G.R. No. 44281 , December 13, 1935
AH YOUNG, petitioner-appellant, vs. VICENTE ALDANESE, in his capacity as Insular Collector of Customs, and EMILIO VELEZ, in his capacity as Collector of Customs of the Port of Davao, respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Ah Young, a Chinese merchant residing in Davao, sought the admission of Ah Fook as his minor son. A Board of Special Inquiry appointed by the Collector of Customs of Davao denied Ah Fook’s entry, finding no satisfactory evidence to establish the alleged father-son relationship. This decision was affirmed by the Insular Collector of Customs. Ah Young then filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Court of First Instance of Davao to review the Board’s decision, but the petition was denied, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

Did the Board of Special Inquiry abuse its discretion in denying Ah Fook’s admission by rejecting the testimonial evidence presented to prove his relationship to Ah Young?

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s order and granted the writ of habeas corpus. While immigration authorities are not obliged to believe testimonial evidence, they must provide specific reasons for rejecting it, supported by facts in the record. Here, the Board merely stated that the testimony was “not satisfactory” and noted Ah Young was not in China when his alleged sons were born. This was insufficient to impeach the consistent testimonies of Ah Young, Ah Fook, and two other witnesses, especially given evidence that Ah Young was married in China in 1914 and made subsequent visits. The Court found no evidence in the record to support the Board’s conclusion, constituting an abuse of discretion.

AI Generated by Armztrong.