G.R. No. L-6430; August 31, 1954
In the matter of the petition of EUSEBIO MANZANO DY CHAN TIAO to be admitted a citizen of the Philippines. EUSEBIO MANZANO DY CHAN TIAO, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.

FACTS

Eusebio Manzano Dy Chan Tiao filed a petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo. He presented evidence that he arrived in the Philippines on June 10, 1909, and had continuously resided since; was married to Irene Gonzales with nine children all born in the Philippines; enrolled these children in government-recognized schools; could speak and write English and Ilongo; mingled with Filipinos; had an annual income over P3,000 from business; believed in organized government and opposed violence for political aims; and was a Catholic who did not believe in polygamy. During cross-examination, he admitted having a tenth daughter, Fanny Dy, whom he and his wife brought to China at age two. Fanny Dy studied in Fusan, Amoy, China, where she continued to live and was married. The Solicitor General initially opposed the petition for failure to file a declaration of intention and non-compliance with educational requirements for children. A supplementary opposition was later filed, alleging petitioner lacked good moral character for deliberately omitting Fanny Dy from his application. The lower court approved the petition, prompting this appeal by the Republic.

ISSUE

1. Whether the petitioner complied with the legal requirement to have all his children educated in schools recognized by the Government of the Philippines.
2. Whether the petitioner possesses the requisite good moral character given his omission of a child from his naturalization application.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and denied the petition for naturalization.
1. On the educational requirement: The Court held the petitioner failed to comply. Petitioner admitted his daughter Fanny Dy studied in China, not in schools recognized by the Philippine Government. The fact that she was outside the Philippines during her minority or had reached majority by the time of application did not excuse the petitioner from his obligation under Section 6 of the Revised Naturalization Law. As the petitioner claimed exemption from filing a declaration of intention under Section 6, the provision requiring enrollment of all children in recognized schools must be interpreted strictly against him.
2. On good moral character: The Court held the petitioner did not prove he possessed good moral character. The omission of his daughter Fanny Dy from the application, filed on June 30, 1948, was a material fact, even though he admitted her existence in an affidavit on September 12, 1948. He did not amend his application or voluntarily disclose this information until forced to on cross-examination. No explanation was given for the omission, which, given its disqualifying nature, destroyed any presumption of good faith. The suppression of this material fact demonstrated a lack of the required good moral character.
Costs were awarded against the petitioner.