GR L 2733; (November, 1950) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-2733. December 21, 1950.
In the matter of the petition of JOSE PIO BARRETO, BENITO ONG BARRETO, and SEBASTIAN ONG BARRETO to be admitted citizens of the Philippines, petitioners-appellees, vs. THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Petitioners Jose Pio Barretto, Benito Ong Barreto, and Sebastian Ong Barreto filed separate petitions for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Manila. The court ordered the publication of the notices in the Official Gazette and a newspaper, Las Noticias, with the hearing set for July 30, 1948. On that date, proof of publication in Las Noticias was presented, but publication in the Official Gazette had not occurred due to the destruction by fire of the Bureau of Printing building. The court then ordered publication in the Official Gazette and reset the hearing to November 5, 1948. On November 5, petitioners presented a certificate from the Bureau of Printing stating that the notices were published in the July 1948 issue of the Official Gazette, but that this issue had not yet been released as of November 2, 1948. The Republic opposed the petitions, arguing that the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the 90-day period from the last publication required by law had not been met, and that petitioners could not effectively renounce their Chinese nationality.
ISSUE
1. Whether the trial court acquired jurisdiction over the petitions despite the delayed release of the Official Gazette containing the publication notice.
2. Whether petitioners are disqualified for failure to show permission from the Chinese government to renounce their Chinese nationality.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decisions granting the petitions.
1. On jurisdiction, the Court held that the date of issue indicated in the Official Gazette is conclusive for determining the date of publication, pursuant to Section 11 of the Revised Administrative Code. The purpose of publication—to inform the public and relevant authorities—was satisfied since publication in Las Noticias was completed, all other formalities were complied with, and the Solicitor General actively opposed the petitions. The delay in the Gazette’s release was beyond petitioners’ control and did not prejudice the opposition.
2. On renunciation of nationality, the Court rejected the Republic’s contention, following its precedent in Parado vs. Republic of the Philippines, which held that such permission from the Chinese government is not required for naturalization under Philippine law.
Separate Opinion:* Justice Pablo dissented, arguing that actual release/circulation of the Official Gazette constitutes publication, not mere printing. Since the July 1948 issue was not yet released as of the hearing date, the 90-day period had not run, and the hearing was premature.
AI Generated by Armztrong.