Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1953 > December 1953 Decisions > G.R. No. L-5593 December 29, 1953 - LUIS TAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

094 Phil 176:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-5593. December 29, 1953.]

In the matter of the petition for Philippine citizenship LUIS TAN alias UY GUAT, Petitioner-Appellee, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Oppositor-Appellant.

Rafael Guerrero for Appellee.

Assistant Solicitor General Lucas Lacson and Solicitor Isidro C. Borromeo for Appellant.


SYLLABUS


NATURALIZATION; REQUISITE OF KNOWLEDGE OF LANGUAGE. — It is not perfect knowledge of any language that the Naturalization Law requires. As was said by this Court in Kookooritchkin v. Solicitor General (46 Off. Gaz., Supp. to No. 1, p. 21), "the law has not set a specific standard of the required ability to speak and write any of the principal Philippine languages." it being sufficient that the person applying for citizenship knows enough words required for the ordinary purposes of life.


D E C I S I O N


REYES, J.:


This is an appeal from a decision of the Court o First Instance of Occidental Negros, granting appellee’s petition for naturalization. It appears that the petitioner is a Chinese citizen, born in China in 1916. He came to the Philippines in 1932 and resided in the city of Bacolod, Occidental Negros, where he engaged in business as a haberdasher. Starting with a capital of P500, his business was, at the time of the trial, worth about P15,000. In 1943 he married a native woman, Natividad Valencia, and with her he now has six children. These he proposes to educate in the public schools when they attain school age. He has not been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude, and he has observed proper conduct in his relation with his fellow men and with the constituted authorities. He believes in the principles of democracy and abhors communism as well as any other system that preaches the use of violence to attain a change in government.

It does not appear that the Government has filed a formal opposition to the petition. But in the course of the hearing the provincial fiscal subjected petitioner to a language test by dictating to him a sentence in English and asking him to write it down together with a translation into the Visayan dialect. The sentence dictated was: "I want to become a Filipino citizen because I married a true-blooded Filipina." As appears in exhibit "1", this is what petitioner wrote: "I when to Become a Pilipino Citizen Becus I Married a tro my . . . Ang aco gusto ma Pilipino citizen Sang Matu-o." It is obvious that petitioner did not have enough time to write down what was dictated and to translate it into Visayan. But contending that what petitioner wrote showed that he did not know how to read and write English and Visayan, the fiscal then and there registered his opposition to the petition for naturalization.

By way of further test, the trial court asked the petitioner to write down the following sentences: "This is a cat. This is a ball. This is a flower. . . Do you have a panty? Are you selling ties in your store?" As appears in exhibit "T", petitioner was able to take down the dictation although he committed some slight mistakes in spelling, which, however, did not prevent his writing from being legible and understandable.

Satisfied that the petitioner had the necessary qualifications for Filipino citizenship, the trial court granted his application for naturalization.

Appealing from this decision, the Solicitor General contends that, judging from what petitioner wrote on exhibits "T" and "1", petitioner did not possess a sufficient knowledge of English and Visayan to entitle him to a grant of Filipino citizenship. We are inclined to believe, however, that those exhibits show petitioner to be fairly versed in those languages. And considering that he testified in court in both English and Visayan, we agree with the following conclusion of the trial court:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

". . . De los dos Exhibitos ’T’ y ’1’ se desprende que el conocimiento del solicitante respecto al lenguaje ingles y el dialecto visayo es imperfecto, pero bastante para capaciterle a enteblar las necesarias relaciones de un filipino ordinario con otros en el curso ordinario de la vida, y unida a este criterio la conducta del solicitante durante el interrogatorio en el asiento testifical que en opinion del Juzgado, demuestre que comprende suficientemente dicho lenguaje, el Juzgado cree que el requisito legal de que un solicitante de naturalización para ser ciudadano filipino debe saber cualquiera de los dos lenguajes, el castellano y el ingles y un dialecto principal del pais, esta cumplido satisfactoriamente."cralaw virtua1aw library

It is not perfect knowledge of any language that the Naturalization Law requires. As was said by this Court in Kookooritchkin v. Solicitor General (46 Off. Gaz., Supp. to No. 1, p. 217), "the law has not set a specific standard of the required ability to speak and write any of the principal Philippine languages," it being sufficient that the person applying for citizenship knows enough words required for the ordinary purposes of life.

