IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF JESUS J. GO. TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. JESUS J. GO, PETITIONER AND APPELLEE, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR AND A…

Jesus J. Go versus Republic of the Philippines

The Case

This is the case of Jesus J. Go versus the Republic of the Philippines. It is a naturalization case: a Chinese citizen asked the courts to be admitted as a citizen of the Philippines, and the government opposed him. The Supreme Court decided the case in December 1959. The case matters because it fixes a rule every Bar candidate must know: an alien who takes part in Philippine politics, even before he files his application, has committed a serious offense that bars naturalization. Good character is not enough if the applicant has broken the election law.

Procedural History

Jesus J. Go filed his petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Cebu. The trial court granted the petition and admitted him to Philippine citizenship. The government appealed from that judgment. The appeal went directly to the Supreme Court, which reversed the trial court and denied the petition, with costs.

Facts

Jesus J. Go is a Chinese citizen born in Bogo, Cebu. He is single. He finished high school at the Cebu Roosevelt Memorial Colleges and completed the course in Pharmacy, but he never took the Board Examination because he is an alien. He has no lucrative profession; he lives on an allowance of 60 pesos from his father. He owns property worth 6,000 pesos, which his grandmother donated to him on July 17, 1954, one week before he filed his application for naturalization.

On paper, he met the qualifications. He speaks and writes English and the Cebuano dialect. He believes in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution. He is not opposed to organized government and is not affiliated with any group that upholds doctrines against all organized government. He does not believe in violence or assassination for the success of ideas. He has never been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, and he suffers from no mental alienation or incurable contagious disease.

But his own witness, Jesus Varallo, testified to something else. The petitioner mingled politically with Filipinos and solicited the votes of his Filipino friends for the candidate of his preference, because he could not vote himself during elections, being an alien. The government seized on this testimony and appealed, relying on the Court's earlier ruling in Benluy versus Republic of the Philippines.

Issues

• Whether or not an alien who solicited votes for a candidate in an election, before filing his application for naturalization, may still be granted Philippine citizenship.
• Whether or not such participation in election activities is a serious offense that disqualifies the applicant from naturalization.

Applicable Provisions

Section 56 of the Revised Election Code provides:

No foreigner shall aid any candidate, directly or indirectly, or take part in or influence in any manner any election.

This is the prohibition the petitioner violated when he solicited votes for his preferred candidate.

Sections 183 and 185 of the Revised Election Code, as described in the decision, penalize that violation:

Violation of the Election Law committed by aliens prior to the filing of their application is sufficient cause for not granting them Philippine citizenship, such violation being considered a serious offense penalized under Sections 183 and 185 of the Revised Election Code with imprisonment of not less than one year and one day but not more than five years and deportation in case of a foreigner.

This shows that the act is not a minor lapse but a serious offense carrying imprisonment and deportation for a foreigner.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the petitioner may not be granted citizenship. His witness testified that he mingled politically with Filipinos and solicited votes for the candidate of his preference. That is exactly what Section 56 forbids. The Court quoted the provision:

No foreigner shall aid any candidate, directly or indirectly, or take part in or influence in any manner any election.

On the second issue, the Court held that the violation is a serious offense. It relied on Benluy versus Republic of the Philippines and on Ernesto Go versus Republic of the Philippines and Kiat Chun Tan versus Republic of the Philippines, where it had already ruled that a violation of the Election Law committed by an alien before filing his application is sufficient cause to deny naturalization. The offense is penalized with imprisonment of not less than one year and one day but not more than five years, and with deportation in the case of a foreigner. The Court found the facts here similar to those cases. Although the petitioner seemingly had all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications, his political activity disqualified him. The Court reversed the trial court, with costs.

Doctrine

An alien who aids any candidate, directly or indirectly, or takes part in or influences any election violates Section 56 of the Revised Election Code. Such a violation, even if committed before the filing of the application for naturalization, is a serious offense and a sufficient ground to deny Philippine citizenship. The applicant's possession of the qualifications and absence of the disqualifications does not cure the violation. For a Bar answer: naturalization requires not only the statutory qualifications but also respect for Philippine law, and an alien who intervenes in elections has shown he does not deserve the privilege.

Disposition

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, denied the petition for naturalization, and ordered the petitioner to pay the costs.

Remember This

Memorize this line: an alien who takes part in any election violates Section 56 of the Revised Election Code, and that violation, even before he applies, bars naturalization. Examiners use this case to test whether a seemingly qualified applicant can still be denied because of a serious offense against the election law.