G.R. No. L-26970 May 29, 1970
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. HON. JOSE BORROMEO, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, Branch IV, Cebu City, and VIDASTO TIU, respondents.

FACTS

On July 9, 1962, Vidasto Tiu, a Chinese citizen, filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Cebu. He stated he was single, born in Cebu City on February 2, 1939, worked as a salesman and insurance underwriter with an annual income of P4,200.00, and did not file a declaration of intention because he was born in the Philippines. The petition was published and heard. On September 30, 1963, the court granted the petition and admitted Tiu to Philippine citizenship. The State did not appeal. On November 8, 1965, Tiu moved to set the case for final hearing for his oath-taking. The Republic of the Philippines, through the Solicitor General, opposed the motion and prayed to set aside the 1963 decision, alleging the petition was fatally defective because Tiu was not exempt from filing a declaration of intention and he had used the name Tiu Yee Sing, which did not appear in the published petition. The lower court denied the opposition and a subsequent motion for reconsideration in its orders dated June 15, 1966, and October 27, 1966. The Republic then filed this certiorari proceeding.

ISSUE

Whether the lower court acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in issuing the orders denying the Republic’s opposition to the final hearing and motion to set aside the decision, due to jurisdictional defects in the naturalization petition, specifically: (1) the defective publication for failure to include an alias name, and (2) the applicant’s failure to file a mandatory declaration of intention as he was not legally exempt.

RULING

The petition is GRANTED. The orders of the lower court dated June 15, 1966, and October 27, 1966, are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The application of Vidasto Tiu for admission to Philippine citizenship is DISAPPROVED.
The Supreme Court held that the publication of the petition was defective because it did not include the name “Tiu Yee Sing,” which the applicant had used while studying at Cebu Chinese High School. This omission deprived people who knew him by that name of the opportunity to testify about him, a deficiency that practically deprived the court of jurisdiction. Citing Wong Chui vs. Republic, the use of an undisclosed other name also constituted a violation of the Anti-Alias Law (Com. Act 142), warranting denial of the application.
Furthermore, the applicant failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of filing a declaration of intention one year prior to the petition under Section 5 of the Revised Naturalization Law. The exemption from this requirement applies only to aliens born in the Philippines who received their primary and secondary education in Philippine public schools or recognized private institutions not limited to any race or nationality. While the applicant’s birth in the Philippines was established, he failed to prove he met the educational requirement for exemption. He completed his primary and secondary education at Cebu Chinese High School. The certifications submitted to show the school admitted Filipino students and employed Filipino teachers did not cover the period when the applicant was a student (up to 1958). Thus, there was no proof that during his attendance, the institution was regularly attended by a sizeable number of Filipino students from whom he could have assimilated Filipino customs and traditions. Moreover, these unverified certifications were considered insufficient hearsay evidence. The failure to file the required declaration of intention was therefore fatal to his petition.
The lower court’s issuance of the disputed orders, despite being apprised of these jurisdictional defects, suffered from infirmity, making it a proper subject of certiorari. The invalidity of the decision granting citizenship was evident from the available papers.