 4 of the Philippine Bill of 1902 as amended in 1912. Reinterpreting the same legal texts but in a different context, the Supreme Court abandoned jus soli . The book on citizenship that had been in use was thrown out of the window. Jus sanguinis has since been the regnant principle in Philippine citizenship. But as this highly condensed history suggests, invoking “the principles of reason and justice” does not occur in a vacuum. Whatever is deemed absolute about citizenship holds only for a given time and place. It is open to change given the predominating spirit of the times. – Rappler.com

Photo of Filomeno V. Aguilar Jr from the Ateneo de Manila University website Filomeno V. Aguilar Jr is professor in the Department of History and Project Director at the Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC), both in the School of Social Sciences, Ateneo de Manila University. An extended discussion may be found in Between the Letter and Spirit of the Law: Ethnic Chinese and Philippine Citizenship by Jus Soli, 1899-1947 published in Southeast Asian Studies, vol. 49, no. 3 (2011): 431–463.

Add a comment

Please abide by Rappler's commenting guidelines .

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

How does this make you feel?

Related Topics

Recommended stories, {{ item.sitename }}, {{ item.title }}.

Checking your Rappler+ subscription...

Upgrade to Rappler+ for exclusive content and unlimited access.

Why is it important to subscribe? Learn more

You are subscribed to Rappler+

Becoming a Citizen of the Philippines: A Comprehensive Guide

• August 30, 2023
• Housearch Team

Living in the Philippines seems like heaven: majestic tropical islands, inviting waters, and delightful weather throughout the year. Locals are warm and friendly, with English serving as a co-official language, facilitating communication for most. The allure extends to quality education and healthcare, a swiftly advancing economy, and a rich tapestry of culture and heritage. Unsurprisingly, a growing number of individuals from foreign shores aspire to embrace Philippine citizenship. 

How to Stay in the Philippines

Pros and cons of philippine citizenship, citizenship by birth and by descent, citizen by naturalisation, citizenship by marriage, reacquiring philippine citizenship, other kinds of citizenship, who is barred from naturalisation.

At first glance, the process may appear straightforward. The nation's legal framework and governmental policies extend a remarkably warm welcome to foreign visitors. Tourists hailing from 157 countries enjoy the privilege of entering the Philippines without the need for a visa, granting them a 30-day stay. To prolong this period, one can exit and re-enter the country, effectively renewing the 30-day allowance. This process can be repeated multiple times, affording flexibility to travellers.

For those who find the prospect of monthly trips impractical, an alternative exists in the form of extending the visa-free stay through the immigration office. This avenue does not require additional documentation, yet it does entail a cost and comes with a stipulated time frame. Initially, a one-month extension is possible, followed by the option to prolong your stay for up to six months. In aggregate, a maximum three-year extension is permissible. For those with intentions of a longer stay, the process involves departing the country and subsequently reinitiating the procedure upon return.

Individuals who extend their stay in the Philippines beyond 59 days are issued an identification card known as the Alien Certificate of Registration Identity Card (ACR I-Card). This card essentially serves as a substitute for the passport within the nation's borders, and it offers additional opportunities, including the ability to initiate a local bank account.

Cebu Business Park, Cebu City. Photo: Zany Jadraque (Unsplash)

This naturally prompts the question: why would one consider acquiring Filipino citizenship, given the country's evident hospitality toward foreigners? Nevertheless, there exist compelling reasons to pursue a Philippine passport.

Firstly, a tourist visa does not grant the authorization to engage in employment or establish a business within the country. While this might not pose an issue for those working remotely, individuals aiming to tap into the burgeoning Philippine market would be wise to contemplate pursuing citizenship.

Secondly, obtaining citizenship provides access to an array of social services, including an extensive healthcare system and a State-backed education framework. For certain individuals, a pivotal consideration is the privilege to cast their vote and engage in political proceedings. For others, a sense of belonging to the local community holds significance, while some simply appreciate the relief from the ongoing obligation of extending their stay.

However, the pursuit of a certificate of nationality in the Philippines remains relatively uncommon among foreigners. Primarily, this is due to the country's legal stipulation, which imposes a cap of fifty immigrants per country annually for applying for Filipino citizenship. Consequently, possessing a less frequently encountered nationality becomes an advantageous aspect.

Furthermore, the power of the Filipino passport is limited. It facilitates visa-free entry to just 34 countries, and for an additional 42 countries, a landing visa is required.

Another drawback pertains to varying property ownership rights based on the type of Philippine citizenship. Individuals who acquire citizenship through naturalisation rather than by birth are prohibited from owning land or maintaining a controlling stake in companies involved in the exploitation of the country's natural resources.

 Manila. Photo: Dayanara Nacion (Unsplash)

The regulations governing Philippine citizenship underwent a profound transformation following the country's attainment of independence. Prior to 1946, during the era of colonial reliance on the USA, the Philippine nationality law accorded priority to the jus soli principle, granting citizenship to all those born within the nation's borders. Subsequently, a shift to the jus sanguinis principle occurred, which remains in effect today. According to this principle, any individual born to at least one parent who holds Filipino citizenship is automatically conferred Philippine citizenship from birth.

Abandoned children found in the country are considered natural-born citizens of the Philippines.

Offspring born abroad to Filipino citizens acquire Philippine citizenship by virtue of birth and have the option to pass it on to their own children. Either parents or medical personnel are responsible for submitting a report of overseas birth to the Philippine consulate. Failure to complete this procedure prior to the child reaching legal adulthood necessitates the parents or legal guardians to notarize a birth certificate, a prerequisite for obtaining a Philippine passport.

Although the current preference leans towards the jus sanguinis principle, it doesn't nullify the jus soli concept entirely. In the Philippines, a child born to foreign citizens can apply for Philippine citizenship upon reaching 18 years of age. This application necessitates the provision of a domestic birth certificate.

El Nido. Photo: Alejandro Luengo (Unsplash)

To attain naturalised Filipino citizenship, the following criteria must be met:

• Be 21 years old or older.
• Maintain residency in the country for a minimum of 10 years.
• Possess adequate financial resources to sustain oneself.
• Demonstrate high moral standards, actively integrate into Filipino society, and adhere to the fundamental principles of the Philippine Constitution.
• Acquire basic knowledge of English or Spanish and any of the Filipino languages.

If you have minor children, they must go to the school where history of the Philippines, constitution and social studies are a part of the curriculum.

The 10-year residency requirement is reduced to five years if the citizenship applicant:

• Holds employment with the Government of the Philippines.
• Has made substantial contributions to the economy or scientific achievements, such as pioneering a new industry or introducing a valuable innovation in the Philippines.
• Is married to a Filipina woman (this does not apply to foreign women married to Filipino men).
• Has taught in a public school or an accredited private school in the Philippines for two years. The school must not be exclusively teaching children of a particular nationality or race.
• Was born in the Philippines.

In all instances except for the last scenario, the acquisition of Filipino citizenship is achieved through a judicial process. To initiate this, the applicant must lodge an application with a Regional Trial Court situated in the province of their residence for the preceding 12 months. Conversely, those born within the country can secure citizenship solely through the submission of an application.

A maximum of fifty individuals from any given country are eligible to receive a certificate of naturalisation annually. During the selection process, candidates undergo an assessment, and their applications are subject to review by the naturalisation committee. This committee consists of the Solicitor General, who assumes the role of chairman, alongside the Foreign Affairs Minister or their designated representative, as well as the National Security Advisor.

Upon approval of the application, the candidate will be required to take an oath of allegiance to the Philippine Constitution and renounce their prior citizenship. Nevertheless, the enforcement of the latter requirement is notably flexible and is frequently viewed as optional.

  Cebu. Photo: Ralph Olazo (Unsplash)

In actuality, this citizenship is achieved through naturalisation. Registering a marriage to a Filipino citizen grants the sole privilege of lawful indefinite residence within the country. For a foreign woman wedded to a Filipino man, fulfilling the prerequisites for citizenship necessitates a residence of ten years. Conversely, foreign men married to Filipino women need only reside for five years to meet the eligibility criteria.

Please be aware that divorce is exclusively applicable to immigrants. The law prohibits Philippine citizens from obtaining a divorce.

Presently, Philippine legislation has introduced a more lenient approach to dual citizenship. In 2003, the country enacted Republic Act No. 9225, commonly referred to as the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act. According to this statute, individuals who were originally born as Filipino citizens, underwent naturalisation in another country, and renounced their Philippine citizenship, now have the option to either retain or reacquire their citizenship. This can be accomplished by pledging allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines before a foreign consul of the Philippines. Subsequently, they are issued a Philippine passport and can fully enjoy the array of civil, economic, and political rights bestowed upon Filipino citizens.

Unmarried minor children, regardless of their legitimacy or adoption status, can be included in the parent's application for the retention or reacquisition of Philippine citizenship, thereby becoming eligible to obtain a Philippine passport.

Photo: Rainier Ridao (Unsplash)

On occasion, the Philippines may issue passports to individuals who showcase exceptional prowess in fields such as science, sports, or the arts, provided that their contributions prove beneficial to the Republic.

Acquiring Philippine citizenship through investments is not feasible. While various programs offer long-term residency permits for investors, the path to citizenship requires a process of naturalisation.

Individuals falling within the following categories are ineligible for naturalisation as Filipino citizens:

• Those who oppose the government or maintain connections with organisations or individuals that oppose the government.
• Those who advocate or endorse violence, personal transgressions, or homicide as means to achieve personal objectives.
• Those who practise polygamy.
• Those who have been convicted of a crime constituting moral turpitude.
• Those who have been diagnosed with a mental or incurable contagious disease.
• Those who, during their residency, have not assimilated into Filipino society or have not demonstrated a genuine commitment to learning and embracing the traditions and values of Philippine citizens.
• Those who are citizens of a nation currently in conflict with the USA and the Philippines.
• Those who are citizens of a nation that prohibits the naturalisation of Philippine citizens.

The Democratizing Function of Citizenship in the Philippines

Cite this chapter.

• Maria Serena I. Diokno  

57 Accesses

2 Citations

Citizenship and democracy have traditionally been viewed as positive values in the Philippines. Even during the martial law regime, the dictatorship took pains to adopt the language, symbolism and paraphernalia of democracy in order to sanitize authoritarian rule or, at best, to make it appear as Asia’s home-grown version of democracy. The power of the people put an end to martial rule, thus highlighting the value of democracy. It is interesting, though, that the exercise of this power has not been widely viewed as an exercise of citizenship.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

Alastair Davidson ( Professor of Citizenship Studies ) ( Professor of Citizenship Studies )

Centre for Urban and Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

Kathleen Weekley ( Research Fellow ) ( Research Fellow )

Copyright information

© 1999 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Diokno, M.S.I. (1999). The Democratizing Function of Citizenship in the Philippines. In: Davidson, A., Weekley, K. (eds) Globalization and Citizenship in the Asia-Pacific. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230377080_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230377080_8

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-40701-9

Online ISBN : 978-0-230-37708-0

eBook Packages : Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies Collection Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy .

Citizenship in the time of pandemic

CAMP Aguinaldo—For the past three months, contemporary life as we know it has been turned upside down. Segments of our society were pushed to the edge in an unprecedented crisis that has exposed the deep crevasses in our society, particularly in our government institutions.

The spread of COVID-19 is a vicious test of the resilience of our government institutions, the capacity of the people in power to run this fragile system, and the capability of the Filipino people to make them accountable.

With local governments at the epicenter of government response, people saw how local executives performed (or underperformed) in response to the spread of the virus. Many are now convinced more than ever that able executives are crucial in responding to situations of great emergency.

In Metro Manila and other urban centers, these able executives utilized the autonomy granted them by the Local Government Code to make sure their constituents were safe not just from COVID-19, but more so from the ill effects of the mandatory quarantine. Unfortunately, not all local governments have these able executives.

On the other hand, the need for investments in mechanisms of public health that can easily be activated in situations of public health emergency has been highlighted. Efficient testing and contact tracing are two crucial elements in arresting the spread of a highly contagious pathogen, and it seems the health department can do so much better in this regard.

On a positive note, we have seen the primary asset of our society—a vibrant civil society—in action. Despite being locked up, the exercise of civil liberties was on display as citizens took to social media and observed every step the government took in trying to arrest the spread of COVID-19.

Moreover, we saw how sectors of civil society stepped up to help the government and those who were in need: big businesses mobilized their resources to provide assistance, religious organizations did what they could to help affected communities, a team of fashion designers designed reusable personal protective equipment for frontliners, and random Facebook groups popped up to help vulnerable groups such as jeepney drivers who had lost their source of livelihood due to the quarantine.

These initiatives, among many others, were a testament to the strength of our civil society.

The Asian Development Bank, in a policy brief published in 2013, named the Philippines’ civil society as “some of the most vibrant and advanced in the world… The basis for civil society comes from the Filipino concepts of pakikipagkapwa (holistic interaction with others) and kapwa (shared inner self). Voluntary assistance or charity connotes for Filipinos an equal status between the provider of assistance and the recipient, which is embodied in the terms damayan (assistance of peers in periods of crisis) and pagtutulungan (mutual self-help).”

Nevertheless, civil society and/or private sector cannot work on the pandemic fight alone. They need the government to be at the helm of effective decision-making to make sure that no efforts go to waste in fighting this invisible enemy.

Experts say this new normal could last up to two years until a vaccine is found. One thing that offers hope in this situation is the suggestion by one study that people’s tolerance for reckless government decision-making declines after a society emerges out of a pandemic.

Here’s hoping that Filipinos will remember the time when the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on their lives, as they cast their ballots in May 2022.

P2Lt. Jesse Angelo L. Altez is a member of the Corps of Professors, Armed Forces of the Philippines. He is a recipient of the Asian Development Bank-Japan Scholarship and obtained a master’s degree in public policy from the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo. The views expressed here are entirely his own and do not represent the position of the AFP.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

React on Twitter: @AngeloAltez

For more news about the novel coronavirus click here. What you need to know about Coronavirus. For more information on COVID-19, call the DOH Hotline: (02) 86517800 local 1149/1150.

The Inquirer Foundation supports our healthcare frontliners and is still accepting cash donations to be deposited at Banco de Oro (BDO) current account #007960018860 or donate through PayMaya using this link .

Fearless views on the news

Disclaimer: Comments do not represent the views of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments which are inconsistent with our editorial standards. FULL DISCLAIMER

© copyright 1997-2024 inquirer.net | all rights reserved.

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.

• Previous Issue
• Previous Article
• Next Article

Introduction and Historical Context

Colonial period, post-world war ii, martial law, post-martial law, critical approach, service learning framework, traditional framework, critical framework, challenges and opportunities ahead, summary and conclusion, (re)framing citizenship education in the philippines: a twenty-first century imperative.

Genejane Adarlo is a full-time PhD student at the University of Hong Kong. She has been Assistant Professor and Associate Director of the Health Sciences Program at the School of Science and Engineering of Ateneo de Manila University in Manila, Philippines. Her research interests include comparative education, volunteerism, global citizenship, and service learning in health and education.

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Genejane Monroy Adarlo; (Re)framing Citizenship Education in the Philippines: A Twenty-First Century Imperative. The Good Society 1 September 2016; 25 (2-3): 256–288. doi: https://doi.org/10.5325/goodsociety.25.2-3.0256

Download citation file:

• Reference Manager

In this era of globalization when local issues have global implications and global concerns manifest locally, traditional citizenship education aimed toward national unity and consciousness is no longer relevant. Thus, for nation-states such as the Philippines, there is a growing need to incorporate a global dimension to citizenship education. In this paper, I discuss salient points in the history of the Philippines to help the reader understand the trajectories of the Filipinos as a nation. I then identify the challenges to educate Filipinos to the civic demands of the twenty-first century and consider the value of a critical approach to citizenship education in acting against the legacies of colonization, dictatorship, and neoliberalism. Finally, I explore service learning in (re)framing citizenship education in the Philippines, highlighting the importance of reciprocity and critical reflection to bring about a citizenry committed to social transformation.

