G.R. No. L-23075. August 19, 1970.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. HON. ANDRES REYES, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch VI and LIM BEK KENG, Respondents.

FACTS

On November 20, 1957, respondent Lim Bek Keng filed a petition for naturalization with the Court of First Instance of Rizal. The court granted his petition in a decision dated January 31, 1959. On February 15, 1961, the court issued an order allowing him to take his oath of allegiance, which he did on February 16, 1961, and a certificate of naturalization was issued. Subsequently, on October 11, 1962, the Republic of the Philippines, through the Solicitor General, filed a motion in the same case to have the decision and order declared null and void and to cancel the certificate of naturalization. The grounds alleged were that the certificate was obtained illegally and/or through fraud, including misrepresentation of residence, submission of false documents regarding a medical certificate and children’s schooling to avoid filing a declaration of intention, and lack of jurisdiction due to non-residency in Rizal. After hearings and the filing of memoranda, the respondent trial judge, in a resolution dated March 30, 1964, denied the Republic’s motion. The Republic filed a notice of appeal on May 5, 1964, and a motion for approval of the record on appeal. On May 19, 1964, the respondent trial judge issued an order dismissing the appeal, reasoning that there was no statutory provision conferring the right to appeal from a resolution in a denaturalization proceeding. The Republic then filed this petition for mandamus and certiorari to annul the order dismissing the appeal and to compel the approval and elevation of the record on appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the State has the right to appeal from an order or decision denying its petition for the cancellation of a certificate of naturalization (denaturalization).

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court set aside the respondent trial judge’s order of May 19, 1964, and directed the judge to give due course to the appeal, approve the record on appeal, and elevate the records. The Court held that a decision denying the State’s petition for cancellation of a naturalization certificate is a final sentence, and Section 11 of the Naturalization Law ( Commonwealth Act No. 473 ), which provides that “[t]he final sentence may, at the instance of either of the parties, be appealed to the Supreme Court,” applies to denaturalization proceedings under Section 18 of the same law. The Court reasoned that the statutory language “final sentence” is general and includes decisions in denaturalization cases. The legislative intent is to give the State ample opportunity to effectively exercise its right to withdraw the privilege of citizenship. The Court further stated that if a decision granting naturalization is appealable, then a decision denying the State’s right to withdraw such privilege must likewise be appealable, especially since denaturalization proceedings involve public interest and the State should not be rendered helpless. The Court cited its prior ruling in Republic v. Reyes, which affirmed this right of appeal.