The decision appealed from being in accordance with law and the evidence, the same is hereby affirmed. Without costs.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Tuason, Jugo, Bautista Angelo and Labrador, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






December-1953 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-6019 December 15, 1953 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MOTIN COCOY

    094 Phil 91

  • G.R. No. L-5461 December 17, 1953 - AMADO ABADILLA CO CAI. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 98

  • G.R. No. L-6084 December 17, 1953 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. RICARDO CATCHERO

    094 Phil 101

  • G.R. No. L-5700 December 18, 1953 - LEONILO PAÑA v. CITY MAYOR

    094 Phil 103

  • G.R. No. L-5272 December 21, 1953 - NORMAN H. BALL v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 106

  • G.R. No. L-5522 December 21, 1933

    LEONCIO HO BENLUY. ET AL., v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 110

  • G.R. No. L-5761 December 21, 1953 - VICTORIANO CAPIO v. FERNANDO CAPIO

    094 Phil 113

  • G.R. No. L-5385 December 28, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FILEMON CAGGAUAN, ET AL.

    094 Phil 118

  • G.R. No. L-3952 December 29, 1953 - MASSO HERMANOS v. DIRECTOR OF PATENTS

    094 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. L-4287 December 29, 1953 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. GING SAM alias TABA

    094 Phil 139

  • G.R. No. L-5341 December 29, 1953 - ARSENIO TING. ARSENIO TING v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 165

  • G.R. No. L-5402 December 29, 1953 - L. R. AGUINALDO & CO. INC., v. NATIONAL LABOR UNION Y CIR

    094 Phil 167

  • G.R. No. L-5545 December 29, 1953 - ALEJANDRO TANGUNAN and PELAGIO TANGUNAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 171

  • G.R. No. L-5593 December 29, 1953 - LUIS TAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. L-5711 December 29, 1953 - PEDRO PAESTE and FELIX CARPIO v. RUSTICO JAURIGUE

    094 Phil 179

  • G.R. No. L-5868 December 29, 1953 - SANCHO MONTOYA v. MARCELINO IGNACIO

    094 Phil 182

  • G.R. No. 6005 December 29, 1953 - NER J. LOPEZ v. LUCIA Y. MATIAS VDA. DE TINIO, ET AL.

    94 Phil 187

  • G.R. No. L-6080 December 29, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AGRIPINA MAGAT DE SORIANO and RODRIGO MIRANDA

    094 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. L-6162 December 29, 1953 - YU SINGCO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    094 Phil 191

  • G.R. No. L-6208 December 29, 1953 - DOLORES BUENAVENTURA v. CELESTINO BUENAVENTURA ET., AL.

    094 Phil 193

  • G.R. No. L-6286 December 29, 1953 - LIM TEK GOAN v. NICASIO YATCO ETC.

    094 Phil 197

  • G.R. No. L-6304 December 29, 1953 - SERGIO V. SISON v. HELEN J. MCQUAID

    094 Phil 201

  • G.R. No. L-6340 December 29, 1953 - SULPICIO OYAO v. EMILIANO OYAO

    094 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. L-6359 December 29, 1953 - CARMEN CASTRO, ET AL. v. FRANCISCA SAGALES

    094 Phil 208

  • G.R. Nos. L-6383-84 December 29, 1953 - FILEMON SANTOS and FRANCISCO FRIAS v. HON. M. M. MEJIA

    094 Phil 211

  • G.R. No. L-6853 December 29, 1953 - FRANCISCO F. ILLESCAS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    094 Phil 215

  • G.R. No. L-6942 December 29, 1953 - JUAN REINANTE v. SEGUNDO APOSTOL, ETC AND ESCOBAR

    094 Phil 225