Many nation-states across the world are confronted to (re)frame citizenship education. The traditional practice of citizenship education for national unity and consciousness seems no longer sufficient in the twenty-first century because as Beck and Beck-Gernsheim point out, there are “new demands, controls, and constraints [that] are being imposed on individuals.” 1 Globalization, which encompasses economic, technological, social, and cultural changes worldwide, continues to characterize the new millennium. 2 As the globalizing world becomes increasingly integrated and interconnected due to time-space compression, 3 our interdependencies have turned global, while our actions have remained localized. 4 Despite the benefits of globalization, neoliberalism—with its emphasis on global capitalism and market-led solutions—has, for the most part, negatively impacted humanity, perpetuating oppressive relations not only at local levels but also on a global scale. Thus, “[t]here is a search,” as conveyed by Clarence, “for a notion of citizenship that empowers individuals to effectively participate in decisions, which impact upon their lives.” 5

Recently, the Philippines underwent curricular reforms to better prepare its students for a rapidly globalizing world: that is, its ten-year basic education has been shifted to a K–12 format while the general education curriculum in the higher education unit has been streamlined toward liberal arts education. Aside from responding to the demands of a knowledge-based economy, the curricular reforms seek to educate Filipinos as citizens who can maximize the benefits of globalization and counter its negative repercussions on humanity and the environment. Poverty alleviation, environmental sustainability, disaster preparedness, and peace in conflict are among many pressing issues facing the country; as such, citizenship education is specifically envisioned to develop in individuals the civic capacities to respond to both local issues with global implications and global concerns that manifest locally.

In this article, relevant moments in the history of the Philippines are presented to provide context. Their implications for citizenship education are discussed, as well as the insights they offer into the trajectories shaping the country as a nation. The following section examines the value of a critical approach to education in light of the civic identity and sense of agency required of Filipinos to act against the legacies of colonization, dictatorship, and neoliberalism. Then service learning is explored as a way to (re)frame citizenship education in the Philippines, highlighting the importance of reciprocity and critical reflection to bring about a citizenry committed to social transformation. Finally, challenges to educate Filipinos to the civic demands of the twenty-first century are identified alongside a discussion of how these challenges might be turned into opportunities to (re)frame citizenship education in the Philippines.

The Philippines, for a significant part of its history as a nation, was colonized by the West: Spain from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century and the United States of America during the first half of the twentieth century. It gained its full independence after the Second World War, becoming one of the original member nation-states of the United Nations in 1945. However, today the Philippines continues to struggle as a nation—it underwent a difficult period of dictatorship and now must confront a rapidly globalizing world.

Despite official independence from colonizers, Spain and the United States left an imprint on social, cultural, and political practices in the Philippines. Education during the Spanish era was conducted mainly to propagate Christianity, 6 resulting not only in the adoption of the Catholic faith as the nation's predominant religion, but also in establishing hundreds of Catholic schools throughout the country's three regions. 7 But education at that time was only for an elite few who had the means to send their children to schools in the capital or in Europe. 8 Education during the U.S. era, on the other hand, was characterized by the introduction of a public schooling system, making basic education accessible across social classes, establishing English as a medium of instruction, and instilling democratic values and thinking. 9

Noticeably in both eras, education was used as a tool to control the Philippine colony as it became a structured system for the colonizers to assert authority over their territory. 10 Spain prevented the majority of Filipinos from receiving an education pertaining to anything other than religion so that the masses, subjugated through religious conversion, remained ill-informed to question their authority. 11 The United States, on other hand, offered universal schooling so as to gain the trust of the people through their acts of benevolence. 12 Although Filipinos welcomed the American democratic structure, 13 the sine qua non was that under the American schooling system, Filipinos were (mis)educated as good colonial subjects so that they might support an American version of conquest 14 and a corresponding U.S. desire for the Philippines to act as a semblance of imperial power in the Pacific area. 15

As a result of this colonial history and imperial past, a colonial mentality has obscured the social identity of Filipinos. 16 Societal devaluation and negative attitudes toward self and in-group members is common. 17 For example, Ningas kugon (lack of perseverance), bahala na attitude (leaving to God's care the final outcome of a decision), and mañana habit (procrastination) are cultural traits that have been ascribed to the Filipino people by colonizers. 18

Similar to other sovereign states, the formation of the nation-state after the Second World War became a ground for (legal) citizenship in the Philippines. It signified membership status within the nation-state's boundaries, 19 cultivating a national identity that was Filipino because a state and its citizens acquire their identity simultaneously. 20 Such civic identity is not only personal but also relational between an individual and the state since rights and responsibilities come along with (legal) membership in a political community. 21

Alongside gaining its status as a nation-state, the Philippines holds sovereignty to plan, decree, and enact its national development. In the postwar period, educational reforms, among others, were instituted to support infrastructure rehabilitation, economic development, social progress, national unity and consciousness, and shared values. 22 Civic education ( Table 1 ) was accordingly geared toward building the nation, including character development for a democratic citizenship that promotes peace, liberty, and justice. 23

Civic Education in the Philippines at Different Periods

Hierarchical relations, however, are detrimental to the Philippines as a nation. According to Zialcita, hierarchy “negates the very notion that all persons should have the right to express their thoughts and feelings without fear of duress and that they should be consulted on matters affecting them.” 24 In many ways, it not only hinders the democratic processes, but also instigates a relational approach that is top-down.

Efforts to build the nation were also not without struggles. Armed conflicts with Muslims in Mindanao and communist movements, among others, brought the country into a period of political instability that served as a justification for then President Ferdinand Marcos to declare Martial Law in 1972. Amidst attempts to restore the “political, social, economic, legal, and moral foundations of [the] existing government,” 25 the Armed Forces of the Philippines was directed to suppress insurrection and rebellion at all costs as well as to enforce the obedience of citizens to the laws, orders, and regulations of the state. All educational institutions were also mandated to reinstate public order and promote national development via civic education ( Table 1 ) that stressed love of country through personal development, economic productivity, and abidance to laws. 26 The school system, as Claude describes, “became propaganda mouthpieces for the regime.” 27 Curricula and textbooks did not only emphasize the achievements of Marcos but also omitted heinous details about martial law. 28

A reconstructed Philippine society did not come about under martial law. Instead of social progress, the dictatorial rule of Marcos was marked by oligarchy and patronage, which widened the gap between the rich and the poor. The country's income inequality remained high at a Gini coefficient of 0.50 29 as monopolies and industry cartels were favored over individuals, families, and groups; these groups made use of their power to maintain their privileged status, and businesses of cronies were heavily protected by the Marcos administration. 30

Amidst the growing incidence of poverty in the country, the Marcos family amassed ill-gotten wealth and flaunted a lavish lifestyle. 31 Media was censored to silence dissenting opinions and exposés. 32 Human rights violations also became rampant during martial law as abduction, torture, and extrajudicial killings were used to clamp down political opposition. 33 Because of these sociopolitical realities, there was a growing discontent among Filipinos.

Nevertheless, a sense of nationhood emerged at this time. Youth movements for students' rights and against the dictatorial rule under the martial law brought civic learning outside the classroom. 34 A series of retaliations against those who openly opposed the dictatorship, such as the 1983 assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr., and mounting social unrest from the alleged win of Marcos during snap elections fueled a collective awareness that culminated in the People Power Revolution in 1986. 35 Heeding the call to gather at EDSA (the capital's main thoroughfare) to safeguard the soldiers rebelling against Marcos, a multitude of Filipinos from various socioeconomic classes and sectors of society came together to support a collective political action to undermine the legitimacy of the dictatorship. 36 For days, they “sat and slept and ate and prayed on EDSA, the main highway in front of the military camps,” until Marcos vacated his office at Malacañang Palace and fled to Hawaii in exile. 37

inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and personal discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden scientific and technological knowledge, and promote vocational efficiency. 39

Although spontaneous, the sense of nationhood and the feeling of solidarity that emerged during the People Power Revolution were transient. 40 A nationwide survey showed that ties with family or clan, ethnic groups, local communities, and the Church were more significant for Filipinos than fervent allegiance to the nation-state. 41 As a result of these diverse affiliations within the nation-state, a sense of oneness as a Philippine nation is weak, and the concept of national identity has been amorphous. 42 This makes the Philippines vulnerable, as Banlaoi describes, in “having to face globalization [and] at the same time undergoing the painful process of nation-building in a highly diverse society.” 43

Educational efforts to rid Phillippine society of the ill-effects of the dictatorship as yet have not sufficed. Decades after the Martial Law, Filipinos still lack the solidarity to challenge the structural injustices that have resulted from an increased disparity between the rich and the poor in the country. 44 Democracy and ideas of citizenship in the Philippines have been shaped by a history of authoritarianism and oligarchy. 45 Thus, instead of taking an active role in deciding matters that affect the broader community, Filipinos, as reported in a survey of contemporary Philippine values, expect their government leaders to solve societal problems. 46

Today there is an increasing need to (re)frame citizenship education in the country because, as the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) emphasizes, Filipinos have to be prepared “to live meaningfully in a complex, rapidly changing and globalized world while engaging [in] their community and the nation's development issues and concerns.” 47 In response to this realization, CHED mandates that civic education be incorporated in different subjects at various academic levels ( Table 2 ), emphasizing the importance of understanding oneself, others, and the world in acquiring the prosocial values and skills necessary for Filipinos to confront the challenges of the twenty-first century. This includes empowering Filipinos as individuals, who can “transform others and oneself” as part of local and global communities, 48 and whose “perspectives [are] grounded in home realities and securely anchored on a sense of personal and national identity and self-understanding.” 49

Civic Learning in the Philippines from Basic to Higher Education

“Standards and competencies for five-year old Filipino children,” Department of Education [DepEd] , http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/page/2014/Final%20Kindergarten%20CG%20December%202013.pdf

“K to 12 gabay pangkurikulum: Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao Baitang 1-10,” DepEd , http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/Edukasyon%20sa%20Pagpapakatao%20Curriculum%20Guide%20Grade%201-10.pdf

“K to 12 gabay pangkurikulum: Araling Panlipunan Baitang 1-10,” DepEd , http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/Araling%20Panlipunan%20Grades%20%201-10%2001.17.2014%20edited%20March%2025%202014.pdf

“Pambungad sa pilosopiya ng tao,” DepEd , http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/SHS%20Core_Pambungad%20sa%20Pilosopiya%20ng%20Tao%20CG.pdf

“Personal development,” DepEd , http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/SHS%20Core_Personal%20Development%20CG%20in%20Filipino.pdf

“Understanding culture, society, and politics,” DepEd , http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/SHS%20Core_Understanding%20Culture%2C%20Society%20and%20Politics%20CG.pdf

“General education curriculum: Holistic understandings, intellectual and civic competencies,” Commission on Higher Education [CHED] , http://www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/CMO-No.20-s2013.pdf , 11.

“General education curriculum,” 11.

“General education curriculum,” 12.

“General education curriculum,” 15.

“Repubilc Act no. 9163,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines , http://www.gov.ph/2002/01/23/republic-act-no-9163/

To do so, the curriculum mandated by CHED seeks to cultivate the multiple and overlapping identities of an individual so that Filipinos are educated for a kind of global citizenship; that is, they should have a critical understanding of society and the impact of globalization, appreciation of cultural diversity, and a sense of responsibility for the immediate and wider community, to name a few ( Table 2 ). Similar to curricular trends elsewhere, there is a growing emphasis in the Philippines to educate individuals not only in regards to national identity and consciousness but also to the global contexts that affect humanity.

Several challenges lie ahead to educate for citizenship in the twenty-first century. The country's colonial legacy and dictatorial regime have had an impact on how Filipinos identify and on their sense of agency to bring about social change. For a society in transition, the Philippines is confronted to provide education that will promote deep understanding of their historical reality, foster identification to a broader community, and nurture individuals to act on local issues with global implications as well as on global concerns that manifest locally.

Although independence as a nation-state was gained over a half-century ago and the subsequent dictatorship was ousted through a mass movement, the Philippines is still historically conditioned for domination and dependence. This is because, according to Freire, 50 our known model of humanity is based on oppression wherein the dominant elite allow social change only insofar as they maintain their power in society, while the marginalized prefer to remain dominated in fear of freedom from the oppressive reality they are used to. Such hierarchical relations do not only reinforce stratification in society but have also impeded a sense of belonging to and solidarity with a broader community.

Thus a primary educational challenge is how to make Filipinos not only aware of their history, but also driven to act on their historical conditioning. There is a need to break, as termed by Freire, 51 the culture of silence and inaction whereby society demonstrates massification or uncritical acceptance of oppressive historical processes. To do so, the marginalized must be awakened to their allegiance to the prescriptions of the dominant elite since “[e]very prescription represents the imposition of one's individual choice upon another, transforming the consciousness of the person prescribe to into one that conforms with the prescriber's consciousness.” 52 The elite, on the other hand, have to undergo the process of liberation alongside the marginalized given that “[i]t is only the oppressed who, by freeing themselves, can free their oppressors.” 53

The Philippine education system, among others, is thereby confronted to bring about a conscientization process that can “enlighten men about the obstacles preventing them from a clear perception of reality.” 54 This entails coming up with dialectical ways for individuals to critically recognize unjust structures in society, understand their causes, and take into account the underlying contexts when solutions are drawn to intervene the historical reality. 55 Such dialectical perceptions should likewise be able to help individuals see themselves and their society from a critical perspective, become aware of their potentialities, and make choices to transform limiting situations to new possibilities. 56

Such citizenship education would require a pedagogical approach that is capable of bringing about critical literacy and collective action among Filipinos. Considering the challenges to educate Filipinos in the twenty-first century, the pedagogical approach should be able to facilitate an identity and a sense of agency, which are necessary to resist oppressive structures in society and incite social transformation. In essence, this method of teaching must be able to provide sites to examine and interrupt the historical and structural roots of power and privilege. Instead of indoctrination, it should offer students the space to reflect upon both their role in maintaining the social status quo as well as the possibility of intervening in such a reality as agents of social change.

