GR L 18281; (November, 1966) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-18281 November 22, 1966
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF TSE VIW alias TSE VIW alias PABLO SIA TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. TSE VIW alias TSE VEW alias PABLO SIA, petitioner and appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor and appellant.
FACTS
Petitioner Tse Viw, also known as Tse Vew and Pablo Sia, filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Leyte. He alleged he was born in Canton, China, on August 20, 1927, arrived in the Philippines on July 10, 1938, and had continuously resided in Ormoc City for more than a year prior to filing. He was employed as a bookkeeper by Walter Johnson & Co. with a monthly salary of P250.00, plus free board and lodging, and was married to a Filipino citizen, Lucita Villas. He claimed to possess all qualifications and none of the disqualifications for naturalization. His petition included affidavits from two character witnesses, Rafael Mejia and Valeriano Daffon, who stated they had known him for over ten years and vouched for his qualifications. After publication and hearing, the lower court granted his petition for citizenship. The Republic of the Philippines appealed the decision.
ISSUE
Whether the petitioner has sufficiently proven his compliance with the legal requirements for naturalization, specifically regarding the filing of income tax returns, the adequacy of his character witnesses’ testimony, and the lawful use of an alias.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and dismissed the petition for citizenship. The Court held that the petitioner failed to affirmatively prove he had filed the income tax returns required by law during his stay in the Philippines. The certificate presented from a revenue officer stating he had no outstanding tax obligation was not equivalent to proof of actual filing. Furthermore, the testimony of the character witnesses was deemed too general and unconvincing. They failed to cite specific facts and events demonstrating their definite knowledge of the petitioner’s conduct and character, which is required as they stand as insurers of the applicant’s qualifications. Lastly, the record showed the petitioner used “Pablo Sia” as an alias given upon baptism, but there was no judicial authorization for its use as required by law. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.