GR L 21128; (August, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-21128; August 19, 1967
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR ADMISSION AS CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. AO SAN, petitioner-appellant, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellee.
FACTS
On May 12, 1960, the Court of First Instance of Manila granted Ao San’s petition for naturalization. After two years, Ao San filed a petition to take his oath of allegiance, alleging compliance with Republic Act 530. The Solicitor General filed a motion to vacate the decision and oppose the oath-taking, citing defects in the amended petition, lack of jurisdiction, lack of qualification, and unreliable witnesses. On January 11, 1963, the trial court set aside its decision, denied the petition to take the oath, and dismissed the petition without prejudice. Ao San appealed this order.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the trial court erred in setting aside its original decision granting naturalization and dismissing Ao San’s petition.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s order, with the modification that the dismissal shall be with prejudice. The Court held that a decision in naturalization proceedings does not become final until after the issuance of the certificate of naturalization and compliance with Republic Act No. 530 ; until then, the Republic retains the right to ensure only qualified applicants are admitted. The Court found fatal defects in Ao San’s petition: he failed to state all his addresses as required (listing only one address in his petition while his alien and immigrant certificates showed different addresses), which affected the court’s jurisdiction, especially since he did not file a notice of intention. Furthermore, the Court found serious discrepancies regarding his children: his original petition stated he had five children, while his amended petition stated eight, with no explanation; the children bore different surnames and had mothers with different names (Ang Yie and Ang Yee); and they used different names in school from their registered names. The birth certificates of two children showed birth dates only five months and twenty-five days apart, casting grave doubt on their paternity and reflecting poorly on Ao San’s moral character. These discrepancies demonstrated a lack of good moral character and an attempt to secure citizenship for all claimed children. The Court concluded the dismissal should be with prejudice.