To educate individuals who can challenge the status quo in society, traditional pedagogy will not suffice. Rather than both teachers and students learning from each other toward a better understanding of the world, this mainstream pedagogy tends to misrepresent teachers as ever knowledgeable while the students are a mere repository of knowledge. This banking concept of education, as explained by Freire, “negates education and knowledge as processes of inquiry” 57 since it does not typically provide opportunities to “[illuminate] the relationship among power, knowledge, and ideology.” 58 It essentially disregards the creative power of individuals to transform their historical reality, suggesting that students “simply adapt to the world as it is and to the fragmented view of reality deposited in them.” 59 In effect, this banking approach to education becomes an instrument of oppression as it tends to condition the consciousness of individuals to get used to oppressive situations and to simply abide by the status quo in society. 60

Freire's 61 problem-posing education, on the other hand, has the potential to educate individuals to challenge the social status quo and take action for social change. This is because a critical approach to education involves a revolutionary agenda. 62 In contrast to the banking concept of education wherein the consciousness is submerged, in critical education there is “ emergence of consciousness and critical intervention in reality” as problem-posing education allows both teachers and students to question, unveil, and transform the historical reality they belong to. 63 As a critical pedagogy, problem-posing education “opens up a space where [individuals are] able to come to terms with their own power as critically engaged citizens.” 64 Specifically, it provides dialogical opportunities for individuals to “develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves … to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in transformation.” 65

Between these two pedagogical approaches, problem-posing education with its critical approach to teaching and learning is most capable to educate Filipinos to develop the civic capacities to perceive and act on their historical conditioning. Advocated in the twentieth century by Freire to counter the colonial legacy and dictatorial rule of Brazil, problem-posing education would be useful for the Philippines, which has a similar historical context and social situation as Latin America. This educational philosophy and methodology can guide individuals to reflect on, understand, and take action against the historical reality that exists between the colonizer and colonized as well as between the oppressor and oppressed. 66 Furthermore, it can offer “new insight, new models, and new hope” amidst the collective struggle for liberation and national reconstruction. 67

In this era of globalization, Freire's contributions to critical pedagogy are still relevant. Such critical pedagogy can expand the civic capacities of individuals in the twenty-first century “with a range of possibilities for challenging a society's commonsense assumptions, and for analyzing the interface between their own everyday lives and those broader social formations that bear down on them.” 68 For instance, it can bring about sites of resistance to the capitalist order that neoliberalism “has unleashed [as] new practices of social control and forms of internationalized class domination.” 69 It can particularly challenge individuals to better understand and transform how power and privilege work in contemporary social contexts. 70

In this new millennium, critical pedagogy can make new, creative forms of civic identity possible. It does not only provide a formative culture that supports the identities and values necessary for a substantive democracy, 71 but it also allows for dialectical spaces for individuals to (re)construct representations, meanings, and identities in relation to a commitment to social justice. 72 This could include grassroots, compassionate, and humane movement amidst a rapidly globalizing world. Such critically literate individuals, as explained by Thomas and Chandrasekera, “intentionally and actively resist oppression and take action against discrimination and social injustice.” 73 They demonstrate an understanding of how power and privilege have been used in history to oppress and marginalize others in society. 74

A critical approach to education can likewise bring about a sense of agency among individuals in the twenty-first century. Characterized by a culture of questioning, critical pedagogy allows for social agency to be enacted as well as for power to be reworked in productive ways. 75 It can be a framework for solidarity and collective action, facilitating dialogues and “transforming those relationships that link … individual interests and issues at the local and community level to broader social and economic relations at a global level.” 76 Taking on a critical approach can likewise “provide the conditions for [individuals] to learn in diverse ways how to take responsibility for moving society in the direction of a more realizable democracy.” 77

But there is a corresponding challenge to educate Filipinos of the twenty- first century as some sort of global citizens, who can intervene in their historical reality. As an abstraction and a framework for action, 78 global citizenship stands for how the world is viewed and the manner in which individuals (and nation-states) relate to each other. It signifies, as Smith notes, “how power works to form the social person, shaping the way in which people variously experience the world they live in.” 79 On one hand, a neoliberal understanding of global citizenship functions to secure power and dominance. It is used as a contemporary extension of the colonial past, imposing, under the guise of democracy and freedom, 80 the dominant elite and the marginalized to “become locked into a particular way of relating.” 81 On the other hand, a critical understanding of global citizenship can reconfigure power structures in society. It can be a process toward social justice 82 by instituting change not from the outside but, most importantly, from within. 83 Working toward a grassroots compassionate and humane globalization, this concept of global citizenship seeks to transform structures of oppression in society and, in turn, reclaim democracy and freedom stand for. 84

With global citizenship carrying several meanings, the challenge of how the proper concept and practice of global citizenship can be deployed in education and in society remains. Instead of a vertical model of citizenship that “reinstates power asymmetries” 85 and perpetuates oppressive structures of a globalization-from-above (i.e., neoliberal globalization), the Philippines needs a horizontal citizenship and a globalization-from-below wherein actions are collective at the grassroots level and are framed within a set of negotiated practices with others. 86 Such global citizens are not passive and apathetic to the increasing social stratification and inequality brought about by the uneven distribution of the benefits of globalization. 87 They are “engaged, informed, civically and politically active,” 88 recognizing that each individual is part of the problem but likewise part of the solution. 89 Rather than getting involved in philanthropic and benevolent acts to messianically free others from their suffering, 90 these critical global citizens take, as Cook illustrates, “a generalized learner stance toward others that assumes they are competent and knowledgeable about their own lives and social circumstances.” 91 They demonstrate critical literacy by creating spaces to learn from diverse contexts, cultures, and experiences as well as by making reflective judgments to social, economic, and political issues. 92 They are, in general, empowered individuals, who do not only critically reflect on the legacies and processes of their cultures but who also intervene to change structures and power relations in society. 93

Freire's problem-posing education can thus potentially help bring about a critical global citizenship that can reconfigure power structures in society. Such a pedagogical approach can infuse a much needed critical element into global citizenship education because, as illustrated by Jackson, it can “challenge learners to think critically about the social, political, and historical realities within which they inhabit the world.” 94 This involves praxis (i.e., theoretical reflection and practical engagement) to come up with alternatives in transforming current realities, and it entails the use of generative themes during the teaching–learning process to question and uncover oppressive structures in society. 95 Conscientization, encompasses, as Johnston and Goodman upholds, “a process of abandoning a passive outlook towards the world, where people begin to understand possibilities for resistance and change.” 96 Hence, global citizenship from a critical perspective does not merely educate students to act according to their vision of an ideal world, but it empowers students to imagine different possibilities and to take responsibility in their communities. 97

However, Giroux points out that “the fundamental challenge facing educators within the current age of neoliberalism is to provide the conditions for students to address how knowledge is related to the power of both self-definition and social agency.” 98 This would require a revolutionary stance among educators to display an ethics of compassion and social justice as well as an ethos based on solidarity and social interdependence. 99 To respond specifically to situations where education takes place, critical pedagogy must also be contextualized: that is, “educators need to engage their teaching as a theoretical resource that is both shaped by and responsive to the very problems that arise in the in-between spaces/place/contexts that connects classrooms with the experiences of everyday life.” 100 This would not only involve teaching opportunities in community settings 101 but also dialectical ways to negotiate between diversity and unity as well as between individuality and collectivity. 102 More importantly, this pedagogy should be able to respond to local issues but “it must be careful not to limit itself only to local accounts.” 103 It must seek to address local concerns that are of global importance.

Among the teaching methods increasingly used from basic to higher education, service learning is one of the most able to take on a critical approach to education and thereby holds a remarkable potential to educate Filipinos as global citizens. At its best, service learning incorporates aspects of problem-posing education wherein both teacher and students assume a learner stance and praxis is employed to transform the world. It is usually contextualized in a community setting, putting theories into practice when it provides dialectical ways to relate classroom learning to real-world situations. Because learning experiences can be gained through giving service in a community, this pedagogical approach can provide citizenship education with a practical component.

course-based, credit-bearing experience in which students (a) participate in an organized service activity that meets identified community needs and (b) reflect on the service activity in such a way as to gain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility. 104

Service learning as a method of instruction was first used as a term in 1966 for a project by Oak Ridge Associated Universities, and the practice of service learning steadily gained traction during the 1980s in the United States, where civic engagement was promoted as a means to prepare students to be future leaders of their local and wider communities. 111 Although its pioneers initially thought of postsecondary education as the appropriate time and place to integrate service to learning, 112 this pedagogical approach is now used in K–12 schools and also involves international placements. Though it is resisted by a number of instructors due to the time and effort it requires from them, 113 service learning holds an appeal to many because, as Harkavy and Hartley clarify, “both [its] idealistic and practical goals have perhaps helped to make it more readily adaptable than other educational innovations to a variety of institutional settings.” 114

In the past decade or so in the Philippines, service learning has likewise attracted educators due to its idealistic and practical uses. These include a number of educators from Ateneo de Manila University, Central Philippine University, De La Salle University, Miriam College Foundation, Inc., Silliman University, St. Paul University, Trinity University of Asia, University of Rizal System, University of St. La Salle, and Xavier University among others. They turn to service learning because they have observed that it not only makes students better appreciate course content but can also increase their social awareness and sense of social responsibility. For instance, Rondonuwu and Mesa noted that graduate students were able to become aware of community needs and feel a sense of responsibility to serve the community after they underwent service learning in a primary healthcare setting in the Philippines, while Del Carmen and Dy found that service learning can help undergraduate students gain intercultural understanding and bridge some gaps in society. 115 Adarlo and Marquez examined how service learning in post-disaster rehabilitation and recovery efforts in the Philippines was able to provide opportunities for undergraduate students to recognize their role in society, participate in intercultural conversation, and become citizens who are critical of themselves and the world they live in. 116

There are, however, varied approaches to the practice of service learning. Due to the different ways service learning is designed and implemented across time and space, the global citizenship to which Filipinos in the twenty-first century aspire may not necessarily come about. Civic identity and a sense of agency can differ based on how citizenship education is perceived and the intents and purposes of service learning.

The traditional approach to service learning is most of all concerned with the learning experiences of students. It takes advantage of community service so that students can appreciate and enrich their academic learning by providing relevant experience and exposure to situated contexts as well as meaningful opportunities to be more engaged and active in applying course contents to real-world situations. 117 Such technical conceptualizations of service learning focus on its usefulness as a pedagogical approach: that is, it primarily functions to demonstrate “better teaching for better learning” of course competencies. 118

This approach to service learning, however, is often criticized because it gives the impression that it prioritizes academic outcomes over community impact, undermining the reciprocity that should transpire between the university and the community. Hence, the community, instead of benefiting from service learning, often becomes exploited for the sake of academic gains. 119 Traditional service learning is also commonly associated with maintaining and carrying on the status quo in the society since it usually does not look into the structural roots of social problems. 120 It does not aim to redistribute power, fails to foster authentic relationships in the classroom and community, and perpetuates an us–them dichotomy. 121

In effect, the service rendered using this approach is, more often than not, an act of charity. It extols fleeting acts of emotional care, such as good will, compassion, and kindness, rather than directing the teaching-learning process toward developing a deep commitment to social action. 122 Thus, despite the numerous benefits identified among students, the traditional approach to service learning, as Chupp and Joseph maintain, “can actually reinforce stereotypes and paternalistic attitudes” 123 by espousing a position of power and privilege wherein the students do tasks “for” the community. 124

In a way, the traditional approach to service learning reinforces a neoliberal understanding of global citizenship ( Table 3 ). Not concerned about changing structures or community conditions, it tends to reinstate power asymmetries and perpetuate the capitalist economy. 125 Students, in turn, generally deem themselves superior in contrast to the agency, reason, and culture 126 of those in their respective service learning sites. Similar to some of those involved in development work and humanitarian aid, they often perceive themselves as “agents of modernization” and “models of emancipation,” considering the service they render as a means to improve the lives of others and free the oppressed from misery based on predetermined standards and norms rather than from on standards determined by those they intend to help. 127 Although such global citizens help because they feel a responsibility for the other, 128 they tend to volunteer not for the sole purpose of making a difference in society but to make a contribution toward their own personal and professional development. 129

Service Learning as Method of Teaching for Global Citizenship

These global citizens, in essene, are apathetic in relation to their historical reality. They are, as Thomas and Chandrasekera describes, “unable to acknowledge, or they deny how they continue to benefit from their privilege and how these privileges infringe upon marginalized groups” 130 They are resistant to dialogue about how their unearned privileges have contributed to oppression, not understanding that their actions have a causal relationship with the local and global society. 131 Instead of garnering collective action for social change, these global citizens have become individualized agents for a neoliberal globalization that has narrowed, according to Giroux, “the legitimacy of the public sphere by redefining it around the related issues of privatization, deregulation, consumption, and safety.” 132

Conversely, a critical approach to service learning is not only focused on the academic learning of students but also on their moral and civic development. Similar to Freire's problem-posing education, this approach aims to challenge and unsettle the status quo in society by “[exposing] students to the root causes of social problems, structures of injustice and inequity that persist in society, their own privilege and power, and their potential role as agents of social change.” 133 But it makes use of community service so that, as Mitchell 134 emphasizes, the experience of service, particularly when critically reflected upon, can elicit social consciousness and responsiveness among students.

Basically, this approach assumes that social action can be made possible and social change can be attained by educating students first and foremost to be engaged citizens. Using problem-posing education, teachers engage their students during service learning “to question the status quo, examine underlying values and assumptions, and explore their own role in relation to social problems.” 135 Students, in turn, would be able to scrutinize their own behaviors, overcome their stereotypes of others, and gain a broader understanding of an underserved population while they take part in service learning. 136

But a critical approach to service learning also intends to develop social consciousness and responsiveness to the community. This is because Freire's notion of critical pedagogy entails “an indivisible solidarity between the world and the people and admits of no dichotomy between them.” 137 Thus, service learning pays particular attention to the principle of reciprocity 138 wherein “community issues and concerns,” as Mitchell asserts, “are as important (in planning, implementation, and evaluation) as student learning and development.” 139 In contrast to traditional approaches to service learning, critical service learning aims to generate a substantial and long-lasting impact on the community itself by placing emphasis on shared understanding as well as on collaborative efforts in challenging structural injustices, reconfiguring power, and working toward a concrete amelioration of social conditions. 140 Built essentially from relationships, this approach envisions a social change that can be meaningfully sought together rather than harnessing a one-sided effort. 141 Such transformational partnerships between the university and the community have been demonstrated by Swords and Kelly, 142 Chupp and Joseph, 143 and Harkavy and Hartley 144 . They documented the willingness of both parties to discuss the historical and structural context of inequity, act for capacity building, bring about community development, and take in community perspectives to the university decision-making process.

Critical service learning is therefore focused on forging university-community partnerships because, similar to Freire's problem-posing education, “the object of action is the reality to be transformed … together with other people.” 145 It specifically intends to bridge the gap between course content and university practices 146 in order to avoid “inconsistent messages [that] can be perceived as hypocritical by both students and [community].” 147 This would require, as pointed out in the study of Getto and McCunney, “reflection [that] should start with the faculty, who enact service learning in their classrooms and research projects, and the administrators, who create programming and service learning initiatives on their campuses.” 148 It would also necessitate clarifying notions of service and community engagement as well as taking into account the processes involved so that there will be, as portrayed by Freire, liberation rather than domination and repression. 149

Because problem-posing education can foster individuals “to discuss courageously the problems of their context—to intervene in that context,” 150 social justice is intentional and explicit in critical service learning. Instead of operating under the tenet of “how can we help,” such an approach specifically aims to ask “why are conditions this way” and uncover the causes of injustices in society. 151 Hence, the practice of critical reflection is essential to providing a theory, process, and framework for modified actions in service learning because, as Fook and Gardner 152 argue, this can link awareness of personal assumptions and social contexts to decisive actions for social change.

Furthermore, service learning, as Tangen, Mercer, Spooner-Lane, and Hepple illustrate, can provide students “opportunities to interact with people of another culture in ways they had not experienced before.” 153 But if it is approached through a critical framework, service learning is also poised to educate for cultural humility and intercultural understanding, which are essential to respect multiple perspectives about local and global issues. Thus critical service learning is the most ideal to bring about a global citizenship that is transformative and emancipatory ( Table 3 ). Instead of a “consciousness historically conditioned by the social structures,” 154 it can lead to critical consciousness characterized by a deep understanding of social problems, openness to social transformation, and integration (i.e., adaptability to historical reality and critical capacity to transform such reality) with one's social context. 155 There is authenticity rather than apathy to respond to the challenge of denouncing unjust structures, acknowledging that oneself is causally responsible toward others. 156 Individuals—as authentic global citizens—thereby do not only reflect on the uncertainties and risks that go along with globalization but they also act upon oppressive patterns in order to uphold human dignity and equity. 157 Due to a critical approach to service learning, they may develop, according to Maruggi, 158 an emerging sense of agency exemplified by openness, permeability, restlessness to know oneself and the world better, an integrating sense of agency typified by ability to perceive and act upon contradictions in historical reality, or an active sense of agency illustrated by immediacy to take action for social change.

Taking these into consideration, critical service learning seems to be the most relevant pedagogical approach to address the historical reality of the Philippine society and to respond to the pressing needs of the Filipino nation in this day and age. Given that citizenship education in the Philippines is often confined to theoretical learning in classroom settings, critical service learning can instead help teachers to educate their students for active citizenship: that is, students are given teaching–learning opportunities not only to take part in rhetoric but also to encourage community involvement and social participation. Rather than abstractly discussing current events and issues inside the classroom, they are allowed to experience and act on these social issues in real world settings. Through critical service learning, these students are provided with practical opportunities to have an identity and a sense of agency toward a grassroots, compassionate, and humane globalization. Instead of apathy, there is a genuine desire to challenge and respond to the oppressive realities that characterize not only the Philippine context but also wider society. Students are, for example, given concrete experiences in service learning to understand the plight of the oppressed and be in solidarity with them. They are likewise empowered to show their responsibility toward others and to come up with solutions to real-world problems.

