GR L 19709; (September, 1964) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-19709 September 30, 1964
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. ANDRES ONG KHAN, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Andres Ong Khan filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Laguna. The evidence established his birth in Los Baños, Laguna, in 1932, his continuous residence, and his education, culminating in a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from the University of the East. He was employed, married to a Chinese citizen, and had three children. The court found he possessed all qualifications and none of the disqualifications under the law, including good moral character, a belief in Philippine principles, and a lawful income. Two Filipino witnesses testified favorably on his behalf. The trial court granted his petition for citizenship.
The Republic appealed, arguing the lower court erred in granting citizenship. The Solicitor General contended petitioner failed to establish by competent evidence his ability to speak and write English and Tagalog. More significantly, the Republic asserted petitioner used an alias in open violation of Commonwealth Act No. 142 , which regulates the use of aliases.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the petitioner’s use of various names and spellings for his identity, constituting a violation of the law on aliases, is a sufficient ground to deny his petition for naturalization.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision and denied the petition for naturalization. On the first assigned error regarding language ability, the Court found it without merit. Petitioner testified in English and held a bachelor’s degree, which is competent proof of his ability in English. While the record lacked direct evidence of his Tagalog proficiency, the Court noted the trial court’s reasonable presumption based on his household use of Tagalog and his work as a salesman.
However, the Court upheld the Republic’s second contention regarding the use of aliases. The record revealed petitioner used different names and spellings interchangeably: Andres Ong Khan in his petitions, Andres Khaw on his alien certificates, Andres Khan on residence certificates, and variations in clearances. This created confusion as to his true identity. His correct family name, derived from his father, should be “Khaw.” The transformation to “Khan” was unexplained. The Court ruled this constituted a violation of Commonwealth Act No. 142 , as there was no showing he was authorized to use an alias. This violation is a sufficient ground to deny citizenship. The use of varying names prevented his full and clear identification in the published notices, potentially hindering those with objections from coming forward. Citing precedent, the Court emphasized that even a minor discrepancy in spelling a name in a change-of-name proceeding is a substantial defect. Therefore, a greater reason exists to deny a naturalization petition when the applicant’s name in the petition differs from his true name. The Court concluded that such practice is unfilipino and facilitates fraud.