IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR ADMISSION TO PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP. NILDA TSE @ NIL, PETITIONER AND APPELLEE, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR AND APPELLANT.

BARRERA, J.:

In the decision of the Court of First Instance of Southern Leyte, granting;
the petition for naturalization of Nilda Tse, alias Nil, it appears that said
petitioner was born in Danao, Cebu on April 25, 1935, of Chinese parents; that
her father was admitted to Philippine citizenship, but she was no longer a minor
when he took his oath as a Filipino citizen; that petitioner was employed as a
purchasing agent of the Evergreen Grocery, an establishment owned by her father,
with a monthly salary of P250.00; that at the time at the hearing, she was on
her fifth year as pharmacy student at the University of San Carlos. Two
witnesses testified to her good moral character, and behavior. Eased on said
evidence, the court found petitioner as possessing all the qualifications and
none of the disqualifications to become a citizen of the Philippines. The
Solicitor General appealed from said decision, contesting the finding of the
lower court that petitioner has a gainful or lucrative d or occupation.

Petitioner’s claim that she has a lucrative occupation is not supported by
the records. She testified during the hearing that as an employee of her father,
in his establishment at Maasin, Leyte, she receives a monthly salary of P130.00,
aside from commission and bonus, which give her a total income of P300.00 a
month, fn the first place, a salary of P120.00 a month cannot be considered
lucrative. We cannot take into consideration the alleged bonuses and commissions
because they are, by their nature, indefinite and unsteady.

Secondly, as certified to by the Registrar of the University of San Carlos,
she was in June, 1961 a fifth year student in Pharmacy of said institution. It
is indeed incredible that she could be employed by her father as a purchasing
agent for the store in Leyte when she was, during the same period, a student of
the University of San Carlos in Cebu. There is even no showing that she has ever
paid the necessary tax for such alleged income. Other than her bare assertion,
there is really no evidence that petitioner has a lucrative trade or employment.

We also found that petitioner failed to satisfy the requirement of the law on
proof of good moral character. In support of her allegation, of good moral
character and behavior, petitioner put up two witnesses, Reymundo Gonzales, who
declared that he had known petitioner since 1953 when petitioner’s father set up
a store in Maasin, Leyte; from where he “used to buy cigarettes”, and Vicente
Kangleon, who testified that he is a neighbor and meets petitioner almost
everyday. Kangleon, however, failed to specify the length of time that they had
been neighbors.

It cannot be said that the first witness” casual acquaintance with
petitioner, as such customer of their store, qualified him to vouch for the good
moral character and behavior of petitioner. Neither the fact that one is a
neighbor and meets her everyday make of said witness competent to testify on her
morality and character. Witnesses in naturalization proceedings are required to
vouch on their good moral character during the entire period that they had known
applicant and this certainly needs more than a mere nodding acquaintanceship
with the latter.

For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the lower court granting the
petition for naturalization of Nilda Tse is hereby reversed and set aside. No
costs. So ordered.

Bengzon, C. J., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J. B. L., Paredes,
Regala, Makatintal, Bengzon, J. P. and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.