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

Benjamin Ko versus Republic of the Philippines

The Case

This is the case of Benjamin Ko versus the Republic of the Philippines. Benjamin Ko petitioned a lower court to be admitted as a citizen of the Philippines, and the Republic opposed him. The decision matters less for any new rule on naturalization than for what it shows about how a naturalization case can be overtaken by events: the very government that was appealing the grant of citizenship later asked to withdraw its appeal because the petitioner had already been naturalized under a different, more liberal procedure. It is a short, practical lesson in mootness and in the finality of administrative naturalization.

Procedural History

Benjamin Ko filed his application for naturalization on February 14, 1968. On December 27, 1970, the lower court rendered a decision favorable to him. On February 16, 1973, that court issued an order allowing him to take his oath of allegiance, finding that the decision had become final and that he had complied with the requirements of Republic Act 530, and directing the Clerk of Court to issue the corresponding certificate of naturalization.

The State appealed, on the ground that both the decision and the order allowing the oath were contrary to law and the evidence. The Office of the Solicitor General was notified to file the appellant's brief, and three petitions for extension were granted by the Supreme Court. On December 5, 1975, the Republic filed a motion to suspend the period to file its brief, or in the alternative for a thirty-day extension, disclosing that Benjamin Ko had applied for naturalization under Presidential Decree through Letter of Instruction No. 270, which imposed less stringent requirements, and that a decision on that application was expected soon. On December 12, 1975, the Supreme Court resolved to suspend the period to file the brief pending action on that application. The Republic then filed a motion to withdraw its appeal, and the case reached the Supreme Court for resolution of that motion.

Facts

Benjamin Ko applied for naturalization in February 1968. In December 1970 the lower court decided in his favor, and in February 1973 it allowed him to take his oath of allegiance and ordered the issuance of his certificate of naturalization.

The Republic appealed, contending that the decision and the oath-taking order were contrary to law and the evidence. While the appeal was pending, however, Benjamin Ko pursued a separate application for naturalization under Letter of Instruction No. 270, a procedure with less stringent requirements than those under which the original case had proceeded.

The Solicitor General informed the Court that the application under Letter of Instruction No. 270 had already been approved on April 20, 1976, under Presidential Decree No. 923, and that Benjamin Ko had taken his oath of allegiance on April 10, 1976. On that basis the Republic moved to withdraw its appeal.

Issues

• Whether or not the appeal of the Republic of the Philippines should be dismissed upon its own motion to withdraw, in view of the petitioner's naturalization under Letter of Instruction No. 270.
• Whether or not the pending appeal had been rendered moot and academic by the approval of the petitioner's application and his taking of the oath of allegiance under Presidential Decree No. 923.

Applicable Provisions

Republic Act 530 is the naturalization law referred to in the lower court's order allowing the petitioner to take his oath:

Wherefore, the decision in this case having become final, the Court finds the motion of the petitioner to take his oath to be supported by convincing evidence, and that the petitioner has complied with the requirements of Republic Act 530, for which the petitioner is hereby allowed to take his oath of allegiance, after this Order shall have become final, and thereafter the Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to issue the corresponding certificate of naturalization in favor of the petitioner, Benjamin Ko.

This is the order that the Republic had appealed, and it frames the relief that the withdrawal of the appeal leaves undisturbed.

Letter of Instruction No. 270 is the alternative naturalization procedure invoked by the Republic:

That petitioner-appellee has filed an application for naturalization by Presidential Decree under Letter of Instruction No. 270 which provides less stringent requirements than those under which the instant case was pursued and proceeded upon.

This provision explains why the Republic itself expected the appeal to become moot.

Presidential Decree No. 923 is the decree under which the petitioner's application was approved:

Comes now, the Republic of the Philippines, by the undersigned counsel, and to this Honorable Court, most respectfully moves and prays for the dismissal of its Appeal in the above-entitled case on the ground that the application for naturalization of the petitioner herein under Letter of Instruction No. 270 had already been approved on April 20, 1976, under Presidential Decree No. 923. The petitioner took his oath of allegiance on April 10, 1976.

This is the ground on which the Republic sought to withdraw its appeal.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court granted the Republic's own motion and dismissed the appeal. The oppositor-appellant, the very party that had brought the appeal, asked for its dismissal, and the Court simply ruled as prayed for.

On the second issue, the Court treated the case as terminated. The Republic had itself represented that the petitioner's application under Letter of Instruction No. 270 had been approved on April 20, 1976, under Presidential Decree No. 923, and that the petitioner had taken his oath of allegiance on April 10, 1976. With the petitioner already naturalized under that decree, the appeal had lost its object, and the Court considered the case closed.

Doctrine

First, an appeal may be dismissed upon the appellant's own motion, and where the appellant is the State itself and it asks for dismissal, the Court will grant the relief as prayed for.

Second, a naturalization case becomes moot and academic when the petitioner has already been naturalized under a separate and valid procedure, such as Letter of Instruction No. 270 and Presidential Decree No. 923, and has taken his oath of allegiance. Courts do not decide questions that no longer have any practical effect on the rights of the parties.

Third, the approval of a naturalization application under Presidential Decree No. 923 and the taking of the oath of allegiance produce a completed naturalization that renders pending litigation over an earlier application academic.

Disposition

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the Republic of the Philippines, as prayed for, and considered the case terminated.

Remember This

The one line to memorize: a naturalization appeal becomes moot and academic once the petitioner is naturalized and takes his oath under a separate decree, and the State's own motion to withdraw the appeal will be granted. Examiners use this case to test mootness and the effect of a supervening naturalization on pending litigation.