IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF ALBERT ONG LING CHUAN TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. ALBERT ONG LING CHUAN, PETITIONER AND APPELLEE VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINE…

The Court of First Instance of Manila, on May 20, 1961, rendered
judgment granting Albert Ong Ling Chuan, Philippine citizenship, upon
the following findings:

Petitioner was born in Atimonan, Quezon, on March 1, 1938, of
Chinese vintage, duly registered with the Chinese Embassy in Manila
(Exh, G), and with the Immigration Bureau (ACR Exh. II and ICR, Exh.
1). He is an employee in the Cosmos Industrial Company, at Mandaluyong,
Rizal, where he draws a salary of P2,400.00 annually, single, and
provided with free board and lodging by his father. Income Tax Returns
in his name for the years 1959 to 1960 were presented in evidence
(Exhs. J, K and K-2), and payments of taxes due for the said years were
proved by Exhibits K-l and K-3. He finished his primary schooling at
the Immaculate Conception Anglo-Chinese Academy of Manila, covering
first to fifth grades (1947- 1952, Exh. L), his intermediate and high
school at San Beda College, (Exhs. M, M-1 and M-2). At the time of the
hearing, he was taking Architecture in the University of Santo Tomas
with his parents paying for the school fees. Exhibits N, N-1 to N-11,
are his clearances from the police and other governmental agencies,
including the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Health Department.
Being a native born and educated in the Philippines, no declaration of
intention was presented in evidence.

It was also shown that petitioner has continuously resided in the
Philippines since 1938; that he believes in the principles underlying
the Constitution; behaved properly during the whole period of his stay
in the Philippines, both in his relations with the government and the
Filipino people; mingles socially with the citizens of this country and
expressed the strong desire to learn and embrace the Filipino way of
life, its customs, traditions and ideals; not opposed to organized
government, nor affiliated with any association or group of persons
which uphold and teach doctrine contrary thereto; he does not favor the
propriety of violence as a means of securing one’s ends or
dissemination of ideas; he is riot a polygamist or a believer in its
practice. He has no conviction of any crime involving moral turpitude,
or is suffering mental or any contagious disease. He renounces his
allegiance to any foreign sovereignty.

The petitioner presented three (3) character witnesses: Pedro del Mundo, 47 years old, sari-sari
store owner; Domingo Cabatingan, 36 years, businessman, and Atty.
Apolonio Gonzales, 47 years old, practicing lawyer. The first two
executed affidavits, which were the supporting papers submitted with
the petition (Exhs. D & E).

Del Mundo, at the witness stand declared that he had known
petitioner since 1947, when Ong King Yee. petitioner’s father and the
witness became acquainted. The relation became closer when witness was
employed as an instructor at the Chinese Sporting Association, which
was housed near petitioner’s residence. He (witness) used to see
petitioner within the premises, and at the gymnasium almost daily; and
because of the proximity of witness’ place of work and petitioner’s
residence, the former’s visits to the family were frequent.

Cabatingan narrated that in 1949, he was working at the Up-To-Date
Shirt Factory; that on one occasion Kee Bok, owner of the factory,
introduced him to Ong King Yee, petitioner’s father, as he was needed
to get some papers from Yee’s residence at Narra street. On his first
visit at petitioner’s residence, Cabatingan saw petitioner who was then
about 11 to 12 years of age, and thereafter, he and Ong King Yee used
to see each other often and be- came friends; that it was thru Ong King
Yee that wit- ness was able to obtain his business license. He came to
know petitioner quite well and observed his ways; saw his schooling and
that of his brothers and sisters. Although witness did not know how to
read and write, he has shown his capabilities in some other ways. From
a mere delivery man in a shirt factory, with a salary of P120.00 a
month in 1947, he has become the owner of a fish business capitalized
at P25,000.00.

Atty. Gonzales said he is a close friend of petitioner’s father; and
he came to know Albert Ong since 1947 and the latter is a person of
good moral character.