There are, however, several challenges in reframing citizenship education in the Philippines through a critical approach to service learning. These would require collaborative efforts to harness the potential of critical service learning for civic education in the Philippines for the twenty-first century.

First, the traditional ties of kinship and local affiliations in the Philippines may not be strong enough to respond to the needs and aspirations of the time since the tendency herein, as Diokno argues, is to “weigh the public good in terms of how it will benefit the family without regard for the effect on others in the country or [broader] community.” 159 The challenge then is how the culture of kinship and multi-layered affiliations can be tapped to foster not only national identity and consciousness among the Filipinos but also a citizenship, which is adapted to the demands of globalization. This may require, as Lee 160 suggests, features of delocalized nationalization and localized internationalization into the civic curriculum by emphasizing development of national consciousness and global awareness as well as integration of global values and skills. Alternatively, it may include opportunities “of imagining the world as a global community” 161 inasmuch as a nation is an imagined community emerging from a deep, horizontal comradeship among individuals, who have not even personally met. 162

Second, there is the challenge to bring about social solidarity, particularly when society today has become individualized. 163 Individuals have become disembedded since there are, as Giddens explains, “multiple sources of authority, frequently internally contested and divergent in their implications.” 164 Thus, “the shape of our sociality, and so of the society we share,” according to Bauman, “depends in its turn on the way in which the task of ‘individualization’ is framed and responded to.” 165 To (re)integrate a highly individualized society, Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 166 believe that integration through values, joint mutual interests, and national consciousness are no longer viable. Instead, a clear understanding of our precarious situation is warranted in order to imagine “new, politically open, creative forms of bond and allegiance.” 167 This would require teachers to come up with innovative ways to make the critical approach to service learning explicit during the teaching–learning process.

Third, it may be difficult to educate for critical literacy in the Philippines when most Filipino youth live in poverty. The priority for these individuals is to get through the day with their basic needs met. In this case, responding to the needs of others may be hard to do. However, service learning, as Reed and Butler argue, can help “students see themselves as vital, powerful participants in giving back instead of being given to.” 168 In fact, such students are most likely to relate and resonate well with the oppressive realities of others since they have also experienced it for themselves. But, to attain the civic outcomes of critical service learning, government institutions and nongovernmental organizations need to institute realistic solutions to poverty, which has been a prevailing problem in the Philippines. This is vital in turning this challenge into an opportunity particularly when studies show that most Filipino youth today are passionate about wanting to make a difference in society but are merely uncertain on how they can do so. 169 By observing collaborative efforts from various sectors of society to responding to social issues and problems, Filipino youth can be inspired to make a difference in society through service learning.

Because colonial legacy and dictatorial rule constitute the historical reality of the Philippines, Filipinos have been historically conditioned to the social structures marked by domination. In effect their sense of belonginess is weak and there is a need to further build the nation. Solidarity among Filipinos is also lacking as the gaps between the rich and poor as well as between the dominant elite and marginalized have widened in Philippine society.

In addition, educating Filipinos for national unity and consciousness no longer holds in the globalized twenty-first century. As a result, there is a growing need to incorporate a global dimension to citizenship education. Filipinos have to be educated not only to become aware of the global contexts that affect humanity and the environment but also to act on the negative impacts of globalization and make the most of its benefits. Other challenges in educating for citizenship in the twenty-first century include educating Filipinos to be critically conscious about their historical conditioning, to collectively act upon their historical reality, to take on a citizenship adapted to the demands for a globalization-from-below, and to become empowered individuals who can critically intervene for social transformation.

To respond to these challenges, a critical approach to citizenship education is warranted. It provides dialectical opportunities during the teaching–learning process to understand how power and privilege affect history and contemporary social contexts. Contrary to traditional or mainstream pedagogy, wherein solutions to social problems tend to disregard historical legacies, power inequalities, and systemic changes, problems are posed for both teachers and students to consider in their complexity and uncertainty, and solutions can be drawn to resist the status quo in the wider society.

Service learning is a practical method of teaching that can take on a critical approach to citizenship education. It can respond to the challenge of educating Filipinos for a compassionate, humane, and grassroots globalization. By aspiring toward a university–community partnership, critical service learning can bring students, academe, and communities in solidarity toward social change. Causal responsibility is not only acknowledged but a learner stance is also assumed. Hence, there is authenticity in the transformative relationship rather than a paternalistic attitude toward others in need. Because a sense of agency can likewise be enacted instead of historically conditioned, critical service learning can provide a pedagogical framework to bring about the global citizenship required for the twenty-first century. Most importantly, it can arrange for local sites of resistance, which allow individuals to act at a local level yet influence society on a global scale.

For more than a decade, service learning has gained traction as an educational practice in the Philippines. Its critical approach can be a useful method of teaching for subjects in the civic curriculum, helping students not only to make sense of their learning experience but to also be agents of social change. As a pedagogical approach that can applied to any subject, service learning can indirectly offer civic education to students since it has the propensity to cultivate the value of community participation and bring about a sense of responsibility in (wider) society. Of the various methods of teaching, critical service learning is thus perhaps the best poised to (re)frame citizenship education in the Philippines to respond to a rapidly globalizing world.

Ulrich Beck and Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim, Individualization (London: SAGE Publications Ltd., 2002), 2.

Wing On Lee, “The Development of Citizenship Education Curriculum in Hong Kong after 1997: Tensions between National Identity and Global Citizenship,” In Citizenship Curriculum in Asia and the Pacific , ed. D. L. Grossman, W. O. Lee, and K. J. Kennedy (Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, 2008).

Darren J. O'Byrne, The Dimensions of Global Citizenship: Political Identity beyond the Nation-State (London: Frank Cass and Co., 2008).

Zygmunt Bauman, The Individualized Society (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001).

Emma Clarence, “Citizenship and Identity: The Case of Australia,” Practicing Identities: Power and Resistance , ed. I. S. Roseneil and J. Seymour (London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1999), 202.

Pedro T. Orata, “Philippine Education Today,” International Review of Education 2.2 (1956), 159–73. de Allan B. Guzman, “The Dynamics of Educational Reforms in the Philippine Basic and Higher Education Sectors,” Asia Pacific Education Review 4.1 (2003): 39–50. Joel B. Durban and Ruby Durban Catalan, “Issues and Concerns of Philippine Education through the Years,” Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 1.2 (2012): 61–69.

“Pastoral Letter on 400 Years of Catholic Education in the Philippines,” last modified 2012, http://www.cbcpnews.com/cbcpnews/?p=324 .

Mary Racelis, “Bearing Benevolence in the Classroom and Community,” Bearers of Benevolence: The Thomasites and Public Education in the Philippines , ed. M. Racelis and J. C. Ick (Pasig: Anvil Publishing, 2001). Durban and Catalan, “Issues and Concerns of Philippine Education through the Years,” 61–69.

Orata, “Philippine Education Today,” 159–73. Durban and Catalan, “Issues and Concerns of Philippine Education through the Years,” 61–69.

Renato Constantino, The Miseducation of the Filipino (Quezon City: Malaya Books, 1966). Josefina G. S. Nepomuceno, “A Theory of Development of Filipino Colonized Consciousness,” (PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1981), Digital Dissertation Consortium. Maria Lina Nepomuceno-Van Haughten, “Edukasyon ng bayani: Mga impluwensya ng edukasyong natamo sa kaisipang rebolusyonaryo,” Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies 14.2 (1998): 21–54. Durban and Catalan, “Issues and Concerns of Philippine Education through the Years,” 61–69.

Nepomuceno, “A Theory of Development of Filipino Colonized Consciousness.” Durban and Catalan, “Issues and Concerns of Philippine Education through the Years,” 61–69.

Constantino, The Miseducation of the Filipino . Durban and Catalan, “Issues and Concerns of Philippine Education through the Years,” 61–69.

Racelis, “Bearing Benevolence in the Classroom and Community,” 14.

Constantino, The Miseducation of the Filipino , 2.

Jose Veloso Abueva, “Filipino Democracy and American Legacy,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 428.1 (1976), 114–33.

Cheryl E. Matias-Padua. The Development of a Colonized Filipino—With A Capital F (Long Beach, CA: California State University, 2005).

Sumie Okazaki, E.J.R. David, and Nancy Abelmann, “Colonialism and Psychology of Culture,” Social and Personality Psychology 2.1 (2008): 90–106.

Rolando M. Gripaldo, “A Filipino Nationalist Ideology for the Twenty-first Century,” In Philosophy, History, and Culture (Quezon City, MM: C&E Publishing Inc., 2010).

Keith Faulks, Citizenship (London: Routledge, 2000).

Susan D. Collins, Aristotle and the Rediscovery of Citizenship (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 120.

Faulks, Citizenship . O'Byrne, The Dimensions of Global Citizenship .

de Guzman, “The Dynamics of Educational Reforms in the Philippine Basic and Higher Education Sectors,” 39–50.

“The 1943 Philippine Constitution,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines , http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/the-1943-constitution/ . Orata, “Philippine Education Today,” 159–73. Sherlyne A. Almonte-Acosta, “Pedagogical Approaches to Citizenship Education in the Varied Contexts of Secondary Schools in the Philippines,” In Citizenship Pedagogies in Asia and the Pacific , ed. K. J. Kennedy, W. O. Lee, and D. L. Grossman (Hong Kong: Comptive Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong, 2010).

Fernando N. Zialcita, “Barriers and Bridges to a Democratic Culture,” Democracy and Citizenship in Filipino Political Culture , ed. M.S.I. Diokno (Quezon City, PH: Third World Studies Center, 1997), 44.

“Proclamation No. 1081,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines , http://www.gov.ph/1972/09/21/proclamation-no-1081/ , para. 2.

“The Philippine Constitution,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines , http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/the-amended-1973-constitution-2/ . Mark Baildon, Jasmine B-Y. Sim, and Agnes Paculdar, “A Tale of Two Countries: Comparing Civic Education in the Philippines and Singapore,” Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education (2014): 1–23. DOI: 10.1080/03057925.2014.940848. Mark Maca and Paul Morris, “Education, National Identity, and State Formation in the Modern Philippines,” In Constructing Modern Asian Citizenship , ed. E. Vickers and K. Kumar (New York: Routledge, 2015).

Richard Pierre Claude, “Human Rights Education: The Case of the Philippines,” Human Rights Quarterly 13.4 (1991): 465.

Claude, “Human Rights Education: The Case of the Philippines.” Joseph P. McCallus, “The Myth of the New Filipino: Philippine Government Propaganda during the Early Years of Martial Law,” Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 17.2 (1989): 129–48.

Jonna P. Estudillo, “Income Inequality in the Philippines 1961–1991,” The Developing Economies 35.1 (1997): 68–95.

Mark Maca and Paul Morris, “The Philippines, the East Asian ‘Developmental States’ and Education: A Comparative Analysis of Why the Philippines Failed to Develop,” Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 42.3 (2012): 461–84, DOI: 10.1080/03057925.2011.652814.

Carmen Navarro Pedrosa, Imelda Marcos: The Rise and Fall of One of the World's Most Powerful Women (Manila: Flipside Publishing Services, 2013).

Fernando Gonzaga, “People Power as Immanent Collectivity: Re-Imagining the Miracle of the 1986 EDSA Revolution as Divine Justice,” Kritika Kultura 12.1 (2009): 109–27.

Cristina Jayme Montiel and Victoria Marie Chiongbian, “Political Psychology in the Philippines,” Political Psychology 12.4 (1991): 759–77.

Montiel and Chiongbian, “Political Psychology in the Philippines.”

Montiel and Chiongbian, “Political Psychology in the Philippines.” Gonzaga, “People Power as Immanent Collectivity.”

Gonzaga, “People Power as Immanent Collectivity.”

Montiel and Chiongbian, “Political Psychology in the Philippines,” 762.

“The 1987 Philippine Constitution,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines , http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/ .

“The 1987 Philippine Constitution,” Official Gazette .

Maca and Morris, “The Philippines, the East Asian ‘Developmental States’ and Education.” Baildon et al., “A Tale of Two Countries.”

Maca and Morris, “The Philippines, the East Asian ‘Developmental States’ and Education.”

Rommel Banlaoi, “Globalization and Nation-building in the Philippines: State Predicaments in Managing Society in the Midst of Diversity,” in Growth and Governance in Asia , ed. Y. Sato (Honolulu: Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, 2004), 214.

Banlaoi, “Globalization and Nation-building in the Philippines.” Maca and Morris, “The Philippines, the East Asian ‘Developmental States’ and Education.” Baildon et al., “A Tale of Two Countries.”

Baildon et al., “A Tale of Two Countries,” 9.

Miriam Coronel Ferrer, “Civil Society: An Operational Definition,” In Philippine Democracy Agenda: Democracy and Citizenship in Filipino Political Culture , ed. M.S.I. Diokno (Quezon City, PH: Third World Studies Center, 1997). Maria Serena I. Diokno, ed. “Becoming a Filipino Citizen: Perspectives on Citizenship and Democracy,” Democracy and Citizenship in Filipino Political Culture (Quezon City, PH: Third World Studies Center, 1997). Zialcita, “Barriers and Bridges to a Democratic Culture.”

“Policy Standard to Enhance Quality Assurance (QA) in Philippine Higher Education through an Outcomes-Based and Typology-Based QA,” Commission on Higher Education , last modified 2012, http://www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/CMO-No.46-s2012.pdf , 2.

“Republic Act No. 10533,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines , http://www.gov.ph/downloads/2013/05may/20130515-RA-10533-BSA.pdf .

“General Education Curriculum: Holistic Understandings, Intellectual and Civic Competencies,” Commission on Higher Education , last modified 2013, http://www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/CMO-No.20-s2013.pdf , 17.

Paulo Freire, “Cultural Action and Conscientization,” Harvard Educational Review 68.4 ([1970] 1998), 499–520. Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , trans. M. B. Ramos (New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, [1970] 2000).

Freire, “Cultural Action and Conscientization.” Paulo Freire, Education for Critical Consciousness (New York: A Continuum Book, 1973).

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 47.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 56.

Freire, “Cultural Action and Conscientization,” 517.

Freire, “Cultural Action and Conscientization.” Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed . Freire, Education for Critical Consciousness .

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed . Freire, Education for Critical Consciousness .

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 72.

Henry Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013), 144.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 73.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed . Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy .

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed .

Peter McLaren, “Revolutionary Pedagogy in Post-Revolutionary Times: Rethinking the Political Economy of Critical Education,” Educational Theory 48.4 (1998), 431–62.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 81.

Henry Giroux, “Bare Pedagogy and the Scourge of Neoliberalism: Rethinking Higher Education as a Democratic Public Sphere,” The Educational Forum 74.3 (2010): 193.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 83.

Donaldo Macedo, Introduction to Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire (New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group, 2000), 11–27.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 29.

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy , 81.

McLaren, “Revolutionary Pedagogy in Post-revolutionary Times,” 449.

Peter McLaren, “Critical Pedagogy and Class Struggle in the Age of Neoliberal Globalization: Notes from History's Underside,” The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy 2.1 (2005): 1–24.

Giroux, “Bare Pedagogy and the Scourge of Neoliberalism.”

McLaren and Farahmandpur, “Teaching against Globalization and the New Imperialism.” Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy .

Lahoma Thomas and Uppala Chandrasekera, “Uncovering What Lies Beneath: An Examination of Power, Privilege, and Racialization in International Social Work,” in Globetrotting or Global Citizenship , ed. R. Tiessen and R. Huish (Toronto: University Toronto Press, 2015).

Lahoma Thomas and Uppala Chandrasekera, “Exposing the Apathetic Ally: An Examination of Diversity and Race in Health and Social Service Organizations,” International Journal of Organizational Diversity 12.3 (2013): 17–30. Thomas and Chandrasekera, “Uncovering What Lies Beneath.”

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy .

McLaren and Farahmandpur, “Teaching against Globalization and the New Imperialism,” 147.

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy , 126.

Lynn Davies, “Global Citizenship: Abstraction or Framework for Action?” Educational Review 58.1 (2006), 5–25.

