WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CITIZENS AND NATIONALS?

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CITIZENS AND NATIONALS?

In everyday conversation, we often use the terms “citizen” and “national” as if they mean the same thing. Legally, however, they are not always identical. In many countries—including the Philippines—the two concepts are treated as one and the same. But in others, such as the United States, the distinction is very real and has practical implications for millions of people.

A citizen is a full legal member of a state who enjoys complete political rights, including the right to vote, run for office, and hold a passport. A national, on the other hand, is someone who owes permanent allegiance to a country and is entitled to its protection, but may not necessarily enjoy full political participation. In short, all citizens are nationals, but not all nationals are citizens.

History offers a striking example. Before Philippine independence in 1946, Filipinos were considered U.S. nationals but not U.S. citizens. They owed allegiance to the United States and were entitled to certain protections, yet they could not vote in American elections. Even today, residents born in places like American Samoa are classified as U.S. nationals without being full citizens unless they undergo naturalization.

In contrast, countries like India treat nationality and citizenship as identical, but they have created hybrid arrangements such as the Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) program. OCI holders are not citizens but enjoy long-term residency, investment, and travel privileges. They cannot vote or hold public office, yet the system keeps them economically and culturally connected to their homeland.

Here in the Philippines, our legal framework does not recognize a “national but not citizen” category. Article IV of the Constitution defines only citizens, and nationality is treated as synonymous with citizenship. Former Filipinos who wish to regain full rights may do so through dual citizenship under Republic Act 9225, which restores their voting rights and eligibility to own property.

But perhaps it is time to ask whether a middle-ground legal category could also serve our national interests. I have long proposed that former Filipino citizens who no longer wish to reacquire full citizenship could be granted an automatic “Filipino national” status. Under such a system, they would not vote in elections or hold public office, and they would not receive Philippine passports. However, they could enter the country without visas, reside here indefinitely, and own property within defined limits.

What would be the advantages? First, it could significantly increase long-term tourism, particularly among second- and third-generation overseas Filipinos who maintain emotional ties to the country but hesitate to undergo formal citizenship procedures. Second, it could stimulate investments in housing, retirement communities, and small enterprises—sectors where diaspora engagement is already strong but administratively complicated. Third, it could strengthen cultural diplomacy by keeping millions of people of Filipino origin formally connected to the nation.

Of course, this proposal would require careful constitutional and legislative review, and safeguards must ensure that political rights remain reserved for citizens alone. Yet the idea deserves thoughtful discussion. In an era of globalization, migration, and diaspora-driven economies, nations are experimenting with flexible legal relationships between people and states. The question we should ask is simple: Can we design a nationality framework that welcomes former Filipinos home—without diluting the meaning of citizenship itself?

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/04-04-2027

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES? When we talk about the crime rate in the Philippines, we often assume that the figures we see are accurate reflections of reality. But have we ever paused to ask—how exactly is the crime rate computed? Where does this data come from, and how reliable is it? The computation of the crime rate in the Philippines is officially handled by the Philippine National Police (PNP). The formula itself is straightforward: Crime Rate = (Total Reported Crimes / Total Population) x 100,000 This simple equation gives us the number of crimes per 100,000 people, allowing for fair comparison across regions and time periods. However, the reality behind these numbers is more complex than it appears. Data from the Ground The foundation of our national crime rate is empirical data collected at the grassroots level—from individual police stations scattered across the country. Every reported crime is logged in local police blotters, forming the buil...
Read more

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS Dear Mr. President: May I ask who is going to be the arbiter or referee whenever there are overlaps in functions between two or more government agencies? I imagine that there would be no problem if these agencies would just cooperate and collaborate with each other, but what if they are unable to settle their differences and they would just end up throwing blame at each other or finger pointing at each other? Allow me to cite some examples. Who is supposed to take the lead in waste to energy projects? Is it supposed to be the DENR that is supposed to handle waste? Or is it supposed to be the DOE that is supposed to handle energy generation? Or is it supposed to be the DILG since it is the one that could direct or influence the waste to energy projects of LGUs? Who is supposed to take the lead in producing and promoting the use of biofuels? Is it supposed to be the DA, since the production of biofuels is supposed to be all about planting biofuel ...
Read more

BATTLING A MENTAL HEALTH EPIDEMIC

BATTLING A MENTAL HEALTH EPIDEMIC It is already a well-established fact that the Covid-19 pandemic also triggered what could be called a mental health pandemic. It does not mean however that since the Covid-19 pandemic has practically slowed down, that the mental health pandemic has also slowed down. For the record, no one has officially declared the mental health problem is already a pandemic, but I suggest that we already make that declaration, so that we could respond to the problem with the attention that it needs. As far as I know, no one has declared that the Covid-19 pandemic is officially over, with most governments merely saying that it is now reduced to being a manageable epidemic, whatever that means. What is clear however, is that no one has also declared that the mental health pandemic is also over, in fact many governments would even hesitate to call it an epidemic. The fact remains however that globally, 1 out of 8 are affected according to the WHO, and locally, at least...
Read more