December 1965 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1965 > December 1965 Decisions >
G.R. No. L-21218 December 24, 1965 - IN RE: LIM YUEN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.:
EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-21218. December 24, 1965.]
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF LIM YUEN TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. LIM YUEN, Petitioner-Appellee, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Oppositor-Appellant.
Francisco Pascual, Simeon Mesina, Jr. and Angel C. Cruz for Petitioner-Appellee.
Solicitor General for Oppositor-Appellant.
SYLLABUS
1. NATURALIZATION; DISQUALIFICATION; ENROLLMENT OF APPLICANT’S CHILDREN IN EXCLUSIVE CHINESE SCHOOL. — By enrolling all his children in Chinese schools, applicant has failed to evinced a sincere desire to embrace Filipino customs, traditions and ideals which failure disqualified him to be a naturalized Filipino citizen.
2. ID.; ID.; ID.; TRANSFER TO OTHER SCHOOLS DURING PENDENCY OF PETITION; EFFECT. — The transfer of applicant’s children from a Chinese School to a school that fulfills the Naturalization Law requirements after the Solicitor General had moved to reconsider the decision because of said disqualification does not detract from the fact that prior to and at the time of the filing of his petition for naturalization, as well as during the hearing and the rendition of said decision, applicant had not evinced a sincere desire to embrace the Filipino customs, traditions and ideals. The law requires the applicant to show by positive, overt and convincing acts, that he earnestly wishes to embrace the Filipino customs, traditions and ideals.
2. ID.; ID.; ID.; TRANSFER TO OTHER SCHOOLS DURING PENDENCY OF PETITION; EFFECT. — The transfer of applicant’s children from a Chinese School to a school that fulfills the Naturalization Law requirements after the Solicitor General had moved to reconsider the decision because of said disqualification does not detract from the fact that prior to and at the time of the filing of his petition for naturalization, as well as during the hearing and the rendition of said decision, applicant had not evinced a sincere desire to embrace the Filipino customs, traditions and ideals. The law requires the applicant to show by positive, overt and convincing acts, that he earnestly wishes to embrace the Filipino customs, traditions and ideals.
D E C I S I O N
CONCEPCION, J.:
Appeal by the Government from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Isabela granting the petition for naturalization of appellee Lim Yuen.
Appellant maintains that said decision should be reversed upon the ground: (1) that appellee has not evinced a sincere desire to embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipinos; and (2) that one of his character witnesses is not a credible person, within the purview of our Naturalization Law.
With reference to the first ground of the appeal, the record shows that, when appellee filed his petition for naturalization (November 11, 1960), he had the following children, whose date of birth is given after their respective names, to wit:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Lolita Lim — February 14, 1950
Henry Lim — November 20, 1951
Purita Lim — April 2, 1953
Lucia Lim — March 26, 1954
Charles Lim — May 20, 1955
Moises Lim — May 25, 1956
Elizabeth Lim — November 19, 1957 and
Abraham Lim — May 20, 1959;
that at the time of the hearing of this case in the lower court (from August 9, 1961 to July 7, 1962), Lolita Lim was enrolled at the St. Theresa’s Chinese Academy, in Dagupan City, whereas Henry, Purita and Lucia Lim were enrolled at the Santiago Chinese School, in Santiago, Isabela; and that, although there were a few Filipino studying in these schools, the enrollment therein is predominantly Chinese.
We have already held that from the enrollment of the children of an applicant for naturalization in Chinese schools it may be inferred that he has not evinced a sincere desire to embrace our customs, traditions and ideals, which is a disqualification to be naturalized as citizen of the Philippines. 1
It is true that the enrollment of Charles, Lucia and Henry Lim was later transferred from the Santiago Chinese School to the Northeastern College, in Santiago, Isabela. This transfer took place, however, after the Solicitor General had moved the lower court to reconsider its aforementioned decision, because of said disqualification of herein appellee.