Gavin Smith, “Hegemony,” In A Companion to the Anthropology of Politics , ed. D. Nugent and J. Vincent (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008), 216.

Barbara Arneil, “Global Citizenship and Empire,” Citizenship Studies 1.3 (2007), 301–28.

Fran Martin and Helen Griffiths, “Relating to the ‘Other’: Transformative, Intercultural Learning in Post-Colonial Contexts,” Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education (forthcoming), 4.

Arneil, “Global Citizenship and Empire.”

Vanessa Oliveiera de Andreotti, “Soft Versus Critical Global Citizenship,” Policy and Practice: A Development Education Review 3.1 (2006), 40–51.

Kathy Hytten, “Education for Critical Democracy and Compassionate Globalization,” in Philosophy of Education 2008 , ed. B. S. Stengel (Illinois: Philosophy of Education Society, 2008). Natasha Shukla, “Power, Discourse, and Learning Global Citizenship: A Case Study of International NGOs and a Grassroots Movement in the Narmada Valley, India,” Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice 4.2 (2009), 133–47.

Shukla, “Power, Discourse, and Learning Global Citizenship,” 141.

Richard Falk, “Resisting ‘Globalisation-from-Above’ through ‘Globalisation-from-Below’,” New Political Economy , 2.1 (1997), 17–24. James Tully, “Two Meanings of Global Citizenship: Modern and Diverse,” In Global Citizenship Education: Philosophy, Theory, and Pedagogy (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2008). Shukla, “Power, Discourse, and Learning Global Citizenship.”

Hytten, “Education for Critical Democracy and Compassionate Globalization.”

Hytten, “Education for Critical Democracy and Compassionate Globalization,” 337.

de Andreotti, “Soft Versus Critical Global Citizenship.”

John Cameron and Anna Haanstra, “Development Made Sexy: How It Happened and What It Means,” Third World Quarterly 29.8 (2008): 1475–89, DOI:10.1080/01436590802528564. Nancy Cook, “I'm Here to Help: Development Workers, the Politics of Benevolence and Critical Literacy,” In Postcolonial Perspectives on Global Citizenship Education , ed. V. O. de Andreotti and L.M.T.M. de Souza (New York: Routledge, 2012).

Cook, “I'm Here to Help,” 137.

Peter McLaren and Ramin Farahmandpur, “Teaching against Globalization and the New Imperialism: Toward a Revolutionary Pedagogy,” Journal of Teacher Education 52.2 (2001): 136–50. de Andreotti, “Soft Versus Critical Global Citizenship.”

Sue Jackson, “Freire Re-viewed,” Educational Theory 57.2 (2007): 203.

Josée Johnston and James Goodman, “Hope and Activism in the Ivory Tower: Freirean Lessons for Critical Globalization Research,” Globalizations 3.1 (2006): 9–30.

Johnston and Goodman, “Hope and Activism in the Ivory Tower,” 21.

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy , 72.

McLaren, “Revolutionary Pedagogy in Post-Revolutionary Times.”

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy , 75.

Mclaren, “Critical Pedagogy and Class Struggle in the Age of Neoliberal Globalization.”

McLaren, “Revolutionary Pedagogy in Post-Revolutionary Times,” 453.

Robert G. Bringle and Julie A. Hatcher, “A Service Learning Curriculum for Faculty,” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 2.1 (1995): 112.

Alice Terry and Jann Bohnenberger, Service Learning … By Degress: How Adolescents Can Make a Difference in the Real World (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2007).

Cathryn Berger Kaye, The Complete Guide in Service Learning: Proven, Practical Ways to Engage Students in Civic Responsibility, Academic Curriculum, and Social Action (Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing, 2010).

Dan W. Butin, Service Learning in Theory and Practice (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

Barry G. Sheckley and Morris T. Keeton, “Service Learning: A Theoretical Model,” Service Learning , ed. J. Schine (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997).

Robert G. Bringle, Patti H. Clayton, and Julie A. Hatcher, “Research on Service Learning: An Introduction,” Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment , ed. P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, and J. A. Hatcher (Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, 2013), 6.

Butin, Service Learning in Theory and Practice , 17–20.

Ira Harkavy and Matthew Hartley, “Pursuing Franklin's Dream: Philosophical and Historical Roots of Service Learning,” American Journal of Community Psychology 46.3-4 (2010), 418-427.

Timothy K. Stanton, Dwight E. Giles, and Nadinne I. Cruz. Service Learning: A Movement's Pioneers Reflect on Its Origins, Practice, and Future (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series, 1999).

Elisa S. Abes, Golden Jackson, and Susan R. Jones, “Factors That Motivate and Deter Faculty Use of Service Learning,” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 9.1 (2002): 5–17.

Harkavy and Hartley, “Pursuing Franklin's Dream,” 419.

Joppi Rondonuwu and Milton Alberto Mesa, “Experiences with Service-Learning as Perceived by Students, Faculty, and Community Partners Involved with the Master of Public Health Program at the Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies, Philippines,” International Forum Journal 7.2 (2004): 51–73. Allen V. Del Carmen and Lisa Dy, Impact of IAC (Information, Education, and Communication) Activities under the Christian Service Learning Program of the Communication Department of the University of St. La Salle on the Muslim Community in Bacolod City, Philippines , http://commons.ln.edu.hk/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article= 1109&context=osl_conference .

Genejane M. Adarlo and Norman Dennis E. Marquez, “Cumbersome yet Worthwhile: Service Learning in Post-Disaster Rehabilitation and Recovery Efforts in the Philippines,” (unpublished manuscript, Ateneo de Manila University, 2016).

Mark G. Chupp and Mark L. Joseph, “Getting the Most Out of Service Learning: Maximizing Student, University, and Community Impact,” Journal of Community Practice 18.2–3 (2010), 190–212.

Dan W. Butin, “Service Learning as Postmodern Pedagogy,” Service Learning in Higher Education: Critical Issues and Directions , ed. D. W. Butin (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 90.

Robert G. Bringle and Patti H. Clayton, “Conceptual Frameworks for Partnerships in Service Learning,” Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment , ed. P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, and J. A. Hatcher (Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, 2013).

Tony Robinson, “Dare the School Build a New Social Order?” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 7.1 (2000): 142–57.

Tania D. Mitchell, “Traditional vs. Critical Service Learning: Engaging the Literature to Differentiate Two Models,” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 14.2 (2008): 50–65.

Joseph Kahne, Joel Westheimer, and Bettany Rogers, “Service Learning and Citizenship: Directions for Research,” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning , Special issue no. 1 (2000), 1–18. Liz Jackson, “Won't Somebody Think of the Children? Emotions, Child Poverty, and Post-Humanitarian Possibilities for Social Justice Education,” Educational Philosophy and Theory 46.9 (2014): 1069–81.

Chupp and Joseph, “Getting the Most Out of Service Learning,” 191.

Kelly Ward and Lisa Wolf-Wendel, “Community-Centered Service Learning: Moving from Doing for to Doing With,” American Behavioral Scientist 43.5 (2000): 767–80.

Shukla, “Power, Discourse, and Learning Global Citizenship.” Falk, “Resisting ‘Globalisation-from-Above’ through ‘Globalisation-from-Below’.”

Cameron and Haanstra, “Development Made Sexy.”

Cook, “I'm Here to Help.”

Thomas and Chandrasekera, “Uncovering What Lies Beneath,” 98.

Thomas and Chandrasekera, “Uncovering What Lies Beneath.” John D. Cameron, “Grounding Experiental Learning in ‘Thick’ Conceptions of Global Citizenship,” In Globetrotting or Global Citizenship: Perils and Potentials of International Experiential Learning , ed. R. Tiessen and R. Huish (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015).

Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy , 111.

Chupp and Joseph, “Getting the Most out of Service Learning,” 195.

Mitchell, “Traditional vs. Critical Service Learning.”

Rahima C. Wade, “Social Action in the Social Studies: From the Ideal to the Real,” Theory into Practice 40.1 (2001): 25.

Shiela Baldwin, Alice Buchanan, and Mary Rudisill, “What Teacher Candidates Learned about Diversity, Social Justice, and Themselves from Service-Learning Experiences,” Journal of Teacher Education 58.4 (2007), 315–27. Karen Meaney, Heidi Bohler, Kelsie Kopf, Leslie Hernandez, and LaTosha Scott, “Service-Learning and Pre-Service Educators' Cultural Competence for Teaching: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of Experiential Education 31.2 (2008): 189–208.

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 92.

Chupp and Joseph, “Getting the Most out of Service Learning.”

Mitchell, “Traditional vs. Critical Service Learning,” 52.

Mitchell, “Traditional vs. Critical Service Learning.” Chupp and Joseph, “Getting the Most out of Service Learning.”

Alicia Swords and Richard Kiely, “Beyond Pedagogy: Service Learning as Movement Building in Higher Education,” Journal of Community Practice 18.2–3 (2010), 148–70, DOI:10.1080/10705422.2010.487523.

Harkavy and Hartley, “Pursuing Franklin's Dream.”

Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 94.

Mary-Ellen Boyle, “Learning to Neighbor? Service Learning in Context,” Journal of Academic Ethics 5.1 (2007), 100, DOI 10.1007/s10805-007-9045-5.

Guiseppe Getto and Dennis McCunney, “Moving from Traditional to Critical Service Learning: Reflexivity, Reciprocity, and Place,” In Service Learning to Advance Social Justice in a Time of Radical Inequality , ed. A. S Tinkler, B. E. Tinkler, V. M. Jagla, and J. R. Strait (Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, 2016), 350.

Randy Stoeker and Elizabeth Tyron, The Unheard Voices: Community Organizations and Service Learning . (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2009), accessed October 2, 2014, from http://www.mylibrary.com?ID=211563 . Getto and McCunney, “Moving from Traditional to Critical Service Learning.” Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed .

Freire, Education for Critical Consciousness , 33.

Jan Fook and Fiona Gardner, Practicing Critical Reflection: A Resource Handbook (Maidenhead, Berkshire: McGraw-Hill and Open University Press, 2007).

Donna Tangen, Louise Mercer, Rebecca Spooner-Lane, and Erika Hepple, “Exploring Intercultural Competence: A Service-Learning Approach,” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 36.11 (2011): 62–72.

Freire, “Cultural Action and Conscientization,” 505.

Freire, Education for Critical Consciousness .

Freire, “Cultural Action and Conscientization.” de Andreotti, “Soft Versus Critical Global Citizenship.” Thomas and Chandrasekera, “Uncovering What Lies Beneath.” Cameron, “Grounding Experiental Learining in ‘Thick’ Conceptions of Global Citizenship.”

Yvette V. Lapayese, “Toward a Critical Global Citizenship Education,” Compar- ative Education Review 47.4 (2003): 493–501. Hytten, “Education for Critical Democracy and Compassionate Globalization.”

Matthew Maruggi, “Kaleisocopic Learning: Spiritual and Social Conscience Development through Narrative Reflection in Service Learning,” In Service Learning Pedagogy: How Does It Measure Up? ed. V. M. Jagla, A. Furco, and J. R. Strait (Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, 2015).

Diokno, “Becoming a Filipino Citizen,” 24.

Lee, “The Development of Citizenship Education Curriculum in Hong Kong after 1997.”

David Jefferess, “Unsettling Cosmopolitanism: Global Citizenship and the Cultural Politics of Benevolence,” in Postcolonial Perspectives on Global Citizenship Education , ed. V. D. Andreotti and L.M.T.M. de Souza (New York: Routledge, 2012), 31.

Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities (New York: Verso, 2002).

Bauman, The Individualized Society .

Anthony Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 3.

Bauman, The Individualized Society , 144.

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, Individualization .

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, Individualization , 18.

Pam Reed and Tamara Butler, “Flipping the Script: When Service-Learning Recipients Become Service-Learning Givers,” Theory into Practice 54.1 (2015): 55.

Jayeel Serrano Cornelio, “The Filipino Millenial?” Rappler , September 17, 2016.

Advertisement

Citing articles via

Email alerts, related articles.

• Issue Alerts
• Submissions
• About This Journal
• Browse our Journals

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1538-9731
• Print ISSN 1089-0017
• Scholarly Publishing Collective
• A Duke University Press initiative
• Phone:  (888) 651-0122
• International:  +1 (919) 688-5134
• Email:  [email protected]
• Partners  
• for librarians  
• for agents  
• for publishers
• Michigan State University Press
• Penn State University Press
• University of Illinois Press
• Duke University Press
• Accessibility
• Terms and Conditions
• Get Adobe Acrobat Reader

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

• Commercial Law
• Constitutional Law
• Criminal Law
• Law Related Discussion
• Legal Ethics
• Procedural Law
• Special Penal Laws
• Filipino Citizenship | Filipinos – More Than Just Inhabitants

by  RALB Law

Filipino Citizenship: The most common way to become a Filipino citizen is through descent from a parent who is a Republic of the Philippines citizen or national. The reason for this is that Philippine Nationality law is based on the concepts of jus sanguinis or by blood. Contrast this with the legal concept of jus soli, which grants citizenship to those born on a country’s territory even if their parents are from another country.

“ Hoy, pinoy ako! Buo aking loob, may agimat ang dugo ko!” This line is quite familiar, right? It is the chorus part of one of Bamboo’s famous songs, Noypi. Filipino (Pilipino)—the formal and most common term to call people who are citizens or natives of the Philippines. 

What is Filipino Citizenship | Who are Filipino Citizens

What makes a person Filipino? Is he automatically Filipino if born in Philippine soil or if he’s born from a Filipino family? This article will be a discourse regarding citizenship and domicile as embodied in Philippine laws.

“ARTICLE 48. The following are citizens of the Philippines: (( Article 48, Civil Code of the Philippines ))

“(1) Those who were citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the Philippines; (( Id. ))

“(2) Those born in the Philippines of foreign parents who, before the adoption of said Constitution, had been elected to public office in the Philippines; (( Id. ))

“(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines; (( Id. ))

“(4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and, upon reaching the age of majority, elect Philippine citizenship; (( Id. ))

“(5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. (n)(( Id. ))

Citizenship is the status of being a citizen, or of owing allegiance to a state for the privilege of being under its protection.(( 1 Paras supra at 264 )) In a clearer sense, citizenship is a relationship between a person owing allegiance to the state while the latter protects the former in return.

Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individuals owe to the government under which they live or to their sovereign, in return for the protection they receive.(( LB Reyes (2021). The Revised Penal Code . Book Two. Rex Printing Company, Inc. p. 4 ))  It must be noted that the rule on citizenship is governed by the Constitution. Thus:

SECTION 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines: (( Article IV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution ))

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution; (( Id. ))

(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines; (( Id. ))

(3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and (( Id. ))

(4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. (( Id. ))

SECTION 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens. (( Id. ))

SECTION 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law. (( Id. ))

SECTION 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act or omission they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it. (( Id. ))

SECTION 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law. (( Id. ))

Article IV of the Constitution clearly provides for the rule on citizenship. A person is considered a Filipino citizen if:

(1) he is a citizen of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution ;

(2) if either or both of his parents are Filipino citizens;

(3) if he is born from a Filipino mother and chose to elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority and is born before January 17, 1973; and

(4) if he is naturalized according to the rule laid down by Philippine laws. The first three are the ones considered as natural-born Filipinos.

While it is true that there is no stated period when electing Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority, has been construed to mean a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority which had been interpreted by the Secretary of Justice to be three (3) years.((Velayo, supra at p. 51 citing Op., Sec. of Justice No. 70, s. 1940, Feb. 27, 1940))

Natural Born 

Illustration:

Seulgi was born in 1974 in the USA to an American father, and a mother who was a Filipino. Her mother applied for American citizenship before Seulgi’s birth, and she then became a naturalized American citizen. Is Seulgi a natural-born Filipino?

Answer: No, she is not a natural-born Filipino because at the time of her birth, her father and mother were both American citizens.

