Go v. Republic
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Go A. Leng, a citizen of the Republic of China, seeks naturalization as a Filipino citizen. He arrived in the Philippines on October 6, 1938, and has resided there continuously, except for a brief visit to China in 1947. He is married to Perla Pama How, a Filipino citizen, with whom he has no children. Leng is employed as the Dean of Discipline and Assistant Property Custodian at the Iloilo Chinese Commercial School, earning P200.00 monthly, and also works part-time at the La Paz Bijon Factory, earning P100.00 monthly. His wife teaches at the same school, earning P140.00 monthly. The government opposes his petition, primarily arguing that his income is not sufficiently lucrative to meet the requirements of the Revised Naturalization Law, and also raises concerns about his use of an alias and his failure to obtain proper authorization for renouncing his Chinese citizenship. Procedural History: Go A. Leng filed his petition for naturalization with the Court of First Instance of Iloilo on November 6, 1960. The petition was later amended due to the death of one of his witnesses. The Court of First Instance granted the petition. The Republic of the Philippines, through the Office of the Solicitor General, appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. The Petition: This case comes before the Supreme Court on appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo that granted Go A. Leng's petition for naturalization. The government's opposition is based on two main grounds: first, that petitioner's combined monthly income of P300.00 (or P440.00 including his wife's income) is not considered lucrative under the Revised Naturalization Law, especially given the current cost of living and the depreciated value of the peso, citing previous Supreme Court rulings on similar income levels; and second, that petitioner used an alias without legal authority and failed to secure the necessary permission from Chinese authorities for the renunciation of his Chinese citizenship, which were not satisfactorily explained in the record.
Issue(s)
Whether the petitioner possesses a "lucrative income" sufficient for naturalization. Whether the use of an alias without legal authority is a ground for denying naturalization. Whether the failure to obtain permission from the Chinese Minister of Interior for renunciation of Chinese citizenship bars naturalization.
Ruling
The decision of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo is reversed. Costs are against the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of lucrative income: The Court held that the petitioner's combined income of P300.00 per month (P200.00 from the school and P100.00 from the factory) is not lucrative. The Court noted that the part-time employment at the factory owned by his brother-in-law, which commenced only after filing the petition, appeared to be a device to inflate his income. Furthermore, even if the income were considered, recent decisions have consistently ruled that a salary of P200.00 a month is not lucrative, considering the low purchasing value of the peso and the increasing cost of living. The Court cited previous rulings where similar income levels were deemed insufficient. The total annual income of P3,000.00, even when added to his wife's income, was considered insufficient to meet the requirements of the Revised Naturalization Law, especially in light of the high cost of living and the need to support a family (though in this case, they had no children yet). On the issue of using an alias: The Court found that the government's opposition based on the petitioner's use of an alias name without obtaining the required legal authority under Commonwealth Act 142, Section 2, was valid. The record did not satisfactorily explain this matter, and the government presented sufficient evidence to support this objection. The use of an alias without proper authorization is a violation of law and can be a ground to deny a petition for naturalization. On the issue of renouncing Chinese citizenship: The Court also upheld the government's objection regarding the petitioner's failure to secure permission from the Minister of Interior of China for his change of nationality and renunciation of Chinese citizenship, as required by Chinese Law of Nationality. Similar to the alias issue, this matter was not satisfactorily explained in the record, and the government's evidence lent validity to this objection. Compliance with the laws of one's country of origin regarding citizenship is often a prerequisite or a significant factor in naturalization proceedings in another country.
Main Doctrine
A monthly income of P200.00, even with an additional P100.00 from a part-time job, is not considered lucrative for naturalization purposes, especially considering the low purchasing power of the peso and the increasing cost of living.