GR L 10761; (November, 1958) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-10761; November 29, 1958
In the matter of the petition of CELESTINO CO Y QUING REYES to be admitted a citizen of the Philippines. CELESTINO CO Y QUING REYES, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Celestino Co y Quing Reyes filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Manila, which was granted. The Republic of the Philippines appealed. The oppositor-appellant contends that the lower court erred in granting the petition because the petitioner failed to comply with all legal requisites. A pivotal undisputed fact is that the petition was published in the Official Gazette only once, instead of three times as required by Section 9 of Commonwealth Act No. 473 (the Revised Naturalization Law).
ISSUE
Did the Court of First Instance of Manila err in hearing and granting the petition despite the petition being published in the Official Gazette only once, instead of three times as required by law?
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the lower court. The publication requirement under Section 9 of Commonwealth Act No. 473 is mandatory and jurisdictional. The law requires publication of the petition “once a week for three consecutive weeks, in the Official Gazette.” This demands compliance with three conditions: (1) weekly publication, (2) done three times, (3) on consecutive weeks. While compliance with the “weekly” condition was admittedly impossible at the time because the Official Gazette was not published weekly, the petitioner could and should have complied with the second and third conditions by ensuring publication three times consecutively in the Gazette. A single publication is not a substantial compliance with the law. Following the precedent in Ong Son Cui vs. Republic of the Philippines, an incomplete publication is insufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the court to try the case and grant the petition. The Court rejected the appellee’s arguments that the issue could not be raised for the first time on appeal, that the duty to publish lay with the clerk of court, and that the defect was not prejudicial. A naturalization proceeding is in rem, and for a court to validly try and decide it, it must have jurisdiction, which requires strict compliance with the statutory publication requirements.