• The vicious attacks against Senator Poe and the Supreme Court


    “Beyond this place of wrath and tears
    Looms but the Horror of the shade,
    And yet the menace of the years
    Finds and shall find me unafraid.”
    – From Invictus by William Ernest Henley

    My last column is the last about EDSA. I have dispensed with the lessons learned from that uprising. It is presumptuous of me to tell everyone the lessons I have learned. I’ll just keep them to myself in preparation for the final plunge, whatever that means.

    The vicious attacks

    I was shocked to read the vicious attacks against Senator Grace Poe and the Supreme Court after the release of the Supreme Court decision. I never thought that people who pretend to have intelligence and education could come out with such vicious, ignorant and irrational attacks against Senator Poe and the SC. There are several reasons why I am passionately enraged. First, I hate ignorant and irrational discussion in any form. Second, I have no respect for arguments offered by people who are not authorities on the subject.

    Third, there is no room for argumentum ad hominem in a civilized discussion; that may be good for gutter politicians, who constitute the rule in our society, but not for polite and decent company. Fourth, I dislike the approach of people who lecture to us on honesty and morality when they have no basis for doing so considering their background. Fifth, I rage against injustice in any form.

    What these attackers should do?

    If these attackers do not like the decision, why don’t they just argue their position well, so the people can consider whether they are right or wrong? They don’t have to malign Senator Poe and the justices who rendered the decision in favor of Poe and the foundlings.

    The rule in decent debate and conversation is to avoid going into the motives, character and qualifications of Senator Poe and the justices; discuss the issues and present your legal and factual arguments for examination by your audience.

    Let’s leave the justices out of the public discussion and spare Senator Poe of the viciousness that characterizes street political debate in this country and in the world for that matter. Let’s just argue with a high degree of civility by presenting our arguments well.

    Since a motion for reconsideration is obviously an exercise in futility, the vicious attackers have these options: First, take the issue to the people and intensify their campaign against Senator Poe so she will not be elected President. Second, file an impeachment case against the justices that they hate under Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution. Third, mount a revolution under Section 1 or 3 of Article II of the Constitution, if they have the means, guts and intelligence that are necessary for victory.

    And let’s see how good they are. In the meantime, they should not pollute the air with their vicious, ignorant and irrational arguments.

    First things first

    These are things people should know about me. For the moment, I do not believe that elections will pave the way for the choice of a national leader, that is why I have no candidate for President, Vice-President or senators. Anyhow, my endorsement has no pragmatic value in electing any of these officials. I have shed off membership in all political parties except my own, which is for now dormant, the Mindanao Alliance. I have no ambition to be President or anything else except that I am working for a change of system. I believe in this country and the validity of my ideas, vision and principles. I don’t get disturbed by what people say of me or my writings – they can go to Hell for all I care. I will just do what is right.

    I believe in a peaceful constitutional revolution. If it is no longer possible, I believe in what President John F. Kennedy once said: “Those who make peaceful revolutions impossible render violent revolutions inevitable.”

    Back to Senator Poe, foundlings and the SC

    I am neither a campaigner nor supporter of Senator Poe; she has enough campaigners and supporters to elect her president. She does not need my vote. I am not a defender of the Supreme Court; the members are old enough to defend themselves and the institution. I am writing this piece as a contribution to intelligent, rational and civil discussion on the subject of foundlings and whether Senator Poe can run for president of this country. So let us go back to basics.

    What is a foundling? It is child found after it is abandoned by unknown parents.

    What is the citizenship of a foundling in the Philippines before the decision? There is no law in the Philippine, before the decision, which defines the citizenship of a foundling.

    In the absence of such law, who is empowered by the Constitution of the Philippines to resolve that issue if there is a case before the courts or any of her institutions? The body or institution which has the sole power to make that determination is the Supreme Court
    (SC) under section 1, Article VIII of the Constitution

    Why must the SC rule on the issue? It is because the Constitution says so and it is a legal doctrine in this jurisdiction that law abhors a vacuum and there is an existing vacuum in our laws on that particular issue.

    Absent the existence of such law that will resolve the issue on the citizenship of foundlings, what is the remaining point of reference of the SC to provide the answer to this question?

    There is nothing, except section 3, paragraph y of Rule 131 of the Rules of Court (RC) which states that “Disputable presumptions. – The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence: …(y) That things have happened in the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life;”

    What is the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life? That the disputable
    presumption that foundling abandoned in the Philippines, as in the case of Senator Poe, is that her parents are Filipino citizens.

