RE:  PETITION FOR PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP GAN Y. GUAN, PETITIONER-APPELLEE, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR-APPELLANT.

This appeal is by the Republic of the Philip­pines
to seek reversal of the decision of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija (in Nat. Case No.
53), involving the issue of when an applicant for naturalization may claim
exemption from filing a declaration of intention.

Gan Y. Guan, also known as Yguan Gan or Yguan
G. Gan, applied for naturalization in the Court of
First Instance of Nueva Ecija,
alleging that he is a Chinese citizen born in Cabanatuan,
Nueva Ecija, on 5 December
1936; that he has always resided in Cabanatuan,
except during the Japanese occupation when he stayed in Manila; that he is one
of the three members of the partnership operating a grocery store in Cabanatuan, of which he is also the assistant manager and
purchasing agent, and from which occupation he derives an annual gross income
of P5,000.00 more or less; that he is single and has no issue, speaks and
writes English and the Philippine national language; that he owns real and
personal properties which, including his personal savings in the bank and
investments in business, have a total value of not less than P25,000.00; that
he has received the degree of Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering from
the Mapua Institute of Technology, and has attended
other government-recognized schools, like the Philippine Statesman College in Cabanatuan City, where Philippine history and government
are taught as part of the curriculum; that he believes in the principles
underlying the Constitution; he is not opposed to organized government, does not
believe in polygamy, is not suffering from any incurable or contagious disease,
and has never been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude.  He did not file a declaration of intention,
claiming exemption from this legal requirement because of his being born in the
Philippines.  The petition was duly accompanied by the
joint affidavit of 2 witnesses who will testify on his good moral character.

After hearing, the court rendered judgment on 27 January 1966, granting the petition upon the
finding that petitioner possesses all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications for Philippine citizenship. 
The Solicitor General, representing the Republic of the Philippines,
thus interposed this appeal on the sole issue of jurisdictional defect in the
petition, for failure of petitioner to file a declaration of intention.

We find the appeal meritorious. 
Under the Revised Naturalization Act, an applicant or petitioner can
claim exemption from filing a declaration of intention if he were born in the Philippines,
and had received primary and secondary education in public schools or private
educational institutions duly recognized by the government and not limited to
any race or nationality.^[1]
In this case, petitioner-appellee himself declared in
court that he received his primary instructions at the Nueva Ecija
Chinese School
in Cabanatuan;^[2]
finished the elementary grades at the Philippine Chinese High School; completed
secondary education at the Philippine Statesman College in Cabanatuan, and received the
degree of Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering from the Mapua Institute of Technology.^[3]
Other than his bare unsupported assertion to the effect that the schools where
he finished the primary and elementary grades were attended also by Filipinos,
which declaration is inadequate to constitute evidentiary proof of compliance
with the requirement of the law,^[4]
there is nothing in the records to establish
that the Nueva Ecija
Chinese School and the Philippine Chinese High School are actually institutions
of learning not limited to any race or nationality.  The fact is that the very names of these
schools convey the idea that they are exclusive to Chinese students,^[5] and there is no evidence that they were not
so.  Petitioner’s attendance in those
schools, therefore, would not have served to exempt him from the provision of
the Naturaliza­tion Act, which is to give special consideration to applicants
for naturalization who, by their association with Filipinos in their youth,
could have assimilated and imbibed the cherished traditions and customs of this
country.  A declaration of intention
being ne­cessary in the case, appellee’s failure to
file the same warrants a denial of the petition.^[6]

There is another reason that goes against the granting of the petition:
incomplete publication of petitioner’s places
of residence.  As stated in the
petition itself and reaffirmed by appellee and one of
his character witnesses on the witness stand, the former and his family left Cabanatuan and lived in Manila during the Japanese occupation,^[7]
which lasted three years.  And yet, the
petition as published did not contain the address of such Manila
residence.  As this Court has repeatedly
declared, the omission of a former place of residence, even if petitioner was
still a minor when he stayed thereat, constitutes an infirmity fatal to the
petition.^[8]

FOR THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the de­cision appealed
from is hereby reversed and set aside, and the petition for naturalization is
denied.  No pronouncement as to costs.

Concepcion, C.J., Dizon,
Makalintal, Zaldivar,
Castro, Fernando, Teehankee, and Villamor, JJ., concur.

Barredo, J., did not take part.

^[1]
Lim Cho Kuan vs.
Republic, L-21198, 22 January 1966,
16 SCRA 25; Lee Ng Len vs. Republic, L-20151, 31 March 1965, 13 SCRA 532; Republic vs. Borromeo, L-26870, 29
May 1970.

^[2]
Page 44, t.s.n.,
hearing of 20 January 1965.

^[3]
Page 46, t.s.n.,
hearing of 20 January 1965.

^[4]
Lim vs. Republic, L-20804, 22
January 1966, 16 SCRA 12.

^[5]
Lee Ng Len vs. Republic, L-20151, 31 March 1965, 13 SCRA 532.

^[6]
Republic vs. Borromeo, supra;
Lim vs. Republic, L-27126, 29
May 1970, and cases cited therein.

^[7]
Page 10, t.s.n., hearing of 14 December 1964; page 16, hearing of 26 March 1965.

^[8]
Chua Hai vs. Republic, L-23515, 27 February 1969, 27 SCRA 75, and
earlier cases (see Ed. Note 27 SCRA page 83; 19 SCRA 379).