G.R. No. L-10559; May 16, 1958
In the Matter of the Petition of Yu Neam to be Admitted a Citizen of the Philippines. YU NEAM, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.

FACTS

Yu Neam, a citizen of Nationalist China, filed a petition for naturalization. He was born in China on August 5, 1915, and arrived in the Philippines on August 19, 1918, at nearly three years old. He continuously resided in Cebu City except for two vacation trips to China. He is a businessman and partner in Jock Chuan Lam Company, with a share of P85,000.00 and an average annual income of P6,000.00. He is married to Quin Wan, a Chinese, and they have eight children. Six of these children were enrolled at the Cebu Chinese High School, a government-recognized institution not limited to any race or nationality, where Philippine history and civics were taught. He speaks and writes English and Cebu Visayan, believes in the principles of the Philippine Constitution, is not affiliated with any subversive association, and has conducted himself irreproachably while mingling with Filipinos. He claimed exemption from filing a declaration of intention under Commonwealth Act No. 535, as he had continuously resided in the Philippines for over 30 years. The Court of First Instance of Cebu granted his petition. The Republic appealed, contending that: (1) petitioner failed to file a declaration of intention because he did not enroll all his children in recognized schools as required by Section 6 of the Revised Naturalization Law; (2) witness Florentino Almacen was incompetent; and (3) the grant of citizenship was erroneous.

ISSUE

1. Whether petitioner Yu Neam was exempt from filing a declaration of intention despite not enrolling all his children in recognized schools.
2. Whether witness Florentino Almacen was competent to testify regarding petitioner’s qualifications.
3. Whether the lower court erred in granting Philippine citizenship to Yu Neam.

RULING

1. On the exemption from filing a declaration of intention: The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision. The requirement under Section 6 of the Revised Naturalization Law that an applicant’s children must receive primary and secondary education in government-recognized schools applies only to children of school age. At the time of the petition, two of Yu Neam’s children, Albert and Elizabeth Yu, were only 3 years, 3 months, and 9 days old, and 11 months and 21 days old, respectively, and thus not of school age. It would be unreasonable to require compliance where it is impossible. The Court cited Quezon Ong Tan vs. Republic of the Philippines (101 Phil., 690) in support.
2. On the competence of witness Florentino Almacen: The Supreme Court found the witness competent. Although Almacen admitted lacking knowledge of petitioner’s specific social or civic activities (e.g., with the Lions Club, Jaycees) or his relations with the government, this did not disqualify him from testifying about petitioner’s general character and conduct. Almacen had been a customer of petitioner’s company since 1934 and was his “compadre,” giving him sufficient knowledge of petitioner’s character. The Court cited Antonio Te vs. Republic of the Philippines (G.R. No. L-10805, April 23, 1958), where similar gaps in a witness’s knowledge were deemed insignificant. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is generally respected, as stated in Tiu Bon Hui vs. Republic of the Philippines (G.R. No. L-8730, November 19, 1956).
3. On the grant of citizenship: The Supreme Court held that the lower court did not err in granting citizenship, as petitioner possessed all qualifications and none of the disqualifications under the law. The appeal was without merit.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The decision appealed from is affirmed. No costs.