Jinnie was born in Australia of a foreign father and a Filipino mother. Her mother applied for Australian citizenship 2 years after Jinnie’s birth, then became a naturalized Australian citizen after. Is Jinnie a natural-born Filipino?

Answer: Yes, he is a natural-born Filipino since one of his parents was a Filipino at the time of his birth.

What are the modes of acquiring Citizenship?

There are two modes of acquiring citizenship which are as follows:

Filipino at Birth(( Citizenship ))

Jus sanguinis (right of blood) —is the legal principle that, at birth, an individual acquires the nationality of his/her natural parent/s wherever he may be born. The Philippines has adhered to this principle.(( Id. ))

Jus soli (right of soil)— is the legal principle that a person’s nationality at birth is determined by the place of birth.(( Id. ))

What is Naturalization?

Filipino through naturalization is the other mode of acquiring citizenship. It is the judicial act of adopting a foreigner and clothing him with the privileges of a native-born citizen. It implies the renunciation of a former nationality and the fact of entrance into a similar relation towards a new body politic.((2 Am. Jur. 561, par. 188))

ARTICLE 49. Naturalization and the loss and reacquisition of citizenship of the Philippines are governed by special laws. (n) (( Article 49 of the Civil Code of the Philippines ))

When is a person considered as a dual-citizen? A person is considered a dual citizen when he possesses two citizenships at the same time as a result of the interaction of the laws between two countries. A person can be a dual citizen by choice or by birth.(( Supra. , Citizenship ))

Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition

Republic Act No. 9225,(( Republic Act No. 9225 )) otherwise known as the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003, declares that natural born Filipinos who were naturalized in other countries could reacquire or retain their Philippine citizenship after undergoing the procedure provided for under the law.

The aforementioned act took effect on September 17, 2003 and is also commonly referred to as the Dual Citizenship Act. Philippine citizenship is reacquired by taking the Philippine oath of allegiance before a duly authorized Philippine official.

While a person takes his oath of allegiance to our state, this does not require one to renounce his allegiance to any other country.(( Id. , “An Act Making the Citizenship of Philippine Citizens Who Acquire Foreign Citizenship Permanent”))

The Oath of Allegiance is the final act that confers Philippine citizenship. It reads as follows:

“I_______________, solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines and obey the laws and local orders promulgated by the duly constituted authorities of the Philippines, and I hereby declare that I recognize and accept the supreme authority of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and allegiance thereto, and that I impose this obligation upon myself voluntarily without mental reservation or purpose of evasion.” (( Id. ))

Only those who are natural-born Filipinos who have acquired the citizenship of another country through naturalization may retain or re-acquire their Philippine citizenship, making them dual citizens of both the Philippines and the country where they were naturalized.

Persons who were naturalized Filipinos before acquiring the citizenship of another country are not eligible for Philippine dual citizenship. Those who are not natural born Filipinos are not eligible to apply under this Act.(( Id. ))

Minji was born in the Philippines to a Korean father and a Filipino mother in 1996. She has lived her whole life in the Philippines including completion of her education. At the age of 19, she went to Korea and applied under the Citizenship Act.

Her application was granted, however one requirement was that the applicant should renounce any foreign citizenship. Five years later, Minji returned to the Philippines to further study medicine and wanted to re-acquire her Philippine citizenship. Is Minji eligible to re-acquire her Philippine citizenship under RA 9225?

Answer: Yes, Minji is eligible to re-acquire her Philippine citizenship under RA 9225. She is considered a natural-born Filipino since her mother is a Filipino citizen at her birth, before renouncing to apply for Korean citizenship.

In another scenario:

Applying the same facts from the case above with her mother obtaining Korean citizenship before her birth and Minji having obtained Philippine citizenship through naturalization before renouncing it for her Korean citizenship, is Minji still eligible to re-acquire her Philippine citizenship?

Answer: No, Minji is not eligible under RA 9225. She is not a natural-born Filipino and had acquired her Philippine citizenship only through naturalization, before renouncing to apply for Korean citizenship.

Domicile denotes a fixed permanent residence to which, when absent one has the intention of returning. Residence is used to indicate a place of abode, whether permanent or temporary. Domicile is residence coupled with the intention to remain for an unlimited time. No length of residence without intention of remaining will constitute domicile.(( MS Sta. Maria (2019). Persons and Family Relations Law. Rex Printing Company, Inc. p.95))

ARTICLE 50. For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of civil obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place of their habitual residence. (40a) (( Article 50 of the Civil Code f the Philippines ))

ARTICLE 51. When the law creating or recognizing them, or any other provision does not fix the domicile of juridical persons, the same shall be understood to be the place where their legal representation is established or where they exercise their principal functions. (41a) (( Article 51 of the Civil Code f the Philippines ))

Under the Family Code, the husband and wife shall fix the family domicile. In case of disagreement, the Court shall decide.(( Article 69 of the Family Code of the Philippines )) In case of a minor, he follows the domicile of his parents. If the child is illegitimate, the domicile of the mother is followed.

RALB Law | RABR & Associates Law Firm

Leave a reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked

Name * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Email * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You cannot copy content of this page

Clarify. Simplify. Multiply.

22 Ways Filipino Students Can Be Good Citizens

Good citizenship is a concept that goes beyond the textbooks. It’s about understanding your role in the community and playing it well. A good citizen isn’t just someone who follows laws; they actively contribute to the betterment of their community and nation.

Why does it matter, especially for you as students?

Well, imagine a school where everyone helps one another, respects each other’s beliefs and works together for the common good. That’s the magic of good citizenship—it transforms environments and builds stronger connections.

Good Citizenship: A Guide for Filipino Students

You, young minds, are the future of our nation, and by practicing good citizenship now, you’re laying the foundation for a brighter Philippines. Let’s dive into how you can embody this spirit.

1. Understand and Respect Diversity

Every individual is unique, bringing their own beliefs, traditions, and perspectives to the table.

By understanding and respecting diversity, we create a more inclusive and harmonious community. It’s a reflection of the Philippines itself—a nation rich in culture and heritage.

Actively listen when others speak, try to learn about different cultures, and avoid making assumptions.

Juan, a high school student, once made fun of a classmate for their regional accent. However, after attending a school event that celebrated regional cultures, he realized the beauty of diversity. Now, Juan takes the time to learn phrases from various Philippine languages and encourages his peers to appreciate the tapestry of our nation’s cultures.

Next time you notice something different about someone, take a moment to learn from them rather than judge. Embrace the richness of our Filipino diversity.

2. Engage in Volunteerism

Offering your time and skills for the benefit of others, without expecting anything in return.

Volunteering not only helps those in need but also instills a sense of purpose and community spirit. It bridges gaps and brings people together.

Join school clubs, community drives, or simply assist someone who needs help.

Maria, a senior high school student, started a weekend tutoring program for younger students in her barangay. What began as a small act of kindness snowballed into a community-wide effort with fellow students joining her initiative.

Look around you. There’s always someone who could use a hand. Whether it’s big or small, your act of service can make a world of difference.

3. Practice Bayanihan

Bayanihan isn’t just a word; it’s the heartbeat of Filipino community life. Rooted in the practice where villagers would physically move a traditional Filipino house (bahay kubo) by carrying it to a new location, bayanihan is about collective effort, unity, and achieving shared goals. It’s when everyone, regardless of their individual strengths and weaknesses, comes together as one.

Embracing bayanihan nurtures a community spirit. In times of need or crisis, it’s this spirit that binds Filipinos together, reminding us that we can achieve more when we stand united than when we stand alone.

Reflect on this: How can you foster the spirit of bayanihan in your school or neighborhood? Can you rally your classmates to start a community project? Perhaps there’s an elderly neighbor who could use some assistance?

Amidst the pandemic, Rosa, a Grade 10 student, felt the bayanihan spirit when she started a small online group to help students struggling with online learning. As more students volunteered to tutor, the group transformed into a large online community classroom, ensuring no student was left behind.

Seek out opportunities to bring people together. When the bayanihan spirit thrives, our communities prosper.

4. Respect and Care for the Environment

Our environment is a living testament to nature’s wonders. It is the forests that give us shade, the oceans that provide us food, and the air that we breathe. Caring for the environment isn’t just about planting trees or recycling; it’s about recognizing our deep interconnection with nature and understanding that our survival hinges on its well-being.

The Philippines, with its archipelagic beauty, is a treasure trove of biodiversity. Yet, this beauty is under threat. Respecting and caring for our environment is paramount for the sustenance of future generations.

Think about this: What small steps can you incorporate into your daily routine to reduce your environmental footprint? Could you campaign for a “No Plastic Day” in your school canteen or perhaps initiate a tree planting activity?

Angelo, a senior high student from Davao, was alarmed by the amount of plastic waste in his community. He initiated a “Bring Your Own Bottle” campaign in his school. The campaign grew, and local businesses started offering discounts to customers who practiced the same principle.

Our environment speaks to us in whispers and roars. Listen, act, and be the change you wish to see.

Channel these values and reflect on how you can make them come alive in your day-to-day life. Your journey as a Filipino student isn’t just about personal achievements; it’s about contributing to the larger story of our nation.

5. Uphold Integrity

Integrity is about being honest, transparent, and standing by your principles even when no one is watching. It’s not just about telling the truth, but living it in every action, every decision, and every word.

Trust is the backbone of any strong community. When individuals uphold integrity, they build trust, strengthening relationships and fostering a sense of safety and security in their community.

Ponder on this: Are there moments in school where you’re tempted to take shortcuts? How can you ensure that you remain true to your values, even when faced with challenges?

Sofia, a college student from Manila, found a lost wallet full of money on her way home. Instead of keeping it, she used the ID inside to track down the owner and return it. Her simple act inspired her peers to share stories of honesty and integrity, creating a ripple effect in her community.

Every choice you make defines who you are. Let integrity guide your actions, and watch how it transforms not just you, but those around you.

6. Value Family and Elders

In Filipino culture , the family is the core of society, and elders are its pillars. Valuing family and elders is about recognizing the wisdom, sacrifices, and love they offer. It’s about listening to their stories, seeking their advice, and cherishing the moments spent with them.

Elders connect us to our roots, traditions, and the rich tapestry of our history. By respecting and valuing them, we ensure that their wisdom is passed on to future generations.

Reflect on this: When was the last time you sat down with an elder in your family or community to listen to their life experiences? How can you show appreciation for your family and the elderly in your daily life?

Miguel, a high school student from Iloilo, started a project where students documented stories of the elderly in their community. These narratives became a local sensation, bridging the gap between generations and preserving a wealth of knowledge.

The tales and teachings of our elders are timeless treasures. Embrace them, learn from them, and let them be your guidepost.

The journey of good citizenship is rich and fulfilling; embrace it wholeheartedly and watch as the Philippines grows stronger with each step you take.

7. Engage in Open Dialogue

Engaging in open dialogue is about active listening, understanding, and constructive conversation. It’s not merely talking, but fostering an environment where everyone feels safe to express their opinions without fear of judgment.

Open dialogue encourages mutual respect and understanding. In a diverse nation like the Philippines, where a myriad of cultures and beliefs converge, open conversations can bridge gaps and resolve misunderstandings.

Reflect on this: Are there discussions in school or at home where you can be more open-minded? How can you create a space where others feel comfortable sharing their perspectives?

Amina, a student from Mindanao, organized a “Culture Exchange Day” in her school where students from various backgrounds shared their traditions, foods, and stories. This fostered an environment of understanding and respect among students who previously had misconceptions about each other.

Listen, learn, and love. Approach every conversation as an opportunity to grow and help others do the same.

8. Nurture the Spirit of Pagtutulungan

Pagtutulungan, or mutual help, is a deeply rooted Filipino value. It’s about assisting others without expecting anything in return, believing that collective efforts bring about greater results.

The spirit of pagtutulungan emphasizes unity and collaboration. In a world where individual success is often celebrated, this value reminds us that true achievement comes from lifting each other up.

Consider this: How can you collaborate with your classmates on a project or help those in your community? What initiatives can you start or join that emphasize mutual help?

Story: Carlos, a college student in Batangas, saw that many of his peers were struggling with online resources due to the pandemic. He initiated a resource-sharing platform where students could share books, notes, and materials, making academic resources accessible to all.

In moments of doubt, remember that unity is strength. When we work together, the impossible becomes achievable.

Being a good citizen isn’t just about individual acts but about fostering a sense of community, understanding, and mutual respect. The beauty of the Filipino spirit lies in its warmth, resilience, and unity.

9. Talk and Listen to Each Other

Talking and listening means sharing your thoughts and also hearing what others have to say. It’s like having a friendly chat where both sides get to speak.

By talking and really listening, we can understand each other better. It helps in solving misunderstandings and building friendships.

Think about this: Is there someone in school you haven’t really spoken to? Maybe it’s time to say hi and get to know them. And if there’s a group discussion, remember to listen as much as you talk.

Amina from Mindanao started a “Share-a-Story” day in her school. Everyone got a chance to tell a short story about themselves. It was fun, and many found new friends because they realized they had similar stories or interests.

Next time you’re with friends or in class, take a moment to really listen. You might learn something new or make a new friend!

10. Help Each Other Out

Helping each other, or “pagtutulungan”, is about giving a hand when someone needs it, even if they don’t ask. Imagine if everyone helped each other just a little bit – things would be so much easier!

When we all work together, bigger things can happen. Plus, it feels good to help and to be helped.

Think about this: Is there someone in your class who seems to be having a hard time with a subject you’re good at? Maybe you can offer to help them study. Or maybe your community needs volunteers for a project?

Carlos from Batangas noticed that some classmates didn’t have all the books they needed. So, he started a small group where everyone could share or borrow books. This simple act made everyone’s school life a bit easier.

Next time you see someone who might need a bit of help, don’t be shy. Offer a hand. When we all help out, great things happen!

Being a good student and friend isn’t just about getting good grades or being popular. It’s about understanding, helping, and caring for those around us. The cool thing is, when we all do our part, school and our whole community become a happier, friendlier place.

11. Be Honest, Always

Being honest means telling the truth, even if it might get you in trouble. It’s like when you accidentally break something and own up to it instead of hiding it.

Trust is like a special bond between friends. When you’re honest, people trust you more, and it makes your friendships even stronger.

Ask yourself: Have you ever been tempted to copy someone’s homework because you forgot to do yours? Next time, try asking them to explain it instead so you can learn and do it on your own.

Juan once found a lost phone at school. Instead of keeping it, he gave it to the school office. When the owner got it back, they were so thankful and became good friends with Juan.

Remember, it’s cool to be truthful. Being trusted is a great feeling!

12. Share and Celebrate Differences

Everyone is unique. Some of us like to dance, some like to draw, and others might love math. Celebrating differences means enjoying and learning from what makes each of us special.

Imagine if everyone was the same – it’d be pretty boring! Our differences make our school and community colorful and exciting.

Think: Do you know someone from a different part of the Philippines or who has different hobbies? Maybe you can ask them to teach you something new, or you can share something about yourself too.

Lina from Cebu taught her classmates a traditional Visayan dance, while they taught her some Tagalog songs. They had a great time exchanging and learning from each other.

Look around, find someone different, and learn something new. You’ll be amazed at the cool stuff you’ll discover!

Remember, school isn’t just about reading and writing. It’s a place where we learn about life, make friends, and grow up to be awesome people. Every small good thing you do makes a big difference.

13. Show Kindness Every Day

Kindness is like sharing a smile, helping someone pick up their books, or simply saying thank you. It’s the little things that make someone’s day brighter.

Kindness can spread like a good kind of virus. When someone is kind to you, you feel happy and want to be kind to others too.

Think: Can you do one kind thing every day? Maybe it’s complimenting a friend, or sharing your snacks, or even just listening to someone who needs to talk.

Maria saw that her classmate, Carlo, looked upset one day. Instead of walking past him, she sat with him and just listened. That simple act of kindness made Carlo’s day much better.

Challenge yourself to do one kind deed every day. It might be small, but it can make a big difference!

14. Be a Team Player

Being a team player is about working well with others. Whether it’s in sports, group projects, or games, it’s about doing your part and helping your teammates.

