G.R. No. L-21958. September 28, 1970
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF FELIPE DE JESUS DY TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES, FELIPE DE JESUS DY, PETITIONER-APPELLEE, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSI…
MAKASIAR, J.:
The Republic of the Philippines,
thru the Solicitor General, appealed from the decision of the Court of First
Instance of Negros Oriental granting the petition for
naturalization of Felipe de Jesus Dy.
On April 30, 1962,
petitioner Felipe de Jesus Dy filed his petition for
naturalization together with the requisite affidavits of his witnesses Ireneo G. Tubio and Maximo R. Enardecido in the Court
of First Instance of Negros Oriental (Exhs. A, A-1, A-2, A-3 and B).
Only the notice of the petition for Philippine citizenship, not
the petition itself, was posted on the Bulletin Board of the Court of First
Instance of Negros Oriental (Exh.
D) and published in the Vanguard, a newspaper of general circulation in the province
of Negros Oriental,
and in the Official Gazette once a week for three consecutive weeks as required
by law (Exhs. C, E, F, F-1, F-2 and F-3). Although the notice of the petition for
Philippine citizenship, as posted and published as aforestated,
contained most of the allegations of the petition, it omitted especially the
important averment in paragraph 12 of the petition concerning his belief in
the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution, his having conducted
himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his
residence in the Philippines, in his relation with the constituted government
as well as with the community in which he lives, his having mingled socially
with Filipinos, and his having evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace
the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipinos (see Exh.
A, p. 2, rec. of Exh.).
It should be noted also that his petition does not allege that he
is of good moral character as required by law.
During the trial, he submitted his certificate of registration as
a private merchant issued on April 19,
1955 (Exh. G-3 and G-4); his permit to
engage in the retail business dated January
15, 1962 issued by the municipal treasurer of Ayungon,
Negros Oriental (Exh. G-5);
official receipts of payment of his privilege tax dated January 20, 1962 and of the license fee to engage
in retail business (Exh. G, G-1, and G-2); his birth
certificate (Exh. H); a certification that he is
registered in the Chinese Embassy and holds ACR No. C-006813 (Exh. I); his immigrant certificate of residence and
receipts of payment of the corresponding fee therefor
dated January 22, 1962 and January 3, 1963 (Exhs. J,
J-1, K, K-1, L and L-1); an official translation of the Chinese Law allowing
Chinese nationals to be naturalized in other countries with the permission of
the Chinese Minister of Interior (Exhs. M, M-2 to
M-8); affidavits of Tranquilina T. Ferrolino and Olivia Diluvio
attesting to his having attended Grade II and Grade III in Ayungon
Elementary School during the school years 1945 to 1946 (Exhs.
N and N-1); the affidavits of Coo Ak and Frank T. Liao that he finished his first, fourth and fifth grades,
in the Dumaguete Chinese School during the school
years 1939 to 1941, 1946 to 1948 (Exh. N-2);
certifications that he completed his elementary and secondary courses at the
then Cebu Chinese
School, now Cebu Eastern
College, from 1948 to 1953 (Exhs. N-3 and N-6), his three-year pre-medical course in
the University of San Carlos, Cebu City, from 1953 to
1956 (Exh. N-4), and his medical course at the University
of Santo Tomas from 1956 to 1961 (Exh. N-5); the official receipt for his payment of his
professional tax as a physician for the years 1962 and 1963 (Exhs. P and P-1); a certificate from the Board of Examiners
attesting to his having passed the medical examination (Exhs.
P-2 and P-3); his income tax returns for 1960, 1961 and 1962 showing his gross
income respectively of P2,228.07 (Exh. Q), P3,698.02
(Exh. Q-1) and P9,300.13 (Exh.
Q-2); official receipts evidencing payment of his income tax for 1960, 1961,
and 1962 (Exhs. R, R-1, and R-2); his residence
certificates A and B for 1962 and 1963 (Exhs. S, S-1,
S-2 and S-3); tax clearance certificates from the assistant municipal treasurer
of Ayungon and the BIR Collection Agent of Negros Oriental (Exhs. T and
T-1); clearance certificates from the chief of police of the Municipality of Ayungon, the provincial commander of Negros
Oriental, the Justice of the Peace of Ayungon, the
First Assistant Provincial Fiscal, the Clerk of Court of the Court of First
Instance of Negros Oriental, the NICA, the
Deportation Board, the Bureau of Immigration, the Bureau of Prisons and the
Land Registration Commission (Exhs. U, U-1, U-2, U-3,
U-4, V, V-1, W, W-1, W-2 and W-3); and a health certificate from the municipal
health officer of Ayungon, Negros
Oriental (Exh. X).
