GR L 3018; (July, 1951) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-3018 July 18, 1951
In the matter of the petition of ROBERT CU to be admitted as a Citizen of the Philippines. ROBERT CU, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Robert Cu filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Rizal. During the hearing, he testified that he considered himself a Filipino citizen by birth, as he was born in Angat, Bulacan in 1913 to a Filipina mother and a Chinese father. He stated his parents were not legally married, but his testimony on this point was uncertain. He admitted he failed to file an application to elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching majority. The lower court found him to be a Filipino citizen “both by right of birth and by right of selection” and dismissed the naturalization petition. The Republic appealed.
ISSUE
1. Whether the lower court correctly declared Robert Cu a Filipino citizen based on his testimony.
2. Whether Robert Cu is entitled to be admitted to Philippine citizenship under his petition, considering the qualifications of his supporting witnesses.
RULING
1. No. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s declaration that Robert Cu is a Filipino citizen. His testimony was inadequate to overcome the strong legal presumption that he was born in wedlock. If his parents were legally married, he was born a Chinese citizen and remained so, as he confessed he did not elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching majority as required by the Constitution.
2. No. The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the petition for naturalization but on different grounds. The petition was void because it was not supported by the affidavits and testimony of at least two credible Philippine citizens as required by Section 7 of Commonwealth Act No. 473 (Revised Naturalization Law). The two witnesses presented were not qualified: one witness, Dr. Jose Ku Yeg Keng, was not established to be a Philippine citizen (being the son of a Chinese father and Filipina mother without proof of election), and the other, Dr. Pastor Gomez, had known the petitioner only since 1945, which was insufficient for the required residency period. Following persuasive U.S. federal court rulings, a naturalization petition not verified by at least two competent citizen witnesses is void.
The dismissal is without prejudice to the petitioner filing a new application for naturalization. Costs are imposed on the appellee.