    Why should that be the disputable presumption? Because it is the ordinary course of nature and natural habits that only a Filipino parent/s could have left a foundling in the Philippines. It is absurd to imagine that a foreign parent/s would come to the Philippines just to abandon a child. And in this jurisdiction, under the rules of statutory interpretation, one should not give a law or rule an absurd interpretation?

    That being the case, what then is the citizenship of a foundling? Of course, she/he is a natural-born Filipino citizen. Being a natural-born citizen, he/she, as in the case of Senator Poe, can run for President under section 2, Article VII of the Constitution.

    Can the disputable be disputed and overcome? Yes, under section 1, Rule 131, if the one who disputes the presumption can present any credible contrary evidence.

    In the case of Senator Poe, have the claimants who maintain that she is not a natural-born Filipino citizen presented any contrary evidence to support their claim? Absolutely, none!
    This in a nutshell is the case of Senator Poe. Any other interpretation is not consistent with our laws and the English language.


    Please follow our commenting guidelines.


    1. jaime lagapa alviola on

      Since it is admitted by Grace Poe herself that she is a foundling that means she does not know whether her biological parents were Filipino citizens or not. Since she cannot claim as fact her parents were Filipinos, was it legally correct for the Supreme Court to disregard the Constitution’s definition of a natural born Filipino by ASSUMING that a foundling like her are from now on considered to be born of parents who are Filipino citizens? This is a very dangerous precedent as it may, if not will, wreck havoc not only on Philippine jurisprudence but certainly will raise questions on the legality of her presidential acts. What happens if Grace Poe were elected president and after serving her term her biological mother is identified but is not a Filipino after all? What will happen to the bills that will be passed by Congress and signed by President Poe into laws? Will those laws be considered as null and void from the beginning because Grace Poe was not a natural born Filipino and therefore disqualified to be President? What will the Supreme Court say then? Oops, sorry folks we made a monumental mistake?

      • That is why she is a foundling because she was abandoned in Philippine soil. If anybody claims that she is her mother, she has to go to court to prove that point. This is going to be a lengthy litigation before it goes to the Supreme Court. By the time the case could be resolved she would have been out of office. Of course not, even if it is proved later that she has a foreign mother, all her acts as President are valid and stay as laws. Under our laws they are valid because they are acts of a de facto President. You have nothing to worry Ma’am.Your worry is the stupidity of our people.- faithfully, TEKLA

    2. matino na pinoy on

      Mr. Adaza, you have a very impressive resume and an excellent understanding about the Philippine Constitution. However, I am not very sure if you I.Q. level is on borderline or high enough to know the difference between your arse and you mouth.

      One interesting question were asked by some of your readers and here it is–When Grace Poe reacquired her Filipino Citizenship, she reacquired through ” Naturalization Process”. Why the SC Justices ruled that she is a natural born? There was no vacuum there that needed complex interpretations.

      Let me give you an example that just occur several months ago. Every year, many Native Born Americans renounce their American Citizenship because they are tired of paying U.S. taxes on the money they made overseas. They would go on and live in their chosen country and enjoying the freedom by not paying U.S. Taxes. At one time, few of these former American Citizens need to get back in to the U.S. to take care some business on the condition that they leave the country before their visitor visas expire. Unfortunately, these former American citizens need to fall in line and wait for the approval of their visa. So what does this actions tells you? They have lost their “NATURAL BORN” status and when they reapply to become American Citizens again, they will acquire their citizenship back through NATURALIZATION process.

      • Read RA 9225. The term used is reacquire. Do you understand English?
        Undergo a seminar so your ass does not stink like Duterte and Binay.

    3. Mr. Adaza, I can clearly read your biased for Mrs. Llamanzares. Your choice to have a US Citizen President is very much welcome but respect as well the Filipino people who are against it. The SC did not close this issue, it only incensed it and it will continue so as long as every dignified Filipinos continue to fight. I will not cower and contribute to that battle. The SC is a prostitute and their supporters are PIMPS!

      • What Filipino people are you talking about? The people prostitute themselves during the elections by selling their votes; the candidates buy votes; the COMELEC manipulate the results of the elections with the cooperation of the BEI composed of teachers who conduct the elections. Our people, probably including you, prostitute this country by accepting the criminal activities of their officials, elective or otherwise and you have the gall talking about dignified Filipino.