But he failed to submit clearances from the National Bureau of
Investigation as well as from the chiefs of police, courts and fiscals of Manila
and Cebu City.
To prove his having imbibed Philippine customs and traditions, he
submitted receipts for his membership fee of P10.00 and contribution of P1.00
paid to the Philippine National Red Cross (Exhs. Y
and Y-1); his contribution of P1.00 to the Philippine Tuberculosis Society for
1961 (Exh. Y-2), P2.00 for 1962 (Exh.
Y-3) and P1.00 for 1963 (Exh. Y-4); his contribution
of P1.00 to the Peace and Amelioration Fund Commission for 1961 (Exh. Y-5); and his P1.00 contribution to the Tayasan Catholic Rectory (Exh.
Y-6).
He demonstrated however his ability to speak and write English
and Cebu Visayan.
Nonetheless, the following circumstances bar applicant’s
admission to Philippine citizenship:
(1)
His petition was not copied
entirely or verbatim in the notice posted in the bulletin board and published
in the Official Gazette and the Vanguard (see Exhs.
A, C, D, and E). Sec. 9 of Com. Act No.
473 requires that copies of the petition shall be published and posted. This requirement is jurisdictional.[1]
The notice as thus posted and published contained only a summary of some of the
contents of the petition. Such an
omission militates against the approval of his petition; because we cannot
depart, as Justice Fernando opined speaking for this Tribunal, from “the basic
concept that the grant of citizenship being a highly regarded privilege, there
must be a full and strict compliance with the requirements of the law before
its benefits can be enjoyed.”[2]
(2)
His alias Agong,
which appears in the records of the Chinese embassy as certified to by its
First Secretary and concurrently Consul General on August 23, 1962, (Exh.
I), in his immigrant certificate of residence dated July 22, 1951 (Exh. K),
and in his permit to engage in the retail business issued on January 15, 1962
by the municipal treasurer of Ayungon, Negros Oriental (Exh. G-5), does
not appear in his petition for naturalization as filed, nor in the notice of
petition as posted and published, and therefore vitiates the same.[3]
His immigration certificate of residence alone (Exh.
K), shows that as early as 1951, he has been sporting said alias. His use of an alias must have started from
the time he was registered with the Chinese Embassy long before 1951.
His claim that “Agong” is the
nickname of his mother, by which people used to call him, imposes on one’s credulity;
because only he could have supplied such data appearing in official documents
like his permit to engage in retail business (Exh.
G-5), his immigrant certificate of residence, (Exh.
K) and embassy records (Exh. I). He should have caused the necessary
correction in said documents if he were not employing such an alias.
(3) There is no showing that he has been duly
authorized by the Court to employ any alias or specifically the alias Agong.
Utilizing an alias without judicial authority demonstrates that he has
not conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire
period of his residence in the country in his relationship with the duly constituted
government as well as with the community in which he lives.[4]
(4) The only name appearing in his petition for
naturalization and in the posted and published notice thereof is Felipe de
Jesus Dy (Exh. A). But his immigrant certificate of residence (Exh. K), issued on July
22, 1951, states that his name is Felipe Yu Dy
de Jesus alias Agong. His certificate issued by the Board of
Medical Examiners on November 22,
1961 states that his name is Felipe Y. Dy
(Exhs. P-2 and P-3), which appears re-stated in the
official receipt, of payment of his professional fee dated February 5, 1962 (Exh.
P). The official transcript of his
records in the University of Santo Tomas shows that his name is Felipe Dy Y. Yu, (Exh. N-5). The affidavits of Tranquilina
T. Ferrolino and Olivia Diluvio
as well as the certificates of the principal and director of the Cebu Eastern
College (formerly Cebu Chinese
School) and the registrar of the University
of San Carlos state that the name
of the petitioner is simply Felipe Dy (Exhs. N, N-1, N-3, N-4, and N-6). Even his 1962 residence certificate B states
that his name is Felipe Y. Dy and he signed
the said residence certificate B also as Felipe Y. Dy
(Exh. S-1).
The middle surname Yu is not justified by his birth certificate which
states that his name is Felipe de Jesus Dy, that his
father is Dy Chuan and that his mother is You Chee (Exh. H). The failure of petitioner to include in his
petition all the names that he used and by which he is known likewise negates
the granting of the same.[5]
(5) His petition states only one place of
residence, namely Barrio Tampucon, Ayungon, Negros Oriental, despite
the fact that he resided in Dumaguete City for about
three years while attending the first, fourth and fifth grade in the Dumaguete Chinese School, from 1939 to 1941 and from 1946
to 1948 (Exh. N-2), in Cebu
City where he completed his elementary and high school at the Cebu Eastern College (formerly Cebu
Chinese School) from 1948 to 1949 and from 1949 to 1953 (Exhs.
