1) Why this topic matters

Philippine citizenship is primarily determined by bloodline (jus sanguinis), not by place of birth. That simple idea covers most people born abroad to Filipino parents. The phrase “election of Philippine citizenship” is a narrower, historically rooted concept that applies only to a specific group—mostly those born under the 1935 Constitution to Filipino mothers when maternal citizenship did not automatically transmit in the same way it does today.

Because many Filipinos abroad hold (or can hold) another citizenship, this topic also overlaps with dual citizenship and reacquisition/retention under Republic Act No. 9225.

2) Core legal framework (high level)

A. Constitution (1987), Article IV (Citizenship)

Philippine citizens include, among others:

Those who are citizens at the time of the Constitution’s adoption.
Those whose father or mother is a Philippine citizen.
Those born before 17 January 1973 of Filipino mothers who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
Those naturalized in accordance with law.

B. Republic Act No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003)

RA 9225 allows natural-born Filipinos who lost Philippine citizenship (usually by foreign naturalization) to reacquire/retain Philippine citizenship by taking an oath. It also addresses the status of certain minor children of those who reacquire.

3) The big distinction: “Citizen by blood” vs “Citizen by election”

A. Citizen by blood (most common for those born abroad)

If at least one parent was a Philippine citizen at the time of the child’s birth, the child is generally a Philippine citizen from birth, even if born overseas.

Key point: Consular Report of Birth / Report of Birth is evidence, not the source of citizenship. Late reporting does not usually erase citizenship; it can, however, make proof and documentation harder until corrected.

B. Citizen by election (narrow, historical)

“Election of Philippine citizenship” is mainly for persons who:

Were born before 17 January 1973, and
Had a Filipino mother and an alien father, and
Were not automatically recognized as citizens at birth under the rules then in force, and
Elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.

This exists because, under the 1935 Constitution, citizenship transmission strongly favored the father; maternal transmission often required an affirmative act (election) when the child reached adulthood.

4) Who must (or may need to) elect Philippine citizenship?

A. The classic group

A person typically needs “election” only if all (or nearly all) of these are true:

Born before 17 January 1973
Mother was a Philippine citizen
Father was not a Philippine citizen
The person did not otherwise clearly fall under automatic citizenship rules at birth

This is the constitutional “election” category.

B. People often confused as needing election—but usually don’t

Many people mistakenly think “election” is required if they were:

Born abroad
Born to a Filipino parent who later became foreign
Holding (or entitled to) foreign citizenship
Late-reported to the Philippine civil registry

In most of these scenarios, if a parent was Filipino at the time of birth, the person is already a Philippine citizen by blood, and the real task is documentation/recognition, not constitutional “election.”

5) When must election be made?

The constitutional text ties election to “upon reaching the age of majority.”

Philippine practice and jurisprudence commonly describe election as needing to be done:

At the age of majority, or
Within a reasonable time thereafter

What counts as “reasonable” can depend on circumstances (e.g., time spent abroad, knowledge of status, steps taken to assert citizenship). In contested cases, delay can become a serious issue—especially when citizenship is raised only when convenient (e.g., for candidacy, immigration benefits, or litigation).

6) How election is done in practice (typical components)

While procedures can vary by implementing rules and the agency handling the record, an election is usually shown through acts such as:

A sworn statement/affidavit of election of Philippine citizenship
An oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines
Registration/recording with the appropriate civil registry / relevant government office (often through the Philippine Foreign Service Post if abroad, or through appropriate domestic channels if in the Philippines)

Because citizenship is a status with public consequences, the system expects election to be formal, recorded, and provable, not merely implied.

7) Effects of a valid election

A. Status as Philippine citizen

A valid election confirms Philippine citizenship. This affects:

Right to a Philippine passport
Right to vote (subject to voter registration and overseas voting rules)
Eligibility for certain professions (subject to licensing requirements)
Property rights where citizenship matters
Immigration status in the Philippines (no need for visas/ACR as a Filipino)

B. Natural-born status (important for public office)

A recurring question is whether those who elected under the constitutional election clause are natural-born. Philippine jurisprudence has generally treated election (in this narrow constitutional setting) as a recognition/perfection of citizenship by blood, not “naturalization,” and it has been considered compatible with being natural-born in many contexts. However, challenges can arise depending on proof, timing, and whether the person was truly entitled under the election clause.

Practical takeaway: in sensitive contexts (e.g., running for office requiring natural-born citizenship), the critical issue is often documentation and timing—showing citizenship was validly recognized/perfected under the Constitution and records.

8) What happens if election is not made (or is made too late)?

If a person falls squarely into the election-only category and never validly elects:

They may be treated as not having Philippine citizenship, unless another independent basis exists.
They may face difficulty obtaining a Philippine passport, registering as a voter, or asserting rights reserved to citizens.

If election is made very late:

It may still be accepted administratively in some situations, but
It becomes more vulnerable to challenge, especially if raised only when a benefit is sought.

9) People born abroad to Filipino parents: the usual rule (no election)

A. If at least one parent was Filipino at the time of birth

The child is generally a Philippine citizen by blood.

