CA: Detention of Globe Ferronickel chair Joseph Sy illegal
MANILA, Philippines — The Court of Appeals has ruled that the continued detention of Globe Ferronickel chairman Joseph Sy is unlawful.
In a 15-page decision promulgated on February 20, the appellate court’s special eighth division denied the appeal filed by the Bureau of Immigration (BI) and the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), maintaining that the government cannot summarily deport a person who holds a valid Philippine birth certificate.
The case stemmed from Aug. 21, 2025, when Sy was intercepted and detained by BI personnel at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) upon his arrival from Hong Kong.
The BI acted on a mission order issued by Immigration Commissioner Joel Viado, claiming that Sy was an alias for Zhong Zhen Chen, a Chinese national who had allegedly misrepresented himself as a Filipino.
To support their claim, immigration officials presented fingerprint evidence from an Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR I-Card) issued 29 years ago, which they said matched the fingerprints on Sy's Philippine passport.
However, Sy’s representative, Dante Bravo, filed a petition for habeas corpus, arguing that Sy is a Filipino citizen.
Bravo provided Sy's Certificate of Live Birth, issued via late registration in 2007, which identifies him as a Filipino born in Quezon City to Filipino parents. Sy also holds a Philippine passport valid until 2031 and various other government identification cards.
Court’s ruling. According to the appellate court, the BI lacks jurisdiction to institute summary deportation proceedings against someone with a valid birth certificate.
The court explained that a birth certificate is a public document and carries a presumption of validity that "enjoys primacy in evidentiary value" over an Alien Certificate of Registration.
“As a public document, a registered birth certificate is presumed valid. It is not for Sy to prove its alleged falsity, but for the respondents-appellants who are assailing the certificate to prove it. As a duly registered public document, the birth certificate is presumed to have undergone the process prescribed by law for the late registration of birth,” the appellate court’s ruling read.
“In the absence of an admission that Sy and Chen are identical and unless the birth certificate is cancelled or corrected, the entry in the birth certificate that Sy is a Filipino preponderates until proven otherwise in a court of competent jurisdiction,” it added.
According to the appellate court, the action is not immediate detention, but rather the filing of a judicial proceeding under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court to cancel or correct Sy’s entries in the civil registry.
In the Rules of Court, Rule 108 refers to the cancellation or correction of entries in the Civil Registry.
The appellate court emphasized that its decision to deny the BI's appeal does not "write finis" to the question of Sy’s actual citizenship.
It noted that the government retains the right to challenge Sy’s status in the future through the correct legal channels.
“The doctrine of res judicata is only applicable in cases of citizenship, provided that the following requisites are present: 1) a person’s citizenship must be raised as a material issue in a controversy where said person is a party; 2) the Solicitor General or his authorized representative took active part in the resolution thereof; and 3) the finding or citizenship is affirmed by the Supreme Court. In this case, these requisites were not shown to be present in the previously decided cases affirming Sy’s Philippine citizenship.”
- Latest
- Trending
