REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES AND THE COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. MANOLO L. MADDELA, AS JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF QUEZON, BRANCH II, AND MIGUE…

These are actually two (2) separate petitions for certiorari and
prohibition with preliminary injunction but are decided jointly because the
issues presented proceed from the same factual background.

The pertinent facts are not disputed.  On April
29, 1963 the Court of First Instance of Quezon
(Branch II), Hon. Manolo L. Maddela
presiding, rendered a decision in its Special Proceeding No. 4012, which is
hereunder quoted in its entirety:

“This is a petition to have the petitioner Miguela
Tan Suat, a Chinese National, to be declared a
Filipino citizen.  The Solicitor General
has been represented by Assistant Fiscal Jose Veluz.  During the trial it has been established to
the satis­faction of the Court that sometime in the year 1937 petitioner was
legally married to Sy Lng Seng, a Filipino citizen; and that the petitioner has all
the qualifications and none of the disqualifications to be­come a Filipino
citizen.  After the sub­mission of the
evidence for the petitioner, the court inquired from Fiscal Veluz
if he has any opposition to the petition to which the Fiscal answered that he
has no opposi­tion, neither has he any evidence to warrant opposition.  The Court had it announced to the public if
there is any opposition to the petition of Miguela
Tan Suet to be declared a Filipino citizen and nobody in the crowded courtroom
registered his opposition.

“IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING, peti­tioner Miguela
Tan Suat is hereby declared a Filipino citizen by
marriage and the Commissioner of Immigration is hereby or­dered to cancel the
necessary alien certifi­cate of registration and immigrant certi­ficate of
residence of the petitioner and to issue the corresponding identification
card.”

On the same day the same court rendered another similarly worded
decision in its Special Proceeding No. 4013, this time in favor of Chan Po Lan.  This second decision reads:

“This is a petition to have the peti­tioner Chan Po Lan, a Chinese National, to be
declared a Filipino citizen.  The
Solicitor General has been represented by Assistant Fiscal Jose Veluz.  During the
trial it has been established to the satisfaction of the Court that sometime in
the year 1961 petitioner was legally married to Cu Bon Piao,
a Filipino citi­zen; and the petitioner has all the qua­lifications and none of
the disqualifications to become a Filipino citizen.  After the submission of the evidence for the
petitioner, the court inquired from Fiscal Veluz if
he has any opposition to the petition to which the Fiscal answered that he has
no opposition, neither has he any evidence to warrant any opposition.  The Court had it announced to the public if
there is any opposition to the peti­tion of Chan PC?  Lan
to be declared a Filipino citizen and nobody in the crowded courtroom
registered his opposition.

“IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, petitioner Chan Po Lan is hereby declared a Filipino citizen by marriage and
the Commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration is hereby ordered to cancel the
necessary alien certificate of registration and immigrant certificate of
residence of the petitioner and to is­sue the corresponding identification
card.”

On July 1, 1963
the Solicitor General^[1]
filed separate notices of appeal from said decisions, at the same time re­questing
an extension of ten (10) days within which to file the corresponding records on
appeal.  However, because of the un­explained
failure of the Clerk of Court of the Court of First Instance of Quezon to forward the records immediately despite repeated
requests therefor by the Solicitor General, the
latter, unable to prepare the records on appeal, filed the instant peti­tions
instead, including the Commissioner of Immigration as co-petitioner in view of
the fact that the dispositive parts of the decisions
of the lower court are addressed to him for compliance.

On August 10, 1963
we issued in each case a writ of preliminary injunction to restrain execution
and enforcement of the judgment. 
Thereafter these two cases were submitted for decision without any
answer from the respondents.

Private respondents’ identical prayer in the lager Court was for
a declaration of their Filipino citizenship and for an order to compel the
Commissioner of Immigration to cancel their respective alien certificates of
registration on the ground that they had married Filipino husbands.  In grant­ing the said prayer the lower court
was clearly in error.  At that time
jurisprudence had already set the question at rest: no person claiming to be a
citizen may get a judicial declara­tion of citizenship.

“Under our laws, there can be no action or proceeding for the
judicial declaration of the citizenship of an in­dividual.  Courts of justice exist for the settlement of
justiciable controversies, which imply a given right,
legally demand­able and enforceable, an act or omission violative
of said right, and a remedy, granted or sanctioned by law, for said breach of
right.  As an incident only of the
adjudication of the rights of the parties to a controversy, the court may pass
upon, and make a pronouncement relative to, their status.  Otherwise, such a pronouncement is beyond
judicial power.  Thus, for instance, no
action or proceed­ing may be instituted for a declaration to the effect that
plaintiff, or petitioner is married, or single, or a legitimate child, although
a finding thereon may be made as a necessary premise to justify a given re­lief
available only to one enjoying said status. 
At times, the law permits the ac­quisition of a given status, such as
naturalization by judicial decree.  But
there is no similar legislation authorizing the institution of a judicial
proceeding to declare that a given person is part of our citizenry.” (Tan v. Republic, L-14159, April 18, 1960).^[2]

Before these cases were submitted for decision the Solicitor
General filed a motion, dated February
14, 1964, to cite the Clerk of Court of the Court of First Instance
of Quezon for contempt by reason of his failure to
forward the records of these cases to this Court despite our resolution to that
effect.  It appears, however, that after
the said resolution was issued the Clerk did send those records and the same
were received here on January 24, 1964.  The question of contempt has therefore become
moot.

WHEREFORE, the Writs prayed for are hereby granted; the
questioned decisions are set aside and the writs of pre­liminary injunction
previously issued are made permanent.  Costs against private respondents.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, JBL, Dizon, Zaldivar, Sanchez, Ruiz Castro,
Fernando, Capistrano, Teehankee, and Barredo, JJ., concur.

^[1]
The Solicitor General was not furnished copy of either
of the petitions below, nor did he authorize the Provincial Fiscal of Quezon to appear in representation of his office.

^[2]
See also:  (Palaran
vs. Republic, G. R. No. L-15047, January
30, 1962; Channie Tan vs.
Republic, G. R. No. L-14159, April 18,
1960; Tan Yu Chin vs. Republic, G. R. No. L-15775, April 29, 1961; Delumen
vs. Re­public, G. R. No. L-5552, January
28, 1954.)