IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF SAW CEN TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES, SAW CEN, PETITIONER-APPELLEE VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR-APPELLANT.

On August
29, 1961,
Saw Cen, a citizen of the Republic of China, who had
been in the Philippines since 1932, presented with the
CFI of Manila, a petition for admission as Filipino citizen. The petition which
contained the requisite jurisdictional facts and enumeration of his
qualifications, upon which he based his application, was accompanied by the
Joint Affidavit of Jose S. Tanchoco, Jose S. Zuñiga and Gregorio R. Viar, who
claimed to have personal knowledge of petitioner’s having resided continuously
in the Philippines, prior to the filing of the petition; that petitioner was of
good moral character and repute and morally irreproachable, during his stay in
the islands, although they contend that they have known him since 1949 and 1946,
respectively, and that he is not in any way disqualified under Sec. 4 of
Commonwealth Act No. 473, as amended.

Under date of August 31,
1961, the
lower Court issued an order for the publication of the petition in the Official
Gazette and the Daily Mirror, for three consecutive weeks. After the publication
of the petition, it appears that an opposition was presented by the office of
the Solicitor General, although the records do not show on what grounds the
opposition was based. After trial, or on August 2, 1962, less than a year from
the presentation of the petition, the court a quo rendered judgment, the
pertinent portions of which recite:

“* * * that before, so me of his
children bore the family name “Tan,” but during the last ten years they are
using the family name “SAW” because previously petitioner had an alias
“TAN HU CHI” and his wife gave this alias name when she gave birth; that
petitioner has not been using the paid name for more than ten years because he
knows that it is prohibited by law; that now he has boon only the name Saw Cen even in his business dealings;

* * *. * * * * * *
*

“* * *, this Court finds that
petitioner has nil the qualifications required by, and none of the
disqualifications specified in, Commonwealth Act No. 473, as amended by
Commonwealth Act No. 535, and has complied with all the requisites established
therein.

“WHEREFORE, the said
petition of SAW CEN to be admitted a citizen of the
Philippines is hereby granted, and let the
proper naturalization certificate be issued in his favor and the registration
thereof in the proper civil registry, this decision to become executory in accordance with the provisions of Section 1 of
Republic Act No. 530.”

Against the above decision, the
instant appeal had been interposed by the Solicitor General, claiming that the
trial court erred:—

(1) in
finding that petitioner has all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications to become a naturalized Filipino citizen: and
(2) in not
holding that the two character witnesses for the petitioner do not meet the
requirements of the law.

By his own admission, it is clear
that petitioner was known by another name, an alias which he had been
using for quite a number of years. So much so that even the five (5) older
children (the first to the fifth) adopted a word in his alias (Tan) as their
family name. The non-inclusion of the other name of petitioner in the
publication of the petition has resulted fatal, for it has deprived any person,
knowing him by that name, to come forward and inform the authorities of any
matter which might affect his application for naturalization. In other words,
the publication was incomplete and insufficient, thereby affecting the
jurisdiction of the court to take cognizance of his petition. The unauthorized
use of the alias is not at all denied by appellee. In fact, he recognized the illegality of the use
when he said that he has not been using it for more than ten (10) years (before
the presentation of the petition) because he knew that it was prohibited by law.

Moreover, We find that the character witnesses of petitioner did not
measure to the requirements provided for by law, to be considered as “credible
persons.” In the case of Ong vs. Republic, L-10642,
May 30, 1958, this Court stated that a credible person, for purposes of
naturalization cases, is one as having a good standing in the community; known
to be honest and upright; reputedly trustworthy, and reliable so that his words
may be taken on its face value to serve as warranty of the worthiness of the
petitioner. This must be so, because said witnesses are in a way, the insurers
of the character of applicant (Cu vs. Rep., 89 Phil. 473). In the case at bar,
evidence was not adduced to show that the character witnesses of petitioner had
the above qualities, and therefore, they could not live up to the category of
credible persons (Sy Shin vs. Rep., 107 Phil., 718).
One thing more, We find no evidence on record to show
that petitioner has had intimate social relations with his witnesses. Witness
Tanchoco declared that he came to know the petitioner
because said witness was the accountant of the La Compaña Factory, the General Fabrikoid Manufacturing Company and the Atlantic Development
Company, all of which were managed by the petitioner. The relation then was
merely on a business level, since there is paucity of evidence to show that they
had social relations. The lack of social relations is crystallized by the fact
that Tanchoco did not even know the parents,
brothel’s, sisters and other matters pertaining to petitioner’s social life. He
could not, therefore, be an insurer of petitioner’s worthiness. Witness Tanchoco being an employee of petitioner, his partiality is
not far-fetched.

PREMISES
CONSIDERED, the
decision of the lower court granting SAW CEN Philippine citizenship should be,
as it is hereby reversed. Another is entered denying his petition, with costs
against said Saw Cen.

Bengzon, C. J., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P.
and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.