Again, said transfer does not detract from the fact that, prior to and at the time of the filing of his petition for naturalization, as well as of the hearing thereof and the rendition of said decision, appellee’s behavior had not evinced a sincere desire to embrace the Filipino customs, traditions and ideals, which can hardly be imbibed by his children in a Chinese school, the student population of which is almost entirely Chinese.
At any rate, appellee’s daughter Lolita Lim has seemingly remained enrolled at the St. Theresa’s Chinese Academy, in Dagupan City, to which the Bureau of Private Schools had granted the "Government Recognition to operate the Elementary Course for Chinese since 1958." In this connection, it should be noted that our law requires the applicant to show, by positive, overt and convincing acts, that he earnestly wishes to embrace our customs, traditions and ideals. In the case at bar, the aforementioned acts of appellee herein suggest otherwise.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, we deem it unnecessary to pass upon the second ground of the appeal and the decision appealed from should be, as it is hereby reversed, with costs against petitioner-appellee. It is so ordered.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P., and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.
Reyes and Barrera, JJ., took no part.
Appellant maintains that said decision should be reversed upon the ground: (1) that appellee has not evinced a sincere desire to embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipinos; and (2) that one of his character witnesses is not a credible person, within the purview of our Naturalization Law.
With reference to the first ground of the appeal, the record shows that, when appellee filed his petition for naturalization (November 11, 1960), he had the following children, whose date of birth is given after their respective names, to wit:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Lolita Lim — February 14, 1950
Henry Lim — November 20, 1951
Purita Lim — April 2, 1953
Lucia Lim — March 26, 1954
Charles Lim — May 20, 1955
Moises Lim — May 25, 1956
Elizabeth Lim — November 19, 1957 and
Abraham Lim — May 20, 1959;
that at the time of the hearing of this case in the lower court (from August 9, 1961 to July 7, 1962), Lolita Lim was enrolled at the St. Theresa’s Chinese Academy, in Dagupan City, whereas Henry, Purita and Lucia Lim were enrolled at the Santiago Chinese School, in Santiago, Isabela; and that, although there were a few Filipino studying in these schools, the enrollment therein is predominantly Chinese.
We have already held that from the enrollment of the children of an applicant for naturalization in Chinese schools it may be inferred that he has not evinced a sincere desire to embrace our customs, traditions and ideals, which is a disqualification to be naturalized as citizen of the Philippines. 1
It is true that the enrollment of Charles, Lucia and Henry Lim was later transferred from the Santiago Chinese School to the Northeastern College, in Santiago, Isabela. This transfer took place, however, after the Solicitor General had moved the lower court to reconsider its aforementioned decision, because of said disqualification of herein appellee.
Again, said transfer does not detract from the fact that, prior to and at the time of the filing of his petition for naturalization, as well as of the hearing thereof and the rendition of said decision, appellee’s behavior had not evinced a sincere desire to embrace the Filipino customs, traditions and ideals, which can hardly be imbibed by his children in a Chinese school, the student population of which is almost entirely Chinese.
At any rate, appellee’s daughter Lolita Lim has seemingly remained enrolled at the St. Theresa’s Chinese Academy, in Dagupan City, to which the Bureau of Private Schools had granted the "Government Recognition to operate the Elementary Course for Chinese since 1958." In this connection, it should be noted that our law requires the applicant to show, by positive, overt and convincing acts, that he earnestly wishes to embrace our customs, traditions and ideals. In the case at bar, the aforementioned acts of appellee herein suggest otherwise.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, we deem it unnecessary to pass upon the second ground of the appeal and the decision appealed from should be, as it is hereby reversed, with costs against petitioner-appellee. It is so ordered.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P., and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.
Reyes and Barrera, JJ., took no part.
Endnotes:
1. Sec. 4, par. (f), Commonwealth Act No. 473; Ong Chin Guan v. Republic, L-15813, September 29, 1962; Garchitorena & Dy Boon Beng v. Republic, L-15102, April 20, 1961; Haw Su Siong & Ramon Cuenco v. Republic, L-13045, July 30, 1962.
