G.R. No. L-20290, August 31, 1965.
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. PANTALEON SIA alias ALFREDO SIA, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.

FACTS

Pantaleon Sia, alias Alfredo Sia, filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Manila on January 30, 1961. He claimed exemption from filing a prior declaration of intention, alleging he was born in Tayabas, Philippines on July 27, 1936, had resided continuously in the Philippines, and had finished his secondary education at the Far Eastern University, a school recognized by the government. He attended Francisco Balagtas Elementary School (public) up to second grade, then transferred to Chia-Nan School (now Hope Christian High School, a Chinese school) from third grade through first year high school, before completing secondary education at Far Eastern University. He was, at the time of the hearing, a college student. He was employed, with a regular monthly salary of P200.00 at the time of filing his petition, and received additional income from bonuses and commissions. He presented character witnesses and various clearances from government agencies. The lower court granted his petition.

ISSUE

1. Whether the petitioner was exempt from the requirement of filing a declaration of intention.
2. Whether the petitioner had a lucrative income or occupation as required by law.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the lower court’s decision and DISMISSED the petition for naturalization.
1. On the first issue, the Court held the petitioner was NOT exempt from filing a declaration of intention. To be exempt under Section 6 of the Naturalization Law, an applicant must have received both primary and secondary education in schools recognized by the Government and not limited to any race or nationality. The petitioner failed to state in his petition the school where he received his primary education. Furthermore, while there was a certification that Hope Christian High School was recognized and not limited to any race at the time of certification, no proof was submitted to show that the school (formerly Chia-Nan School) was not limited to any race or nationality at the time the petitioner actually attended it. The burden of proof lies on the applicant.
2. On the second issue, the Court held the petitioner did NOT have a lucrative income. The financial capacity must be determined as of the time of filing the petition (January 30, 1961). At that time, his regular salary was P200.00 per month (P2,400.00 annually). The additional amounts he earned in 1960 and 1961 from bonuses and commissions were indefinite and unsteady, and thus could not be considered in determining lucrative occupation. The Court had previously ruled that similar or higher incomes, even with free board and lodging, were not considered lucrative due to the high cost of living and the low value of the peso. The petitioner also owned no real property.
Given these two fatal deficiencies, the Court found it unnecessary to discuss other possible objections.