When everyone works together, things get done faster and it’s more fun. Plus, it’s a great way to make friends.

Ask yourself: Are you good at sharing ideas? Can you listen to what others have to say during group activities? Try to find ways to make everyone feel included.

During a group project, Jake noticed that Paolo was quiet. Instead of ignoring him, Jake asked Paolo for his ideas. Together, they came up with a super cool part of the project that everyone loved.

Remember, together is better. Next time you’re in a group, make sure everyone feels like a part of the team!

Every day at school is a new adventure. You get to learn, play, make friends, and so much more. By practicing these simple things, not only will you have more fun, but you’ll also help make your school a happier, friendlier place for everyone. So, keep shining and doing your best!

15. Respect Everyone

Respect is treating others the way you want to be treated. Whether it’s a teacher, a classmate, or the janitor, everyone deserves respect.

When you show respect, it builds trust and a positive environment. It makes school and other places nicer for everyone.

Think about it: Are there times when you might forget to say ‘please’ or ‘thank you’? Little gestures can show big respect.

When Ella noticed classmates leaving trash behind after lunch, she reminded them how hard the cleaners worked. The next day, the cafeteria was spotless.

Let’s make an effort! A simple ‘thank you’ or a nod can make a world of difference. Show respect, it’s cool!

16. Stay Curious

Being curious is about asking questions, wanting to learn new things, and always being eager to discover. Curiosity makes learning fun and exciting. It can turn a boring lesson into an amazing adventure.

Got a question? Don’t be shy, ask! Ever wonder how something works? Look it up or ask someone who might know.

Juan was always curious about stars. He asked his teacher, and together they started an after-school astronomy club. Now, many students enjoy stargazing!

Keep wondering, keep asking. The world is full of amazing things waiting for you to discover!

17. Be Responsible

Being responsible is about doing what you say you’ll do and taking care of your tasks, whether it’s homework, chores, or promises.

When you’re responsible, people can count on you. It shows you’re growing up and can handle bigger things.

Remember that project due next week? Start early. Promised to help a friend? Make sure you do.

Lara forgot to do her part in a group project once. She apologized and took responsibility. The next time, she finished her part early and earned back her group’s trust.

Show that you can be counted on! Whether it’s a small task or a big promise, always do your best.

School days are more than just lessons and tests; they’re about learning how to be the best version of ourselves. By practicing these habits, not only will you shine, but you’ll also help make school a great place for everyone.

18. Take Care of the Environment

Caring for the environment means not littering, recycling when you can, and looking after the nature around us. It’s about making sure our world stays beautiful and safe.

We only have one planet. If we take care of it now, it’ll be a better place for us and for future generations.

Think about the small things: Can you pick up trash if you see it? Maybe join a school club that focuses on the environment?

Marco and his friends noticed a lot of trash in their school’s garden. They started a cleanup drive every month. Soon, their garden looked beautiful, and other students joined in to help!

Let’s be planet heroes! Even small acts can help make our world cleaner and greener.

19. Stand Up Against Bullying

Standing up against bullying means not letting anyone get picked on or hurt, and speaking out if you see it happening.

Everyone deserves to feel safe and happy at school. When we stand against bullying, we’re making school a better place for everyone.

If you see someone being teased or bullied, can you help them? Maybe tell a teacher or an adult, or even just be a friend to the person being bullied.

Sam saw Mia being teased because of her glasses. He decided to wear funny glasses the next day to make her laugh and show that it’s okay to be different. Many others joined, turning it into a “fun glasses day”.

Let’s make school a no-bullying zone. Stand by your classmates and show them they’re not alone.

20. Be Grateful

Being grateful is about saying ‘thank you’ and appreciating the good things and people in your life.

Gratitude makes us happier and reminds us of the good in the world.

Can you think of something or someone you’re thankful for today? Maybe share your feelings with them?

Every night, Anna writes down three things she’s thankful for in a little journal. Over time, even on bad days, she always finds something positive.

Try Anna’s idea or simply say ‘thank you’ more often. It’s a small word with a big impact.

Your school journey is filled with lessons beyond the classroom. Each step you take helps shape the person you’ll become. So, always strive to be kind, caring, and the best version of yourself. Remember, every positive action makes school and the world a better place!

21. Embrace Patience

Patience is about waiting calmly, even when things don’t happen immediately. It’s understanding that some things take time.

Not everything will always go our way, and that’s okay. Being patient helps us handle challenges without getting too upset.

If something is taking longer than expected, like waiting in line or understanding a tricky subject, take a deep breath and remind yourself that it’s okay to wait.

Jolina was having a hard time mastering a new dance move. Instead of getting frustrated, she practiced a little bit every day. With patience and determination, she finally nailed it during the school performance!

When things get tough, remember Jolina. Take your time, and believe in yourself. You’ll get there!

22. Spread Positivity

Spreading positivity means sharing good vibes, cheering people up, and looking at the bright side of things.

A positive attitude can change the mood of a whole room. When you’re positive, it’s contagious, and it lifts everyone’s spirits.

Think: Can you compliment someone today? Or share a funny story or joke to make someone laugh?

Miguel had a simple goal: to make someone smile every day. Whether it was sharing a funny drawing or simply saying something kind, his positive energy became legendary in school.

Be like Miguel and spread happiness! A little positivity can turn someone’s day around.

School is more than just books and exams; it’s a journey of growth and self-discovery. Every act of kindness, every smile shared, and every hand extended in friendship leaves a mark. As students, you have the power to transform your school and community one good deed at a time.

So, step out there, be the change, and inspire others with your radiant positivity! 🌟

About The Author

Jef Menguin

Leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

--> Get 3M: Monday Morning Motivation (Short Notes to Start Your Week)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

I offer immersive, playful, and impactful learning experiences.

The best training programs we can give to leaders help them get started, build momentum, and make breakthroughs.

Schedule a free Zoom consultation.

Start typing and press enter to search

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

AN ANALYSIS ON HOW CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION IS LOCATED IN THE PRESENT K TO 12 SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM IN THE PHILIPPINES

Related Papers

International Journal of Learning and Development, 7(1), 41-61

Αργύρης Κυρίδης

Preparing students for the honor and privilege of being able to assume the role of citizen is one of the main roles and aims of education, which is considered to be one of the most important institutions as far as political socialization and civic education of children is concerned. The power of a state lies with its citizens. In a democracy, everyone is responsible for what happens in the public sphere and thus, everyone must be properly prepared for and committed to the role of citizen. The question is whether the current education system is ready and able to form conscientious and active citizens. This study consists of 103 activities that were designed with civic education in mind by students of various education faculties of various universities in Greece (students of faculties of primary education N = 54, students of faculties of preschool education N = 49) and analyzed. The average age of the students that participated in the study was 20.3 years. The results show that students choose activities that are mainly related to environmental education and democracy and focus less on activities related with interculturalism. More advanced students (i.e. students who are closer to graduation) are usually using more measurable objectives and experiential methods. As far as

Markus Sehlmeyer

The concept of citizenship, which is unknown to the states and empires of the Ancient Near East, constitutes one of the most salient features of the Greek and Roman World. The article discusses the concept from Archaic Greece to Late Antiquity.

Nitish Yadav

Review of European Studies, 9, (4), 148 - 159

We are moving into an era of intense economic, social and political crisis, where the need of active and critically thinking citizens is imperative. Teachers play a key role in the transmission of knowledge, values and skills which are essential for students to become effective citizens. The aim of the study is to investigate teachers' perceptions about citizenship and its functionality as educational tool in the classroom. Specifically I investigated their views on citizenship, on citizenship education and on ways of teaching citizenship, as well as, on the objectives of citizenship education that they consider as important. Finally, I examined the frequency with which they perform certain actions in their classroom. The survey was conducted in the spring of 2016 using a questionnaire with closed questions. In our research took part 183 Greek primary school teachers.

Journal of Education and Human Development

Gerasimos Koustourakis

Konstantinos Tsioumis , Maria Karadimou , Argyris Kyridis

Elias Matsagouras

Journal of the Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture

'Goke Akinboye

The notions of citizen and citizenship have been understood in different senses. When Barrack Obama was campaigning for his presidential election some years back, many conservatives peddled conflicting stories about his US citizenship. Some of the stories alleged that: his birth certificate was forged, he had dual citizenship in both the US and Britain and his country of birth was either Kenya or Indonesia, not Honolulu in Hawaii where he was actually born. Thus citizenship today denotes a link between a person and his state of birth with the rights to work, trade, reside and participate in the civic life of the community. Compared with the ancient world, citizenship, with regard to the state, conveyed deeper meaning. The ancient Greeks believed that the state is a creature of nature. By nature, man himself is a political animal, only capable of relating to humanity through his rights to participate in the affairs of the state. The state is a multifaceted entity, made up of citizens. Therefore, without the citizens, there is no state and without the state, no citizens. It then follows that the extent to which a state is good is proportional to the nature of its citizens and vice versa. For the Greeks, like Aristotle, the city-state should be the only proper setting for man's greatest good (summum bonum). In view of the above and in the face of contemporary realities in African states, it becomes imperative to look again at the roots of citizenship in order to understand both its historical and cultural context. Using Aristotle's Politics as a template, this paper reviews the concept of citizenship by providing insights into the workings and attitudes of the citizens of the state of Athens, the city that served as " education to all Hellas ". Simultaneously, the paper presents a view into the civic mind of Aristotle, the greatest scholar of the Socratic school whose clinical and critical study of his society has continued to influence the modern thought.

Burcu Tekin

The purpose of this paper is to search the impact of the modern and postmodern logic in the formation of the school knowledge regarding the subject of the Citizenship Education and its teaching in contemporary Greek Primary School. The most important findings of this research show that the school knowledge of social and political studies and the instructions given for their teaching management follow the logic of modernism, while postmodern influences are found mainly in the application of the educational package, that contains the educational software, and in the possibility given to the educator to develop teaching strategies through the adoption of various teaching methods.

RELATED PAPERS

Rachael van der Kooye

Journal of Case Reports and Scientific Images

MOHAN PATIL , Jinela desouza , Anil Kurane

Maria Luisa Fernandez-Marcos

Gaceta Medica Boliviana

Gilberto Bastidas

Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985)

Simeon Cairns

Simona Oancea

Scientific Reports

Hussein Abdel-haleem

Oana Maria Marinica

Dan Bouhnik

Canadian Journal of Physics

Cristóbal Colón Hernández

Rizki Manalu

Journal of Corporate Finance

Salim Chahine

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids

Gabriel J Cuello

International Journal of Online Marketing

MEHEDI HASAN

Cancer and Metastasis Reviews

Javier S. Morales Rojas

Investigação Qualitativa em Ciências Sociais: Avanços e Desafios // Investigación Cualitativa en Ciencias Sociales: Avances y Desafíos

tiago nascimento

Tijdschrift voor Gerontologie en Geriatrie, 2007

Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Panagiota Korenis

Goshka Bialek

Physical Review D

Diabetes & Metabolism

Catherine Tourette-Turgis

Ramli Harahap

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Citizenship Issues and the Presidential Elections in the Philippines

— Dante Gatmaytan, University of the Philippines, College of Law

There is an issue shadowing the presidential elections in the Philippines in May 2016. The leading candidate is Senator Mary Grace Poe Llamanzares. Senator Poe (she does not use her husband’s name) was the daughter of movie royalty but she stayed out of the limelight for most of her life. She was naturalized as a citizen of the United States in 2001 after being petitioned by her husband who has dual citizenship. [1]

Her father Fernando Poe, Jr. ran for President in 2004, but he lost to Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. He died of a heart attack while his electoral protest was pending. Senator Poe returned to the Philippines after her father’s death and joined the public sector. She gave up her US citizenship and served as the chair of the Movie and Television Regulatory and Classification Board, then ran as a Senator in 2010 garnering the highest number of votes.

Senator Poe’s path to the presidency took an interesting turn when it was revealed that she is a foundling. Her status as a foundling raised an important issue because according to the Philippine Constitution, a Senator and the President must be a natural born citizen. [2] Is a foundling a natural born Filipino? If not, then was she illegally elected as a Senator and is she barred from running as President?

Her political rivals were quick to capitalize on her past. Rizalito David, a losing candidate in the 2010 senatorial elections challenged her qualifications as a Senator before the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET). The SET is the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the Senate. The SET has nine Members, three of whom are Justices of the Supreme Court designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining six are Senators. [3]

After Poe filed her certificate of candidacy for President, cases challenging her qualifications were filed with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) all claiming that a foundling is not a natural born citizen.

In the meantime, the SET promulgated its decision dismissing the petition to unseat Senator Poe. [4] The Poe camp is hyping her victory, claiming that the issue of her citizenship has been clearly and convincingly settled.

Poe’s posturing may be an attempt to mask her tenuous victory. The SET voted 5 to 4 in her favor. Her support came from five Senators who apparently closed ranks to protect one of their own. The three Supreme Court Justices who sat in the SET voted against her. One Senator voted against Poe: Senator Nancy Binay, the daughter of the Vice President Jejomar Binay who is also running for President (and running second according to surveys).

Senators voting in her favor also give the impression that their decisions were guided less by the law and more by political considerations. Senator Loren Legarda wrote that “I believe that by denying Senator Poe’s natural-born citizenship, we would be reversing the will of over 20 million voters. And in the process, we would be effectively denying our entire electorate the opportunity to select their President freely and democratically.” [5] Senator Vicente Sotto III wrote that the composition of the SET alone indicated that the Constitution “did not demand a strictly legal viewpoint in deciding disqualification cases against senators…. The fact that six Senators elected by the whole country form part of the Senate Electoral Tribunal would suggest that the judgment of the whole Filipino nation must be taken into consideration also.” [6]

Poe’s popularity has not been affected by the cases questioning her eligibility to run for office. Three days after the SET’s decision was announced, media reported that Poe lead other candidates with 39 percent, up by 13 points from 26 percent in September.

But Poe’s victory is already unraveling: on December 1, the COMELEC’s Second Division voted to disqualify her in the race for the presidency for failing to meet both the residency and citizenship requirements of the Constitution. The COMELEC en banc will still rule on the issue, as will the Supreme Court but without Senators willing to gloss over the law, her chances of staying in the race are dimmer. If she is disqualified by the Supreme Court, this would place Vice-President Binay, already indicted by the Ombudsman for graft, [7] ahead of the pack.

Things could worsen if the decision to disqualify Poe comes after the elections in May. Poe’s supporters are urging authorities to adhere to the popular will instead of the requirements of the law. The Supreme Court has said, however, that when the law requires qualifications to be possessed by persons desiring to serve as elective public officials, those qualifications must be met before one even becomes a candidate and that “[w]hen a person who is not qualified is voted for and eventually garners the highest number of votes, even the will of the electorate expressed through the ballot cannot cure the defect in the qualifications of the candidate.” [8]

If a Poe victory cannot cure the defect in her citizenship, who would become the President if she is disqualified after elections? Recent case law suggests that the candidate who obtains the second highest number of votes will be declared the winner. Things are looking good for the Vice-President.

If the Supreme Court finds reason to disqualify Senator Poe, it must do so quickly and convincingly to assure the public that the decision is not politically motivated. It will not be an easy task convincing Poe’s supporters how the fact that she is a foundling deprives her of the opportunity to run for President.

Suggested Citation : Dante Gatmaytan,  Citizenship Issues and the Presidential Elections in the Philippines , Int’l J. Const. L. Blog, Dec. 1, 2015, at: http://www.iconnectblog.com/2015/11/citizenship-issues-and-the-presidential-elections-in-the-philippines

[1]  Camille Elemia, Timeline: Grace Poe’s citizenship, residency, RAPPLER, September 4, 2015, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/104731-grace-poe-citizenship-residency-timeline-arguments.

[2]  Const., Art. VI, § 3 and Art. VII, § 2.

[3]  Const., Art. VI, § 17.

[4]  Decision of the Senate Electoral Tribunal on SET Case 001-15, November 17, 2015, available at http://www.set.gov.ph/decision-set-case-001-15-david-v-poe-lamanzares/.