    4. Praise be to you, Mr. Adaza. Tama ka. You hit the nail right on the head. Your wise and orderly thoughts put the critics of the Supreme Court decision in a bad light.

    5. Praise be to Mr. Adaza. He hit the nail right on its head. His comment correctly put the critics of the majority Justices of the Supreme Court in the proper, and shameful places. I wish Mr. Adaza were a foreigner commenting on the sad plight of critics of the Supreme Court majority who voted 9 in favor of Sen. Poe, because a foreigner would have appeared a neutral judge, pandering to no party or partisan school of thought. As and being Filipino, Mr. Adaza would be perceived partisan in the bandwagon of Sen. Poe. But objectively, Mr. Adaza sounded the correct call for indeed argumentation and debate on the SC decision favoring Poe should always be with decorum of statesmen, debating with more authoritative and better supported arguments. In start contrast, the SC critics ran out of factual and reasonable arguments and delved into fantasies, like bribery of the SC justices who voted to reverse the Comelec, amending or bastardizing the Constitution, as well as ad hominems and gutter arguments like those of Atty. Rivera who in the process shamed not only himself but also this employer the San Beda College of Law.

    6. Please do not praise yourself as the only one who is not ignorant or the only one intelligent enough to have the right opinion on the SC decision on Grace POe. In the first place, I do not know you from Harry and you have been an obscure figure in national affairs that I don’ think you are qualified to render an opinion on national importance nor criticizing others who have criticized the SC and Grace Poe.

      Please look in silence and stop pretending to be more knowledgeable than the SC brilliant minds who dissented from the so-called “majority” opinion on Poe’s disqualification case.

    7. Donato Coronel on

      Your opinion mr bono is very insulting to the opinion of others who are diametrically opposite to yours and of the 5 justices who voted against sen poe and the 24% of the population who will vote for her. But anyway, reading your column is fun but annoying.

    8. Donato Coronel on

      Your opinion mr bono is very insulting to the opinion of others who are diametrically opposite to yours and of the 7 justices who favored sen poe and the 24% of the population who will vote for her. But anyway, reading your column is fun but annoying.

    9. Rodan Guerrero on

      Grace Poe the MENACE keeps and continues bastardizing us especially now that these BRIBED JUSTICES sided with her. If we can not stop their conspirary as a result of thier injustice…then we can do it by THRASHING THIS BASTARD FOUNDLING BY NOT VOTING HER. THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN ABORT HER FOOLISH AND ILLEGAL AMBITIONS TO PURSUE SACRIFICING OUR RIGHTS AND PRIVILLAGES AS TRUE FILIPINOS!

    10. arturo b. odejar on

      This is what should be read by Ms. Grace Poe opponents so they will stop making noises and stick to their own problems…

    11. Atty. Adaza I know you are a brilliant and well known lawyer, although I’m not a lawyer I understand fully the content of Our Constitution. Why the SC are focusing on the issue of Foundling, the issue involve on disgrace is Citizenship am I right or wrong. As per Our Constitution when you re-acquire your citizenship you are considered a Naturalized Born not a anymore a Natural Born. This is very clear in Our Constitution. Now you are lawyer what is your decision regarding the statement on our Constitution. Is dis Grace a Natural Born or Naturalized tell me? I need your response on you next issue Atty. Daza I hope you will give your reply.

    12. Andrea Abante on

      I agree with Senator Grace Poe when she said that she never lost the values of being a Filipino and it did not make her love the country any less. She did what she had to do and she came back to the country ready to help the people. She is the most viable presidential candidate and her continuously topping the recent nationwide surveys prove that a lot of Filipinos still admire her and believe in her in spite of all of this. Expect our undying support, Senator Grace Poe!

    13. Francheska Ramos on

      I’m so proud of our fellow Filipinos who agree that foundlings and Global Filipinos should be given the same rights and privileges like all of us. I’m glad that the will of the people was heard in the Supreme Court decision, and I’m praying that the spirit of the Constitution remind us not to discriminate our fellow Filipinos, no matter how different their circumstances in life are from ours.

    14. yes, there is no law defining the citizenship of a foundling but i contest your assertion that there is a vacuum. the constituion defines who are citizens of the philippines and specifically who are natural born. this applies to not just those that are in the country but to all the people in the world including grace poe. hence, there is no vacuum in our laws on citizenship. thus, she definitely is not natural born unless she can find her parents.