N-3 and N-6), and his three-year pre-medical course at the University
of San Carlos from 1953 to 1956 (Exh. N-4), and in Manila
where he took his medical course at the University
of Santo Tomas from 1956 to 1961
including the twelve-month internship (Exh.
N-5). He resided for about four years in
Dumaguete City,
eight years in Cebu
City, and five years in Manila
or a total of seventeen years of his thirty years – his age when he filed his
petition on April 30, 1962
as he was born on February 6, 1932. Such omission to state all his previous
residences, whether permanent or temporary, in his petition as filed and in the
notice thereof as posted and published, is likewise fatal.[6]
(6) As aforestated, he
took his first, fourth and fifth grade at the Dumaguete Chinese
School (Exh.
N-2) and his sixth grade and high school at the then Cebu Chinese
School, now Cebu Eastern
College. While it is true that both Chinese schools
were certified to as not limited to any particular nationality and race (Exhs. N-3 and N-6); it is obvious that most, if not all, of
the students therein at the time were Chinese.
This indicates that petitioner has not imbibed Filipino customs and
traditions as well as ideals.[7]
This is further demonstrated by the fact that the principal and director of
the Cebu Eastern College as well as the fact that one
Coo Ak, his teacher in the Dumaguete
Chinese School, who certified to his having attended his fourth, fifth, and
sixth grade at the said school (Exh. N-2), are all
Chinese as they bear Chinese names (Frank T. Liao,
L.F. Chen, and Coo Ak). His taking four years of his six-year
elementary course and the entire four-year high school course in Chinese
schools, negates petitioner’s protestation that he has a sincere desire to
imbibe Filipino customs, traditions, and ideals.[8]
(7) His pretension that he was in the retail and
cattle business in Ayungon from 1950 until 1962 is
repudiated by the fact that from 1948 to 1961, he was studying in Cebu and Manila. He could not possibly operate a retail store
during that period of time in Ayungon, Negros Oriental. It
is patent therefore that during said period, his parents owned and operated the
business. He did not present any license
to operate a retail store from 1950 to 1961.
The only permit he submitted was issued on January 15, 1962 by the municipal treasurer of Ayungon, although it states that “he is hereby permitted
to continue his retail business at poblacion Ayungon, Negros Oriental. xx xx” (Exh. G-5). The
foregoing permit does not state when he started as a retail merchant. If long prior to 1962 he owned a retail
store, he could have at least submitted his sales books and licenses for the
last five (5) years including 1963, the year of the trial; for the law requires
a merchant to keep his books for at least five years. (Secs. 334, 336 and
338, Nat. Int. Rev. Code and Sec. 13, Chapter IV of Revenue Regulation No. V-1
of March 17, 1947).
We cannot accord belief to his assertion that, during the time that
he was studying in Cebu and Manila, his uncle Raymund Vailoces managed his
store assisted by his uncle’s houseboy; because he does not know the name of the
alleged store helper, or whether he had a payroll or not, or whether his
business was registered with the Social Security System. Neither is his claim that he capitalized his
store with his savings of P1,000.00 in 1950, credible; because he did not even
state the source of his alleged savings or how he saved such an amount when he
was only about 18 years old.
(8) His income tax returns are insufficient to
support his alleged income for 1960, 1961, and 1962. His salesbooks for
1958 until the first quarter of 1963, should have been submitted to show not
only that he had such an income but also that he owned and was actually operating
the store, which should be corroborated by the business licenses, permits,
books and income tax returns of his father or mother to prove that they have
separate businesses.
To prove his alleged ownership of thirty heads of large cattle,
petitioner submitted only a certification of the municipal treasurer attesting
to such ownership. The best evidence of
such ownership are the certificates of ownership of large cattle themselves or
certified true photostats thereof, which contain the
description of the individual cattle owned by him, its sex, age, cowlicks,
brands, etc. and the source and mode of acquisition thereof. The certification issued to him by the
municipal treasurer does not even identify the alleged thirty heads of large
cattle he allegedly owns, whether cows, bulls, carabaos,
or horses. He has not submitted any
proof to show that he had income from the sale of such large cattles.
He received his certificate from the Board Medical Examiners on November 22, 1961 (Exhs. p-2 and P-3).
