G.R. No. L-11642; November 28, 1959
In re: Petition to be Admitted a Citizen of the Philippines. BOON BING NG LIN, petitioner and appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor and appellant.

FACTS

Petitioner Boon Bing Ng Lin, a Chinese citizen born on May 5, 1926, arrived in Davao, Philippines on April 2, 1936. He filed a sworn declaration of intention to become a citizen on June 26, 1954, and a petition for naturalization on June 28, 1955, in the Court of First Instance of Davao. After due publication and hearing, the court granted his petition. The government appealed. The evidence established that the petitioner was a merchant since 1950, owned property and a business, paid his taxes, was married to a Filipina with whom he had five children, and claimed to have a good moral character, mingled socially with Filipinos, believed in Philippine constitutional principles, and participated in civic organizations. The government opposed, citing the petitioner’s failure to present alien certificates of registration for his wife and children, his inability to enumerate the three branches of government, lack of evidence showing deep knowledge of Philippine principles, his continuous association with the Chinese community, and an incident where he was quarrelsome over rancid butter.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioner, Boon Bing Ng Lin, is entitled to be admitted as a citizen of the Philippines by naturalization despite the grounds for opposition raised by the government.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decree granting naturalization. The Court held that:
1. The petitioner’s failure to present alien certificates of registration for his wife and children, or to prove their registration as aliens, does not alone disqualify him from naturalization. His presentation of his own income tax returns, tax receipts, certificates of no criminal record, health certificate, marriage certificate, and his own alien and immigration certificates showed sufficient compliance with the laws.
2. The petitioner’s failure to enumerate the three branches of government and the alleged lack of evidence of his knowledge of constitutional principles do not constitute disqualification, as he is not being tested on proficiency in political science.
3. His association with the Chinese community does not exclude his proven association with Filipinos as found by the trial court.
4. His alleged quarrelsome character, based on a single incident, is not sufficient proof of bad moral character, as it may have been an isolated occurrence.
Therefore, under the established facts, the petitioner is entitled to naturalization.