GR 20415; (December, 1965) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-20415 December 29, 1965
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO BECOME A FILIPINO CITIZEN. SIO KIM alias JOHN DIA, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Sio Kim alias John Dia filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Surigao on October 18, 1960. He alleged he possessed the qualifications for citizenship and stated he was the son of a Filipino mother, Leona Custodio, and a Chinese father, claiming he should be considered a Filipino citizen as he was a minor when his father died. The Solicitor General opposed the petition, citing grounds including petitioner’s failure to file a declaration of intention. The trial court initially found petitioner qualified but declared granting the petition superfluous, holding he was already a Filipino citizen. On February 21, 1962, the court amended its decision, declaring petitioner eligible and granting his application for naturalization, subject to Republic Act No. 530, in light of Supreme Court rulings that courts cannot adjudge citizenship by declaratory relief. Petitioner later moved for a further amendment to include a finding that he was the son of a Filipino mother, which the court stated was unnecessary but noted the uncontroverted evidence on the matter. The Solicitor General appealed.
ISSUE
Whether the petitioner was exempt from filing a declaration of intention to become a citizen as required by Section 6 of the Naturalization Law.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the judgment and dismissed the petition. The Court held that the trial court erred in declaring petitioner exempt from filing a declaration of intention. Under Section 6 of the Naturalization Law, while persons who have resided continuously in the Philippines for 30 years or more are exempt from filing a declaration, the same section imposes an additional requirement that the applicant must have given primary and secondary education to all his children in public schools or recognized private schools not limited to any race or nationality. The evidence showed petitioner had eight children, none of whom finished high school, and the educational records for several children were incomplete or showed discontinuation. Therefore, petitioner failed to comply with this additional requirement. This failure constituted a jurisdictional defect, rendering the entire naturalization proceeding null and void. The Court deemed it unnecessary to address the other alleged errors.