Being a novice in the practice, he could not possibly earn in his town
P200 a month or P2,400 that year 1962. Even
if he did, the said income is insufficient to qualify him for naturalization,
although he is a bachelor.
In Uy vs. Republic,[9]
the petition for naturalization was denied because the petitioner, single of Cebu City,
had a monthly income of only P300. In
Tan Tiu vs. Republic,[10]
the petition for naturalization was also rejected because the applicant, a
bachelor of Numancia, Surigao,
earned only P230 a month. In Sia Faw vs. Republic,[11]
the petition for naturalization was also denied because the applicant, a
bachelor of Ormoc
City, earned only P250 a month with
free board and lodging. In Te Poot vs. Republic,[12]
the applicant, another bachelor resident of Davao, was denied naturalization
because his monthly income was only P250 although with free board and lodging.
(9) His petition does not specifically allege
that he is of good moral character as required by Sec. 7 in relation to par. 3
of Sec. 2 of Com. Act No. 473.[13]
(10) Even his good moral character has not been
satisfactorily established. His three
witnesses, Irineo Tubio, Maximo Enardecido and Dr. Julio Abella, could not possibly affirm that petitioner had
conducted himself properly while petitioner was studying for eight years in Cebu City and for five years in Manila, despite their
pretension that they visited him two or four times a year during that period of
thirteen years. And in the case of Dr.
Julio Abella, he did not see petitioner while the
latter was studying at the University
of Santo Tomas from 1959 to 1961.
Much depends upon what they know about the petitioner during at
least ten years before he applied for naturalization.[14]
And he did not present the necessary clearances from the National
Bureau of Investigation, as well as from the chiefs of police, courts, and
fiscals of Manila and Cebu City.
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is reversed and the
instant petition for naturalization is denied.
Costs against petitioner-appellee.
Reyes, J.B.L., Acting C.J., Dizon, Makalintal, Zaldivar, Ruiz Castro,
Fernando, Barredo, and Villamor,
JJ., concur.
Teehankee, J., in the result.
Concepcion, C.J., concurs in the foregoing decision.
[1]
Yu Tiu vs. Republic, L-19844, June 30, 1965, 14 SCRA, 587, 589-590;
Kiat vs. Republic, L-19915, June 23, 1965, 14 SCRA, 389, 392-393;
Co vs. Republic, 55 O.G. 9224, 9229.
[2] Luchayco vs. Republic, L-25814, July 30, 1969, 28 SCRA, 997, 1000; Ngo vs.
Republic, L-25805, Feb. 27, 1969,
27 SCRA, 88, 90-91.
[3]
Yu Nam vs. Republic, 16 SCRA 733, 734-735; Dy vs.
Republic, 16 SCRA 667, 669-670; Celerino Yu Seco vs. Republic, 108 Phil. 807, 809.
[4]
Yu Lim vs. Republic, 27 SCRA 804, 806; Uy vs.
Republic, 28 SCRA 754, 757; Te Poot vs.
Republic, 27 SCRA 644, 648.
[5] Uy vs. Republic, 28 SCRA, 754, 756; Yu Lim vs.
Republic, 27 SCRA, 804, 806; Te Poot vs.
Republic, 27 SCRA, 644, 648; Yu Nam vs. Republic, 16 SCRA, 733, 734-735;
Dy vs. Republic, 16 SCRA, 667, 669-670; Yu Seco vs. Republic, 108 Phil. 807, 809.
[6]
Tan Liu vs. Republic, L-21558, Jan. 30, 1970, 31 SCRA, 124, 125; Zabaleta vs. Republic, L-25401, July 30, 1969, 28
SCRA, 654-657; Lim Siong vs. Republic,
L-26601, June 30, 1969, 28 SCRA 687, 690-691.
[7] Luchayco vs. Republic, 28 SCRA 997, 999; Lee vs.
Republic, L-20151, March 31, 1965;
Hong vs. Republic, 17 SCRA 220 (1966), 222.
[8] Yap
vs. Republic, L-15102, May 23,
1968, 23 SCRA 681, 683-684; Chan De vs. Republic, L-25551, May 29 1968, 23 SCRA 943; 947.
[9]
14 SCRA, 596, 597-598.
[10]
18 SCRA, 824, 826.
[11]
21 SCRA, 893, 894.
[12]
27SCRA, 644, 649.
[13] Pidelo vs. Republic, L-17796, Sept. 29, 1965.
[14]
Lim vs. Republic, L-2001, Feb.
28, 1961; Dy vs. Republic,
L-13496, April 27, 1960; Te
Poot vs. Republic, 27 SCRA, 644-650.