    15. Fair N Square on

      Sounds like you are a lawyer for Poe and the Supreme Court but “shocked” when others voice their opinion if they are against the decision of the SC on Poe. The SC justices are not elected by the people. They are not infallible and they also make mistakes, like allowing Enrile to post bail “because of his health and age” even if he is charged with a non-bailable offense, and the ruling on EDCA. There are so many cases when Supreme Courts all around the world have reversed their decisions.

    16. Sir allow to me to put into hypothetical situation regarding poe’s citizenship issues. Certainly true that claimants have not presented any contrary evidences to support that she is not a natural born citizen but only relied on what our core law provides under our Constitution:word for word, letter by letter. Did it not come unto your mind that ” what if she was a child of a chinese mother out of wedlock because she was to marry somebody else as we all know chinese are known for fixed marriages. So as not to destroy the name of her family she kept it a secret that she was pregnant and when she gave birth she left her inside a cathedral knowing for sure that her child would be looked after when found. This is a situation that if poe is of chinese descent then we would in effect have if elected a chinese president then it will be easy for china to take the whole part of spratry’s. That is why the position is only for NATURAL BORN citizen as provided forth under our constitution. So he or she alleges that he/she is a natural born citizen of a country whose biological parents are unknown has the burden of proof to prove that he/she is what he/she is especially in a country like ours who adopts and adheres to the jus sanguinis principle. another ruling of the sc which has caused outraged among ordinary citizens and majority of law experts/practitioners is allowing poe to run with due disregard to its previous ruling regarding residency. On one ruling the SC decided that using of foreign passports after he/she has denounced it is considered an act or re-acquisition. Likewise using the renounced foreign passport cuts the residency of the individual.

      • Just1patriot on

        If you know that the mother is Chinese (not a Filipino citizen?), then the child is no longer a true (both parents unknown) foundling. How about the father?

        Mr Adaza’s opinions on these matters are right on, the reason the SC ruled against the Comelec 9-6. This ruling sets a precedent and fills the vacuum for foundlings. Grace (quit kidding yourself if you don’t like her) is Filipino ( everyone against her knows this in their heart but would rather defeat her in court).

        Her stay in the US can only be a plus: an experience of what a healthy governance looks like and a fresh start in PHL politics who have not been immersed in corruption.

        Those who have longed how FPJ would have led the country, cheated out of the experience, would now have their second chance at it.

    17. Amnata Pundit on

      Supposing the rules of the Bar exam says your grade must be 100% to pass. If you get 99.99%, doesn’t that clearly mean that you failed? The president of the Philippines MUST BE a natural born citizen, says the constitution, so that if Grace is only PROBABLY a natural born she does not qualify. The argument of “Disputable presumptions…that things have happened in the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary basis of life” is clever but not applicable in this case because running for president does not fall under that rule. How many times have a foundling run for president? Besides, if there are only 5 people running for president out of a population of 100 million, that cannot be ” in the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary basis of life.” The Supreme Court is right even if its wrong, but if the justices say I am PROBABLY not the son of my father I would curse them to high heavens too. Wouldn’t you?

    18. Bono, there was never a vacuum since the constitution is very clear on who can run for president. The case was never to rule on what foundilngs are but whether the Comelec committed grave abuse of discretion. There was never an issue whether she was a foundling or not as she has admitted she is. What is lacking is an exact definition of a “founding” or who can be a considered a “foundling”. But since there are rules on who can be called “foundlings”, she does not even qualify as one. The Comelec interpreted the Constitution literally and based on their interpretation, Grace can not pass the requirements that can allow her to become a president. That’s the simple fact. No amount of legalese can justify the ruling that is not even a majority vote. But since the constitution has been bastardized, then, the only option will be for a system change and that does not need to wait for May 2016.

    19. Rodan Guerrero on

      The basic law of the land is written in the simplest way possible, such that even non-lawyers like me can understand it. Contrary to the opinion of this column`s writer…the burden of proof is on the side of Poe to prove, which she failed to do so. They presented statistics and probabilities which are not accepted as basis for correct judgement. The problem in our society is….almost all authorities are bribed which ultimately affect what they are going to do no matter how important it is but affected by the glaring greed of money. If Atty. Homobono Adaza insist siding with Grace Poe, as he always do despite some indirect insinuations in this writing, then I am now convinced that injustice is attained though performances done by crooked lawyers. Incidentally, I learned that this lawyer is not allowed to practice his profession as a result of his defiance of the laws.

