GR L 21951; (November, 1964) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-21951, November 27, 1964
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE MINOR CHARLES JOSEPH BLANCAFLOR WEEKS. UGGI LINDAMAND THERKELSEN and ERLINDA G. BLANCAFLOR, petitioners-appellants, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent-appellee.
FACTS
The petitioners, Uggi Lindamand Therkelsen (a Danish national with permanent residence in the Philippines) and Erlinda G. Blancaflor (a Filipino citizen), are legally married spouses who filed a joint petition for adoption. They sought to adopt Charles Joseph Blancaflor Weeks, the minor natural child of petitioner Erlinda Blancaflor from a previous relationship. The child’s American father had abandoned them, and the child had been living with the petitioners since their marriage. The petitioners demonstrated financial stability, moral fitness, and a genuine familial bond, with the minor already treating Therkelsen as his father. The Manila Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, however, denied the petition solely on the ground that the adoption would not result in the minor acquiring the Danish citizenship of the adoptive father, Therkelsen. The lower court, applying its earlier ruling in another case, held that an alien cannot adopt a Filipino minor unless the adoption confers the alien’s citizenship upon the child. The petitioners appealed this decision.
ISSUE
Whether the lower court erred in denying the petition for adoption on the sole ground that the adoption would not confer the alien adopter’s citizenship upon the Filipino minor.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the lower court and directed the approval of the adoption. The Court held that the lower court’s requirement—that adoption by an alien must result in the child acquiring the adopter’s foreign citizenship—is not supported by law and constitutes an unwarranted additional prerequisite beyond those expressly provided in the Civil Code.
The Ratio Decidendi is anchored on a strict interpretation of statutory requirements for adoption. Article 335 of the Civil Code (now superseded) only disqualified aliens from adopting if they were either non-residents or citizens of a country with which the Philippines had broken diplomatic relations. Since petitioner Therkelsen, a Danish citizen, was a permanent resident in the Philippines and Denmark maintained diplomatic relations with the Republic, he was legally qualified to adopt. The Court emphasized that citizenship is a political matter, not governed by civil law, and it is beyond the scope of the Civil Code to prescribe how or when foreign citizenship is acquired. The lower court’s ruling improperly imported a naturalization consequence into adoption proceedings. The Court further distinguished this case from those involving the adoption of alien children to circumvent immigration laws, noting that here, the adoption of a Filipino child by a qualified alien does not subvert public policy but rather promotes the child’s welfare within an established family unit. Thus, the denial based on the absence of a change in citizenship was legally erroneous.