GR L 31862; (August, 1974) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-31862 August 21, 1974
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF TAN TENG HEN alias FRANCISCO TAN TENG HEN TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. TAN TENG HEN alias FRANCISCO TAN TENG HEN, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor and movant-appellant.
FACTS
Tan Teng Hen, a Chinese citizen, filed a petition for naturalization. After trial, the Court of First Instance granted his petition in 1963 and later allowed him to take his oath of allegiance in 1965. Subsequently, the Republic, through the Solicitor General, filed a petition to declare the decision void and to cancel his naturalization. The State initially raised two grounds: first, the petitioner’s failure to state in his petition that he had once resided at a specific Manila address as indicated in his marriage contract; and second, his failure to disclose that he had used the aliases “Francisco Tan Teng Heng” and “Francisco Tan” in his marriage contract and in vehicle registration papers. The petitioner opposed, arguing the address was temporary and the aliases were used by his wedding sponsor and driver without his direct involvement.
ISSUE
Whether the naturalization granted to Tan Teng Hen should be declared void and cancelled.
RULING
Yes, the naturalization is void and must be cancelled. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order denying the State’s petition. The primary and sufficient ground for cancellation is the fatal defect in the publication of the notice of hearing. Section 9 of the Revised Naturalization Law ( Commonwealth Act No. 473 ) mandates that the petition itself must be published verbatim. The lower court clerk published only a digest of the petition, not its full text, including annexed documents. This non-compliance is jurisdictional; a naturalization proceeding is in rem, and jurisdiction over all concerned parties is acquired strictly through proper publication. Any decision rendered without this is a nullity. The State may raise this jurisdictional defect at any stage, and it is never estopped from assailing a void naturalization.
Additionally, the petitioner’s failure to state all names by which he was known constituted a separate, valid ground for cancellation. The requirement aims to notify anyone who knows the applicant by any alias. The petitioner’s awareness of the use of the names “Francisco Tan Teng Heng” and “Francisco Tan” in official documents in his possession obligated him to disclose them, regardless of who actually filled out the forms. This omission also impaired the completeness of the publication and the court’s jurisdiction. Consequently, the decision granting naturalization was set aside, the naturalization declared void, and the petitioner was ordered to surrender his certificate for cancellation.