GR L 19636; (June, 1965) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-19636 June 30, 1965
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP. ANTONIO SY, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Antonio Sy, a single citizen of the Republic of China, filed a petition for naturalization. He was born in Sagay, Negros Occidental, on January 17, 1934, and resided there until 1938. He then lived in Iloilo City from 1938 to 1952, in Bacolod City from 1952 to 1957, and again in Iloilo City from 1957 up to the filing of his petition on March 29, 1961, and thereafter. He worked as a traveling salesman for Manila Victoria Trading, with a salary of P240.00 a month and a daily allowance of P12.00 when traveling, which he claimed gave him an average yearly income of approximately P3,400.00. His character witnesses were Ernesto Uy Kimpang and Felixberta Celiz, both residents of Iloilo City. The Court of First Instance of Iloilo granted his petition on February 1, 1962. The Republic of the Philippines appealed.
ISSUE
1. Whether petitioner Antonio Sy possessed a lucrative trade, profession, or occupation.
2. Whether petitioner’s character witnesses were qualified to vouch for his good moral character and irreproachable conduct during his entire residence in the Philippines.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the judgment and denied the petition.
1. On the issue of lucrative income: Petitioner’s P12.00 daily travel allowance was intended to cover job-related expenses and should not be considered part of his income. His income from salary was only P240.00 a month. The Court held that an applicant earning less than P250.00 a month does not possess a lucrative trade or profession, considering the high cost of living. This guideline applies regardless of marital status. Even if the income could be considered lucrative for a single man, it would not be so if petitioner, who was 27 years old at application, were to marry, as it would be insufficient to support a family without becoming a burden to society.
2. On the issue of character witnesses: Petitioner resided in Bacolod City from 1952 to 1957. His character witnesses, being residents only of Iloilo City, did not have the opportunity to observe him personally and intimately during that five-year period. Therefore, they were not qualified to attest that he conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during his entire residence in the Philippines, as required by law.
The Court emphasized that naturalization is a privilege with stringent requirements. The judgment was reversed and the petition denied, with costs against petitioner.