IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR ADMISSION TO PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP, JULIO LIM ALIAS JUAN TAN ALIAS JULIONG LIM, PETITIONER-APPELLEE, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITO…

Julio Lim versus Republic of the Philippines

The Case

This is Julio Lim versus the Republic of the Philippines, a naturalization case decided by the Supreme Court in July 1966. Julio Lim, who also goes by the names Juan Tan, Juliong Lim, Juliong Lira, Juliong Tan, and Julio Y. Lim, petitioned the Court of First Instance for admission to Philippine citizenship. The Republic opposed the petition and, when the trial court ruled in the petitioner's favor, carried the matter to the Supreme Court. The case matters because it shows how strictly our courts guard the grant of citizenship: three seemingly small defects — a modest income, the use of several names without judicial authority, and the failure to prove one's true name in the civil register — were each enough to defeat the petition.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed his petition for admission to Philippine citizenship in the Court of First Instance. The trial court rendered judgment finding that the petitioner is entitled to Philippine citizenship. The Republic, through the Solicitor General, appealed. The appeal reached the Supreme Court, which reversed the judgment below on three grounds and denied the petition.

Facts

Julio Lim sought to become a Philippine citizen. At the time he filed his petition, his monthly income was only 250 pesos, and his average income was 300 pesos a month. He was a married man with a wife and four children.

The petitioner bore a number of names. He was known as Julio Lim, Juan Tan, and Juliong Lira, and he also signed his name as Julio Y. Lim. In his check-up certificate dated August 31, 1953, he was also known as Juliong Tan. He used these various names without any judicial authorization.

Although he was born in Malitbog, Leyte, the petitioner offered no evidence of the actual name appearing in the civil register. The trial court nonetheless granted the petition, and the Republic appealed.

Issues

• Whether or not the petitioner's income satisfied the statutory requirement for naturalization.
• Whether or not the petitioner's use of several names without judicial authorization disqualified him from becoming a Philippine citizen.
• Whether or not the absence of evidence of the petitioner's true name in the civil register bars the grant of citizenship.

Applicable Provisions

Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 142, the law regulating the use of aliases, provides:

It shall be unlawful for any person to use any name different from the one with which he was christened or by which he has been known since childhood, unless such use is expressly authorized by law or by judicial authority, or unless it is for a purpose which is not contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or good customs.

The petitioner's use of several names without judicial authorization violated this provision and showed a disregard for the law that a candidate for citizenship must respect.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the petitioner's income fell short of the statutory requirement. His average income was 300 pesos a month, and his monthly income at the time of filing was only 250 pesos. The Court said these were "decidedly both notches below the level of the lucrative." Even a single man with an income of 5,600 pesos a year would fail the requirement; a man with a wife and four children was certainly in a worse position.

On the second issue, the Court held that the petitioner's use of diverse names without judicial authorization violated Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 142. This was a mark against his character and his respect for Philippine law.

On the third issue, the Court held that the absence of sufficient evidence of the petitioner's true name bars the grant of citizenship. The Court ruled that the name appearing in the civil register is, for legal purposes, a person's real name. The petitioner, though born in Malitbog, Leyte, adduced no evidence of that name.

Doctrine

Three rules emerge. First, a naturalization applicant must show a lucrative income; an income below the statutory threshold disqualifies him, and the burden is heavier for an applicant with a family to support. Second, an applicant must not use aliases without judicial authorization, for such use violates Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 142 and reflects a disregard for law. Third, an applicant must prove his true name as it appears in the civil register, because that name is, for legal purposes, his real name; failure to do so bars the grant of citizenship.

Disposition

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment below and denied the petition for citizenship, with costs against the petitioner.

Remember This

Memorize this line: the name in the civil register is, for legal purposes, a person's real name, and its absence in the evidence bars naturalization. Examiners use this case to test the qualifications for naturalization — income, alias use, and true name — and the strict burden on the applicant.