G.R. No. L-19646 May 31, 1965
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. ESPIRITU NG, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.

FACTS

Espiritu Ng filed a petition for naturalization with the Court of First Instance of Manila on June 3, 1959. He claimed to be a resident of Manila, born in Manila on October 26, 1938, of Chinese parents, single, and employed as a supervisor at Pioneer Tobacco Corporation with a monthly salary of P170.00. He stated he could speak and write English and Tagalog, had completed elementary, intermediate, and high school at the Technical and Commercial College of Baguio, and was a third-year Commerce student at the University of the East at the time of filing. He declared his belief in Philippine constitutional principles, proper and irreproachable conduct, and social mingling with Filipinos with a desire to embrace their customs. The government opposed the petition on grounds including the untrustworthiness of character witnesses, the witnesses’ inability to vouch for qualifications, insufficient lucrative income, and illegal use of an alias. The lower court granted the petition, dismissing the opposition as unmeritorious, prompting the Republic’s appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioner possesses a lucrative occupation or income as required by the Naturalization Law.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision, denying the petition for citizenship. The Court found that the petitioner’s income was not lucrative as required by law. His admitted annual income was a little over P2,040.00 (based on P170.00 monthly), which was deemed grossly insufficient for the high standard of living in Manila, even considering an inconclusive claim of additional food provisions. The Court noted that his Social Security System membership card indicated a salary of only P150.00 monthly, making the actual income even lower. Citing the precedent in Ngo Go Liong Siu v. Republic (G.R. No. L-18319, May 31, 1963), where a monthly income of P300.00 was held insufficient, the Court concluded the petitioner’s income was inadequate. Additionally, the Court noted the petitioner failed to declare all former places of residence in his petition, specifically omitting his five-year residence in Baguio, which violated Section 7 of the Revised Naturalization Law. Given these findings, the Court deemed it unnecessary to address the other assigned errors.