    20. It is good that Manila Times have balanced opinions about the status of Sen. Grace Poe, but for those still questioning her legitimacy and if they keep on appealing it means that they don’t accept the ruling of the Supreme Court which was not one sided. Then, it seems that they want the Supreme Court to follow their own thinking, this seems to be an opposite logic.

    21. Absolutely right.The most logical explanation. It takes a Great Bono to do that. I hope these people accept the fact.

    22. Jose Apolinario on

      The Constitution does not define the citizenship of a “foundling” in the Philippines.The foundling is ,therefore,stateless.
      Until a law is enacted by the Legislature or the Constitution amended to classify “foundlings “in the Philippines as natural- born citizens,they remain stateless.

      The Supreme Court should have remanded the case to the COMELEC.

      The Supreme Court allowed itself to be “politicized” by no less than Pres BS AquinoIII due to his own personal ulterior motives. He continues his onslaught to “bastardize”the Constitution and other laws of this country,destroy the institutions of govt,only to satisfy his whims and caprices!

      The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution and other existing laws . The Legislature enacts laws. The Executive Department enforces the laws of the land.

      In the “Foundling Grace Poe” case, the Supreme Court did not only encroach but subverted the functions of the Legislature to enact laws and the Commission on Elections in the determination of the qualification of candidates for elective positions in govt ,as mandated by the Constitution of the Philippines.

      Did ur Professor in Constitutional Law
      ,Dean Vicente Sinco of the UP College of Law,teach you that?
      Tough luck,the UP Law alumni/alumnae in the SERENO Supreme Court are sorely divided on the “Foundling Poe” case.They were mentored by different Professors! Confused?Perhaps, some want to be SENATORS?

      • There is no such thing as stateless person. Where did you see this in any constitution. The framers tried their best so that nobody is stateless person.

    23. Amado Aguila on

      Thank you. Finally a reasonable person that explains complicated topic and break it down to simple, understandable, and common sense language.

    24. There must be a columnist like you to clear up the air. There are columnist that is advocating a military coup and instigating a rebellion. I informed Manila Times regarding this and informed them that these people ideas are being read by a lot of readers. I hope Manila Times must stop using these columnist because it is bad for our country . It is not an issue anymore on fairness but and issue of what is right.

    25. Hindi po ako civil lawyer pero nagtataka ako at sobra ang ginawang debate kung alien siya samantalang kahit ang isang magsasaka ay alam na dahil dito isinilang, eh di pilipino sya. Hindi po sa ako ay may kinakampihan. NAG-IISIP LANG PO AKO.
      Natatandaan pa po ba ninyo ang sumikat na kantang SINO ANG BALIW na inawit nina Kuya Basil at Ate Kuh Ledesma? Pero iba na yata ngayon. Parang ang umuusbong na kanta ngayon ay “SINO ANG ALIEN?” Ang alien ba ay yung “pinoy” na kulang sa Residence o yaong pinoy na walang alam at pakiramdam tungkol sa idinadaing ni Juan de la Cruz? Yun bang “pinoy” na itinatwa ang pagiging Pilipino o ang pinoy na isinusuka ng mga Pilipino? Yun bang nagpalit ng citizenship dahil “wala lang”- dahil sa di agad nakitang may pag-asa pa sa pagiging pinoy o yaong pinoy to the bones na kahit sa imahinasyon ay nakakahiyang ibilang sa hanay ng authentic na pinoy? Syanga naman.

    26. Tama naman e, dapat hayaan na lang si sen grace poe at wag na siya kondinahin dahil hindi naman siya ang nag decide e, ang Sc naman ang nag decide. Kaya sana ay hayaan na lang sila na makatakbo ngayong May. Kung may reklamo pa ang mga nagsampa ng kaso gumawa sila ng MR at yun na yun hindi yung kung ano anong paninira pa ang gagawin para siraan ang SC at si Grace Poe. NAwawalan ata sila ng respeto sa SC sa ginagawa nilang yan. O ang pinbaka mabuti sa lahat e hayaan na lang nila na ang taumbayan na lang ang mag decision kung nararapat ba na maging pangulo si sen grace poe.

