Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-10912 October 31, 1958
In the matter of the petition of ANSELMO LIM HOK ALBANO, etc., to be admitted a citizen of the Philippines. ANSELMO LIM HOK ALBANO, etc., petitioner-appellant,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellee.
Cirilo Paredes and Cornelio Antiquera for appellant.
Assistant Solicitor General Florencio Villamor and Solicitor Juan T. Alano for appellee.
PARAS, C.J.:
The appellant, Anselmo Lim Hok Albano, alias Lim Hok, alias Lim Hok Anselmo Albano, filed a petition for naturalization which, after due trial, was granted by the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte. Upon the expiration of the two-year probational period required in Section 1, Republic Act No. 530, a petition was filed for the appellant's oath-taking and the issuance of his naturalization certificate. After hearing, the lower court denied the petition and a subsequent motion for reconsideration. Hence, this appeal.
The appealed order of denial was based on the argument that the appellant has been using aliases in violation of Commonwealth Act No. 142. In the petition for naturalization it was alleged that appellant's full name is Anselmo Lim Hok Albano, alias Lim Hok alias Lim Hok Anselmo Albano; and it is contended for the appellant that any opposition based on the alleged illegal used by the appellant of aliases should have been interposed during the hearing and before the granting of the petition for naturalization. This contention is tenable because the same court that granted the application for naturalization has jurisdiction to conduct a hearing (before the order becomes final and executory) to determine whether or not the applicant has complied with the requisites proceeded for in Republic Act No. 530; and any question affecting the purported right or qualifications of the applicant to become a Filipino citizen may be invoked at any stage of the proceedings. (Lim Lian vs. Republic of the Philippines, G. R. No. L-3575, December 26, 1950; Yap Chin, alias Jose Go Tanse vs. Republic of the Philippines, 93 Phil., 215.)
The decisive question to be determined is whether appellant's use of aliases comes within the contemplation of Commonwealth Act No. 142, otherwise known as the Anti-Alias Law. It is noteworthy that this law is not violated if one uses a name with which he was christened or by which he has been known since childhood. It is a matter of record that the name "Lim Hok" is one by which the appellant has been known since childhood and that, although he was baptized as Anselmo Lim Hok, he has always added "Albano", the surname of his godfather, Dionisio Albano, in connection with his business and social dealings, merely to emphasize his identity. There is no showing that confusion or prejudice ever was or has been caused by the addition of that surname, the effect that Commonwealth Act No. 142 seeks to prevent. (Francisco, Comments on the Revised Penal Code, First Ed., Book II, p. 223.) We are not thus prepared to hold that the appellant has violated the Anti-Alias Law.
Wherefore, the order appealed from is reversed and the lower court ordered to allow the appellant to take his oath of allegiance and thereafter to direct the issuance of the corresponding certificate of Filipino citizenship. So ordered.
Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J. B. L. and Endencia, JJ., concur.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