Common documentation steps (not “election,” but proof/registration):

Report of Birth (Consular Report of Birth) with the Philippine Embassy/Consulate having jurisdiction over the place of birth, then forwarding/endorsing for recording in the Philippine civil registry system
If not reported on time: late registration procedures and supporting documents
Proof of the parent’s Philippine citizenship at the time of birth (e.g., Philippine birth certificate, old Philippine passport, proof of reacquisition timing if relevant)

B. Dual citizenship at birth (by operation of foreign law)

Many countries grant citizenship by birth on their soil (jus soli) or by descent. A child can be:

Philippine citizen by blood, and
Foreign citizen by the other country’s law This is typically dual citizenship by circumstance, not something prohibited per se.

The Constitution flags dual allegiance (a political concept involving loyalty and obligations) as inimical, but dual citizenship itself can exist. For many ordinary situations (passports, travel, civil status), dual citizenship is workable, though public office can impose extra requirements.

10) Illegitimacy, legitimation, and citizenship transmission

Philippine family law concepts sometimes matter for citizenship proof.

General patterns used in Philippine legal reasoning:

Mother-child link is usually straightforward for citizenship transmission and proof.
Father-child link can require proof of filiation (e.g., acknowledgment, legitimation, or other legally recognized proof), especially where records are inconsistent.

Under the modern constitutional rule (“father or mother”), legitimacy is less about which parent can transmit and more about how to prove the parent-child relationship, particularly if relying on the father’s citizenship.

11) Dual citizens under RA 9225: reacquisition/retention and children

A. Who uses RA 9225?

A natural-born Filipino who lost Philippine citizenship (commonly by becoming a naturalized citizen of another country) may reacquire/retain Philippine citizenship by taking the statutory oath.

This is not “election” of citizenship; it is reacquisition/retention.

B. Children of a person who reacquires under RA 9225

RA 9225 contains an important derivative rule for children:

Unmarried minor children (below 18) of the person who reacquires are generally recognized as Philippine citizens (subject to documentation requirements).

Practical consequences:

If a child was already a Philippine citizen by blood (because the parent was still Filipino at the time of birth), RA 9225 is not the source of citizenship; it is mainly relevant to the parent’s status and the child’s documentation.
If a child was born while the parent was no longer a Philippine citizen, the child may not be a Philippine citizen by blood through that parent at birth. In that scenario, the child’s pathway depends on:
- Whether the other parent was Filipino at birth; or
- Whether the child qualified as a minor under RA 9225 derivative coverage at the time; or
- Other citizenship acquisition methods (which may include naturalization routes, depending on facts).

C. Public office and the “renunciation” issue

For certain public positions, Philippine law and jurisprudence have required dual citizens who seek elective office (and sometimes appointive office) to comply with rules on renunciation of foreign citizenship (or at least to meet statutory/jurisprudential standards demonstrating exclusive allegiance for that purpose). This is a frequent litigation point in candidacy cases.

12) Proof issues: the real battleground in citizenship cases

Citizenship controversies are often less about the rule and more about evidence. Common proof questions:

Was the parent a Philippine citizen at the time of birth?
Are the parent’s records consistent (name variations, date discrepancies)?
Was there a foreign naturalization before the child’s birth?
Is filiation established (especially if relying on the father)?
For election cases: was election made properly and timely, and is it recorded?

Typical supporting documents:

Parent’s Philippine birth certificate / PSA records
Parent’s old Philippine passport(s)
Marriage certificate (if relevant to legitimacy/records)
Child’s foreign birth certificate (apostilled/legalized as needed)
Consular Report of Birth / Report of Birth (or late registration packet)
For RA 9225: parent’s oath and identification/certification of reacquisition

13) Common scenario map

Scenario 1: Born in the U.S. (or any foreign country) in 2005; mother is Filipino

Usually: Philippine citizen by blood from birth
Task: document and register (Report of Birth, proofs)

Scenario 2: Born abroad in 1965; mother Filipino, father foreign

Likely: falls into constitutional election category
Task: election upon majority (or within reasonable time), with formal recording

Scenario 3: Parent became a foreign citizen in 1998, child born in 2000; other parent is not Filipino

If the Filipino parent lost citizenship before the child’s birth, the child is generally not a Philippine citizen by blood through that parent at birth
If the parent later reacquires under RA 9225:
- Child may benefit only if covered as an unmarried minor under RA 9225’s derivative provisions (fact-dependent and documentation-heavy)
- Otherwise, child may need a different legal route

Scenario 4: Child is a Philippine citizen by blood but never reported to the Philippine Embassy/Consulate

Usually: still a citizen; needs late reporting/late registration and supporting documents

14) Practical consequences of being (or not being) a Philippine citizen

Citizenship status affects:

Immigration: entry, stay, ability to work without alien permits (as a citizen)
Political rights: voting, running for office (with stricter rules for high office)
Property: constitutional/statutory restrictions on land ownership by foreigners make citizenship status significant
Family law and civil registry: names, legitimacy, recognition, and civil status records often intersect with proof

15) Key takeaways

Most people born abroad to at least one Filipino parent do not need “election.” They are citizens by blood, and what they need is documentation/recognition.
“Election of Philippine citizenship” is a narrow constitutional mechanism, mainly for those born before 17 January 1973 to Filipino mothers (with an alien father) who must formally elect upon reaching majority (or within a reasonable period).
RA 9225 addresses reacquisition/retention for natural-born Filipinos who lost citizenship, and it has important (but bounded) effects on minor children.
In real disputes, timing and proof often decide the outcome more than the abstract rule.

This article is for general legal information in the Philippine context and is not legal advice.