    27. Well said, i am in 100% agreement with you. Not so long ago i was of the sway that grace would make a good president, but my mind has been changed by the reasoning of an editorial in philnews.com. So now i ( if i were allowed ) wouldnt vote for Grace. But i 100% agree she should be allowed to run for president. I thought this was a very well written article with valid points. If any refute them then as you say please start debating it right now with your counter arguements & evidence.

    28. “It is absurd to imagine that a foreign parent/s would come to the Philippines just to abandon a child.”

      It happens in other countries – undocumented babies abandoned by immigrant women. Come to think of it, the Philippines back in the 60’s era fared much better economically than its South-East Asian counterparts. This was a time when even South Korea wasn’t so progressive, when their abandoned babies were being
      “exported” overseas like crazy, including the ones “mass produced” in US military camp towns.

      • Jowana Bueser on

        You said it yourself, “it happens in other countries.” The point is, does it happen here. The SolGen’s defended it with statistics. What’s your defense?

    29. Secondly, and most importantly, there is a law on foundlings in the constitution – that foundlings are not one of those that are mentioned as natural born citizens of the Philippines. In effect, there is a law but against the position of Ms Llamanzares. Unfortunately, this negative law is set aside and its place an “imagined vaccum” is created. What creativity!

      • Where in the constitution that says the citizenship of foundlings in the 1986 constitution ? That is why there is a conflict of ideas because the 1986constitution is silent in regards to foundlings. The burden of proof is on the opposing party. That is why the Supreme Court decided on Poe favor.

    30. I think the opinion of Atty Adaza is absolutely wrong that it is the ordinary course of nature and natural habits of Filipinos to leave a founding in the Philippines.

      Human beings are the same anywhere subject to the same errors. It is the argument presented that is absurd.

    31. Your legal argument is faulty: the doctrine of disputable presumption, which comes from the Rules of Court, is subordinate to the Constitution. The Rules of Court is in essence a judicial legislation of the Supreme Court based on the authority granted to it by the Constitution (Article VIII, Section 5, Paragraph 5). However, the Constitution itself defined what a natural born citizen is (Article IV, 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.” Disputable presumption cannot grant natural born citizenship on foundlings because it’s not perfect (er, it’s disputable).

      To think, even in a “jus soli” or citizenship by birthplace regime, a foundling’s citizenship is still disputable. Think of a scenario where a child is born to an American mother on the Mexican side of the border and is then abandoned by her on the American side. Later the American border guards find the child: is the foundling an American or Mexican citizen (assuming neither country didn’t ratify any treatise granting automatic citizenship on foundlings)? Without having any witness to the birth of the foundling (the mother), citizenship is disputable: we can just assume he/she is an American because he/she was found on the American side of the border.

    32. Right on the money!
      But I’ll add: Denizens or inhabitants of Pinas are of 3 categories only: 1) aliens, 2) naturalized citizens and 3) natural-born citizens (NBC). Foundlings are not aliens nor naturalized citizens because they did not undergo any process that perfected their citizenship from birth: they went to schools; became professionals; took licensure exams; got licenses/permits; voted; owned properties; filed tax returns, etc. not as an alien nor as naturalized citizen. Therefore, they are NBCs.

    33. Mr. Intelligent and Educated Columnist, assuming that the SC is right in ruling that Poe-Llamanzares is natural-born, as you claim, despite the arguments against, how would you justify the lack of residency, assuming that you know simple math? Also, assuming that she had the right to re-acquire her Filipino citizenship, she was unable to go through the formal process of renouncing her American citizenship, before assuming her appointment. for a position in the Aquino government.Finally, do you sincerely believe that with her being No. 1 Senator will make her capable to govern the country?

    34. Very well written sir, I have been trying to say this all along, there has been no evidence so presented to show cause she is not a fillipino natural born, in fact as you yourself stated, what they are trying to make us beleive (and in so doing insulting the intelligences of the fillipino people) is that some forgeiners somewhere else in Asia travelled all the way to the Phillpines to drop Sen. Poe on the doorsteps of a church. If this is not insulting to people intelligences then i dont what is. God bless.

    35. Kurokuro lang on

      Really? Open up your eyes and you will see. Foundling can never be a natural born citizen. Sc can not rule or decide by merely presumptions or an honest mistake. Ke ano p sabihin mo, ramdam ko n kampi k kay poe. Wag k n magmarunong at magmalinis. Alam ng taumbayan ang kaliskis mo.