The three witnesses informed the court that petitioner Albert Ong
had all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications to become
a citizen of the Philippines.

When petitioner rested his case, the government Solicitor manifested
that he had no evidence to present except Exhibit 1, which was the
writing made by petitioner, dictated by the Solicitor during the
cross-examination.

The Solicitor-General interposed an appeal from the judgment
heretofore recited, and alleges in his brief that the lower court erred:

1. In finding the witnesses of the petitioner to be credible;
2. In not finding that petitioner does not have a lucrative occupation; and
3. In granting the petition for naturalization.

Anent the first count, no evidence was adduced by petitioner to
show the standing of the character witnesses presented by him, in the
community in which they live. Aside from showing their personal
circumstances and how they came to know petitioner, the record is
wanting of the important data. The law mandates that the petition must
be supported by the affidavit of, at least, two credible persons, and

“* * *. Within the purview of the Naturalization
Law, a ‘credible’ person is, to our mind not only an individual who has
not been previously convicted of a crime; who is not a police character
and has no police record; who has not perjured in the past; or whose
‘affidavit’ or testimony is not incredible. What must be ‘credible’ is
not the declaration made, but the person making it. This implies that
such person must have a good standing in the community; that he is
reputed to be trustworthy and reliable; and that his word may be taken
on its face value, as a good warranty of the worthiness of the
petition.” (Ong v. Republic, 55 Off. Gaz., 3290).

Del Mundo had been an instructor in the Chinese Sporting Association
from 1949 to 1959; he was called only by the association every 4 or 6
months before tournaments in weightlifting. He did not have sufficient
opportunity to observe well petitioner’s conduct, behavior and
inclinations. Cabatingan had been a delivery man for the Up- To-Date
Shirt Factory from 1949 to 1958. The owner, Kee Bak, of said factory,
is the compadre of petitioner’s father who admittedly was the one
responsible for securing wit- ness’ license to open the business of
buying ,and selling fish. Atty. Gonzales has been found to be holding
office at the residence of petitioner’s father; he has been and still
is the lawyer for petitioner’s father who is a business agent. These
circumstances lend grave doubts as to the veracity of the testimonies
of said witnesses, and lead one to conclude that their declarations are
biased, unreliable and untrustworthy. They are not, therefore,
qualified to act as insurers of the character of petitioner.

Cabatingan, admittedly, an illiterate, did not know what are the
qualifications and disqualifications of one desiring to become a
Filipino citizen. And yet, he claimed that petitioner had all the
qualifications and no disqualifications to become such. As the
Solicitor General has well said:

“* * * Domingo Cabatingan started his business only
in 1960. At a salary of P120.00 a month which reached P200.00 at his
retirement in 1059, and a wife and child to support in Manila, a saving
of P25,000 is incomprehensible. Considering that he as a Filipino, his
conduct of having an alien help him secure his business’ license throws
him wide open to suspicion. There is more than meets the eye in the
fact that his business is buying fish in Palawan and selling it in
Manila, but he has only gone to Palawan once.”

To become a Filipino citizen is merely a privilege and it is
incumbent upon one desiring to become such citizen, to show the
worthiness and reputation of his character witnesses.

Furthermore, petitioner has been allegedly employed as stock clerk
with a salary of P200.00 a month with Cosmos Industrial Company,
exclusively owned by his brother-in- law, since his graduation from
“the high, school in April of 1957. Considering the low buying power of
the peso at present, a salary of P200.00 a month is not lucrative (R.
Ong vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-15764, May 19, 1961; Keng Giok vs.
Republic, G.R. No. L-13347, Aug. 31, 1961).

Wherefore, the decision appealed from should be, as it is hereby
REVERSED, and another entered, DENYING the petition of Albert Ong ling
Chuan to become a Filipino citizen. Costs against petitioner-appellee.

Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepción,
Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, Dizon, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.