[5]  Separate opinion of Senator Legarda on SET Case 001-15, November 17, 2015, available at http://www.set.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/S.-Legarda-SET-CASE-001-15-David-v-Poe-Lamanzares.pdf.

[6]  Separate opinion of Senator Sotto on SET Case 001-15, November 17, 2015, available at http://www.set.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/S.-Sotto-SET-CASE-001-15-David-v-Poe-Lamanzares.pdf.

[7]  Camille Diola, Ombudsman Oks criminal raps vs VP Binay, son, THE PHILIPPINE STAR, October 12, 2015, http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2015/10/12/1509924/ombudsman-oks-criminal-raps-vs-vp-binay-son.

[8] Maquiling v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 195649, April 16, 2013.

• Post category: Faculty Highlights
• Post published: January 1, 2015
• Post last modified: July 16, 2020

Atty. Fina dela Cuesta-Tantuico

• Assistant to the Dean for Alumni Affairs
• Senior Lecturer, UP College of Law
• Professorial Lecturer, Lyceum of the Philippines College of Law
• Fellow, 1st UP Creative Writers’ Workshop (1980)
• Instructor I, UP Department of English and Comparative Literature (1982)
• Trustee and Corporate Secretary, UP Law Alumni Foundation Inc.; Justice George Malcolm Foundation Inc.
• Past President, UP Women Lawyers’ Circle
• Past President, Philippine Bar Association
• UP College of Arts and Sciences, A.B. English, cum laude (1982)
• UP Law Class 1988

Atty. Rizalde Laudencia

• Member, Sangguniang Panlungsod, San Fernando, La Union
• Studied at Confucius Institute, Ateneo de Manila University
• Does Chinese Painting ( Lingnan Style)
• Writes poems in English, Tagalog, and Ilocano
• UP A.B. Political Science (1978)
• UP Law Class 1982

Dr. Rolando Tolentino

• Professor, UP Film Institute
• Director, UP Institute of Creative Writing
• Former Dean, UP College of Mass Communication
• Member, Manunuri ng Pelikulang Pilipino and the Film Development Council of the Philippines
• Awardee: UP Press Centennial Publication Award; National Book Award, Obermann Summer Research Fellowship; Manila Critics Circle Award; Carlos Palanca Memorial Awards for Literature
• A.B. Economics, De La Salle University
• M.A. in Philippine Studies, De La Salle University
• Ph. D. in Film, Literature and Culture, University of Southern California

Atty. Nicolas Pichay

• Director, Legislative Research Service, Senate of the Philippines
• Poet, playwright, essayist
• Hubert Humphrey Fellow, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University 2018
• Awardee: Carlos Palanca Literary Prize (2007 Hall of Fame); NCCA Literary Awards; CCP Literary Awards; Asian Cultural Council; and Gawad Pambansang Alagad ni Balagtas of UMPIL (2016)
• UP A.B. Political Science (1984)

Atty. Alden Lauzon

• Assistant Professor 7, Department of Art Studies, UP College of Arts and Letters (CAL)
• Associate Dean for Administration, CAL (June 2015 – June 2021)
• Senior Partner, Pedregosalaw Offices
• UP M.A. Art Studies, Art History (1998)
• UP Law Class 2000

Dr. Jose Dalisay Jr.

• Professor Emeritus , English and Creative Writing, UP
• Fellow and Former Director, UP Institute of Creative Writing
• Author, writer
• Awardee: 16 Carlos Palanca Awards in 5 genres
• UP College of Arts and Sciences, A.B. English, cum laude (1984)

Jayvee Arbonida del Rosario (Student)

Fever dream (I want to stay)

What is to wake? As days blur by and memory fails, so too does the line between dream and reality fade. One is as ephemeral as the other. Perhaps, it is in this realm of warped time and lost futures, of muted joys and terrors, where things make more sense.

Marissa Lucido Iñigo (Admin Staff)

Pagsulong sa kabila ng pagsubok

Bagamat matagal at paulit-ulit na tayong naghihigpit at lumuluwag sa mga kwarantin na ipinapatupad sa ating bansa, iisa lang ang nababakas sa mga buhay ng mga Pilipino araw-araw, pagsulong at pagtataguyod sa pamilya sa kabila ng pagsubok na sinasagupa araw-araw.

Nababata ng mga manggagawa ang lahat para sa kanilang mga pamilya. Nadagdag isuot araw-araw ang proteksyon laban sa nakakahawang sakit, pero talaga nga bang napoproteksyunan tayo sa totoong sakit sa bansa?

“Ano nga ba ang tunay na pagsubok? Ang Pandemya o ang sistema?” – Tanong ng Pilipinong lumalaban.

Gianina O. Cabanilla (REPS)

Stay with me till the sun sets and we rise together

The fury, the fire, the glory of endings and beginnings, the bone melting pain of it all

Life goes on… and we will not stop pushing for a better tomorrow. Not now, not ever.

Note: This e-book is intended for online viewing only. It is not intended as an actual publication. Click on the thumbnail to view the winning entries.

(To view  all entries , click here )

Recommended internet cookies are used by this website to improve your browsing experience. These cookies include Google Analytics, Facebook, Instagram, WordPress and Zendesk products or widgets. Your consent is important to us.

Primer for Engaged Citizenship

Filipino version.

Every Filipino has the capacity to do their part as engaged citizens in working toward a better Philippines. How can we work together as one Filipino family in showing our love for our country?

In previous exhibits, we learned about democracy and the ways that it upholds the dignity of every Filipino citizen. While Martial Law was declared with the promise of a New Society, it also violated people’s freedoms, plundered the nation’s wealth, and corrupted institutions with effects we continue to feel to this day.

The success or failure of a country cannot depend on a single man. No matter who our leader is, every Filipino has the capacity to do their part as engaged citizens in working toward a better Philippines. How can we work together as one Filipino family in showing our love for our country?

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS

As Filipinos, we are all recognized under the 1987 Constitution as having fundamental, inalienable rights. No matter who the leader is, we have a just claim to these rights. We also know that each basic right corresponds to an inherent responsibility. In our everyday lives, we strive to uphold these responsibilities as engaged citizens.

The first step to being able to embody these rights is knowing them. Once we know what our rights are, we are empowered to live out these rights and the responsibilities they entail. For each of our rights recognized under the Constitution, what do you think is our corresponding responsibility?

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

The right to life..

Under this right, all life is considered sacred. No life can be taken away with impunity. The law equally protects all life, and no person can be denied this right.

The right to property.

Under this right, all people have the right to their own property. Private property thus cannot be seized or searched without sufficient reason. Even with a search warrant, authorities must present probable cause, and specify exactly what will be searched.

The right to privacy.

Under this right, the privacy of communication between citizens is considered inviolable. Any information obtained by violating this privacy cannot be used in court to incriminate the speakers. Thus, the state is not mandated to invade the persona lives of its citizens, but instead respect their autonomy and freedom in relationships.

The right to freedom of speech.

Under this right, no law may be enacted that restricts the people’s freedom of speech. Even when this speech goes against the government, the state cannot curb the people’s ability to peacefully express their grievances. This is a basic precondition for any democratic society: that one is free to express one’s views and contribute to ongoing dialogue with their fellow citizens without fear.

The right to freedom of religion.

Under this right, Filipino citizens are free to practice any religion of their choosing. Laws may not be enacted that prohibits the free exercise of one’s religious beliefs. Moreover, religion can never be made a condition for whether someone can exercise their civil and political rights.

The right to freedom of information.

Under this right, Filipinos may have free access to information that matters to the public. This includes official records and data used by government to create policies. Thus, every citizen will be able to scrutinize the evidence and draw their own conclusions about the actions we should take as a nation.

The right to vote.

Under this right, all Filipino citizens above 18 years old who have lived in the Philippines for at least a year have the right to vote during Philippine elections. Ways and means shall be designed so that literacy and disability will never be an obstacle to suffrage. All Filipinos are guaranteed a voice in choosing our leaders in a free and democratic society.

The right to assemble.

Under this right, all persons are freely allowed to form unions and associations, so long as their purposes are lawful. This right stands even in the case where these associations are in disagreement with the views of authority.

The right to due process.

Under this right, no person shall be punished for a crime without due process. Moreover, the court shall strive to provide citizens accused of crimes with speedy, impartial, and public trials, including providing them with competent lawyers in case they cannot afford one. All are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

The right against inhumane treatment.

Under this right, no torture or violence may be used against someone being investigated for or convicted of a crime. Similarly, secret detention and solitary confinement are prohibited because of their cruelty. Victims and their families shall be appropriately compensated in the event that such violations occur.

SERVE ANYWHERE

In Filipino culture, it is said that we think and act as one big family. But who really is our family? As engaged Filipino citizens, how can we live so that we treat each other as belonging to the same family?

One problem we may encounter is when we limit the horizon of whom we consider to be our family—whom we treat with respect, kindness, and compassion. Imagine where we could be as a nation in a Philippines where we truly believed and acted as one family working together for a brighter future. You can start this change today, beginning in your own home, and serve anywhere.

The journey of becoming an engaged citizen starts at home. When we think of heroes, we often imagine larger-than-life figures performing grand feats. We seldom realize that there are plenty of opportunities to learn and develop engaged citizenship even at home. Help with the household chores. Study hard. Teach your siblings when they have difficulties in school. Respect your elders. Respect those younger than you. Learn to save water and electricity. Say “please” and “thank you”. As these seemingly mundane efforts build-up, together they can empower us to apply these same principles of ordinary service in every aspect of our lives, ever radiating outward. Never underestimate the power of everyday acts of love and kindness that contribute to the unshakable strength of the basic unit of the Filipino society.

Our community is our first encounter with members of society whom we may not know as intimately as our immediate family yet see every day. They may also be our first concrete experience of a special cause, one that we believe in, and that inspires us to act. Thus, our community is our first opportunity to go beyond our comfort zones and grow in service to our fellow Filipinos. Whether in our school, in our church, or in our immediate neighborhood, there are always opportunities for us to serve and engage those around us. Reaching out to discover what those opportunities are is the best first step.

It is said that character is shown by what a person does when nobody is looking. Online, people are often allowed the benefit of anonymity. This has been the source of unnecessary conflict and disrespect, surrounding virtually any public issue. Because of the widespread availability of diverse kinds of web content, people may also be led to share news or information that might not necessarily be accurate—or worse, they might be falsehoods intentionally designed to misinform. Engaged citizenship in the digital sphere of the internet calls for conducting oneself responsibly, even when nobody knows who you are. By promoting honest and respectful conversation, civil engagement can thus be cultivated even online; better yet, various parties may learn a new take on an issue, which allows them to grow as people. Moreover, by developing critical thinking skills, engaged citizens may learn to discern between fake news and credible information, promoting the value of truth and fact-based discussion.

How can we show our love for our nation? It may be a daunting prospect to imagine, but in fact, being an engaged citizen at home, in our communities, and even online is already a way of concretely showing patriotism. As individual citizens, our collective efforts to cultivate service in our everyday lives build together toward an engaged Filipino citizenry. One way to expand the role patriotism plays in our lives is to actively expand our understanding of what our nation means, especially in our geographical setting as an archipelago. We may, for instance, get so caught up in the everyday experience of our specific place and time that we fail to recognize that the Philippines is composed of very distinct contexts in a single nation. It is only in recognizing these differences that true unity can be built. Thus, to be patriotic means to choose leaders that uphold this unity through their actions. It means seeking out, for example, government policies that benefit all provinces, instead of favoring one at the expense of another. It also means developing empathy for Filipino experiences outside our own, which involves integration with others and genuinely listening to their joys and struggles. As engaged citizens, we must recognize that to love the country is to love all 100 million of our fellow Filipinos, as one family.

 Photo by John Oranga

Related articles, martial law museum.

All materials in this website are used with permission from the owners. Citations are found as footnotes in every exhibit.

This is a community museum. If you want to contribute in any way, please reach out to us.

[email protected]

• Mag-aral Digital Library
• Magturo Lesson Plans and Teaching Materials
• Manindigan Make a Stand

Philippine Consulate General

The Republic of the Philippines

PHILIPPINE CONSULATE GENERAL

New york, usa.

RECOGNITION AS A FILIPINO CITIZEN

Under the Bureau of Immigration’s Law Instruction No. RBR-99002, issued on 15 April 1999, any child born of a Filipino parent may be recognized as a Filipino citizen under existing laws.

The following documents are to be submitted to the Commissioner of Immigration in the Philippines :

Documentary Requirements

Petition in the form of letter-request.

The petition, in the form of a letter-request, made under oath by the Filipino parent or legally appointed guardian. A person who is 18 years old must apply in his/her own capacity. In default of parents or a judicially appointed guardian, the following persons shall exercise substitute parental authority over the child in the order indicated: (a) The surviving grandparent as provided in Article 214 of the Family Code; (b) The oldest brother or sister over 21 years of age, unless unfit or disqualified; and (c) The child’s actual custodian, over 21 years of age, unless unfit or disqualified. In case the letter-request is made by a person on behalf of any of the parents, the legally appointed guardian, or persons exercising substitute parental authority, he or she must be duly authorized through a power of attorney to file such petition.

Authenticated birth certificate of the child

Birth certificate of the filipino parent, affidavit of citizenship executed by the applicant's filipino parent attesting to his/her citizenship at the time of birth of the child, photocopy of the child's passport, if he/she has one, photocopy of the filipino parent's passport, if he/she has one, proof of filipino citizenship of a parent at the time of birth of the child other than the parent’s passport or the child’s passport, note: all documents issued by the foreign governments and those executed in a foreign country shall be duly authenticated by the authorized officer of the philippine embassy or consulate that has jurisdiction over them. , communications, statements, or documents executed in a language other than english or filipino should be officially translated under the seal of the authorized officer of the appropriate foreign embassy. , pursuant to executive order no. 292, the bureau of immigration, through its records section, will automatically furnish the department of justice an official copy of its order of recognition within 12 days from its date of approval. identification certificates shall be issued only after confirmation by the secretary of justice. , for more information.

http://www.immigration.gov.ph/services/citizenship-retention-and-aquisition/recognition-as-filipino-citizen

What's next after you have the Identification Certificate or IC?

Report your birth to the appropriate Philippine Embassy or Consulate which has jurisdiction over the place of birth.

Click here to know how to report the birth.  

Apply for Philippine Passport

The child is eligible to apply for a Philippine passport immediately after reporting the birth to the appropriate Philippine Embassy or Consulate.

Click here   to know how to apply for Philippine passport.  

• The Philippines
• The President
• The Government
• The Department of Foreign Affairs
• The Secretary of Foreign Affairs
• The Consul General
• The Consulate
• History of the Consulate General
• Consulate Directory
• Non-Working Holidays
• Consulate Finder
• Announcements and Advisories
• Press and Photo Releases
• Cultural & Community Events
• Consular Outreach
• Online Appointment
• Assistance-to-Nationals
• Civil Registration
• Dual Citizenship (RA 9225)
• Notarial Services
• Overseas Voting
• Travel Document
• Passport Tracker
• Schedule of Fees
• Citizen’s Charter
• Adopt a Child from the Philippines
• Foreign Donations to the Philippines
• Foreign Medical Missions to the Philippines
• GSIS Pensioners Abroad
• Importation of Motor Vehicles to the Philippines
• Importation of Personal Effects to the Philippines
• Importation of Pets and Plants to the Philippines
• J1 Visa Waiver
• National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Clearance
• Philippine Centenarians
• Philippine Driver’s License Renewal
• PRC Registration of New Professionals
• Renunciation of Philippine Citizenship
• Restrictions in Bringing Medicine & Other Regulated Products to the Philippines
• Shipment of Human Remains to the Philippines
• Social Security System (SSS)
• Travel Tax Exemption
• Videoconference Hearing
• Sentro Rizal
• Promoting Philippine Culture
• Doing Business & Investing in the Philippines
• Traveling to the Philippines
• Fil-Am Community Directory
• Filipino Businesses
• Filipino International Students
• Request Message of the Consul General
• Procurements