Case Study #1 - 30 POINTS

G.R. No. 180364 December 3, 2014 TZE SUN WONG,Petitioner, vs. KENNY WONG,Respondent. Issue Whether or not the petitioner, Tze Sun Wong should be deported from the Philippines The Facts Petitioner is a Chinese citizen who immigrated to the Philippines in 1975 and subsequently acquired a permanent resident status in 1982. As the records would show, he studied, married, and continued to reside in the country, and even owned a company called Happy Sun Travel and Tours.⁴Links to an external site. On September 12, 2000, Kenny Wong (respondent), owner and proprietor of San Andres Construction Supply, filed a Complaint Affidavit5 Links to an external site.against petitioner before the Bureau of Immigration (BOI), alleging that the latter had misrepresented, in his driver's license application, that he was a Filipino citizen. Respondent also averred that petitioner and his business partner, Tina Yu, issued post-dated checks in the amount of 886,922.00 which, however, bounced to his damage and prejudice. Thus, taking cue from the foregoing acts, respondent prayed that petitioner be investigated by the BOI for violation of immigration laws.6Links to an external site. In his Counter-Affidavit7 Links to an external site.dated September 28, 2000, petitioner denied respondent's claim of misrepresentation, stating that when he applied for a driver's license, it was another person who filled up the application form for him. However, said person entered the wrong information, particularly, on his name, birth year, and nationality.8Links to an external site. Finding probable cause, the Special Prosecutor filed with the BOI the applicable deportation charges9 Links to an external site.against petitioner, docketed as BSI-D.C. No. ADD-02-280.10 Links to an external site.Thereafter, the BOI Commissioner issued a Mission Order11 Links to an external site.to verify petitioner's immigration status. The Mission Order was later recalled12 Links to an external site.and the Law and Investigation Division endorsed the records to the Board of Special Inquiry which directed the parties to submit their respective memoranda.13Links to an external site. Ruling In a Judgment¹⁴ Links to an external site.dated October 2, 2002,the BOI Board of Commissioners ordered the deportation of petitioner on the grounds of: (a) illegal use of alias, i.e., Joseph Wong, which was the name appearing in his driver's license application; and (b) misrepresenting himself as a Filipino citizen in the same application, in violation of Section 37 (a) (7) and (9)¹⁵ Links to an external site.of Commonwealth Act No. 613,¹⁶ Links to an external site.otherwise known as "The Philippine Immigration Act of 1940" (Immigration Act), in relation to Sections 1, 2, and 3¹⁷ Links to an external site.of Republic Act No. (RA) 6085.¹⁸ Links to an external site.Aside from pointing out the misrepresentations made by petitioner, the BOI took judicial notice of the fact that driver's license applications require the personal appearance of the applicant in order to prevent fraud. Thus, by allowing someone to apply for him, he actively involved himself in the preparation and issuance of a fraudulent driver's license. By the same account, he cannot then aver that he was without any participation in the entry of his supposed Philippine citizenship in his driver's license.¹⁹Links to an external site.

1. Summarize in 2 to 3 sentences the arguments of both the petitioner and the respondents/
2. Why did the respondent file a case against the petitioner?
3. Do you agree with the ruling of the BOI? Why?
4. What area of Section 37 of the PIA did the petitioner violate?
5. If you were one of the commissioners of the BOI, will you give the same verdict?