Tan v. Republic
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Felix Tan, a subject of Nationalist China, filed a petition for naturalization. He was born in Dumaguete City on February 25, 1932, was unmarried, and had never been to China. He spoke English and Visayan-Cebuano, had obtained his education in government-recognized schools, and was employed as a salesman earning annual salaries of P1,560 in 1958, P1,680 in 1959, and P1,740 in 1960. He declared an earning of P180.00 a month in 1961. He paid personal taxes, was duly registered as an alien, was in good health, possessed clearance certificates attesting to his good character, contributed to civic and religious organizations, believed in the Philippine Constitution, mingled socially with Filipinos, was not opposed to organized government, did not advocate violence, and was not a polygamist. He expressed his intention in good faith to become a Philippine citizen and renounced allegiance to Nationalist China. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Negros Oriental declared Felix Tan qualified for admission to Philippine citizenship and ordered the issuance of a naturalization certificate after two years, subject to compliance with Republic Act 530. The Petition: The Republic of the Philippines appealed the decision, arguing that the lower court erred in finding Felix Tan qualified, specifically pointing out that he did not possess a lucrative trade or profession.
Issue(s)
Whether petitioner Felix Tan possesses a lucrative trade or profession as required for naturalization. Whether the evidence sufficiently established petitioner's income to meet the requirements of a lucrative trade or profession.
Ruling
The decision of the Court of First Instance of Negros Oriental is reversed, and the petition for admission to Philippine citizenship is denied.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether petitioner Felix Tan possesses a lucrative trade or profession: The Court held that a lucrative employment for naturalization purposes means a gainful employment that provides an income with an appreciable margin over expenses, sufficient to provide for adequate support in the event of unemployment, sickness, or disability, thereby avoiding becoming a public charge. The petitioner's average monthly salary of P138.00 during the three years prior to the hearing, or P145.00 based on his highest annual salary in 1960, with an estimated P50.00 monthly value for board and lodging, was deemed insufficient. This income was considered not lucrative enough to shield him from the hazards of penury in case of unforeseen circumstances. On whether the evidence sufficiently established petitioner's income: The Court agreed with the Solicitor General that the unsworn certificate from Tan Chu Eng, the claimed manager of the store, was unreliable for proving the petitioner's salary of P180.00 a month with free board and lodging. The Court based its calculation of the petitioner's income on the highest salary he declared for the years prior to the hearing, which was P1,740.00 annually or P145.00 monthly. The absence of income tax returns, despite paying residence taxes, further underscored the lack of robust financial documentation. The Court emphasized that the absence of opposition in the lower court does not preclude appellate review to ensure that citizenship is conferred only upon qualified individuals, citing Lee Ng Len vs. Republic.
Main Doctrine
An applicant for naturalization must possess a lucrative trade or profession, meaning an employment that provides an income with an appreciable margin over expenses to avoid becoming a public charge. A monthly income of approximately P145.00 with free board and lodging valued at P50.00 is not considered lucrative enough given the prevailing cost of living and low buying power of the currency.