Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-19846 February 26, 1965
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF JUAN YAP TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES.
JUAN YAP, petitioner-appellee,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
Teodorico M. Durias for petitioner-appellee.
Office of the Solicitor General for oppositor-appellant.
CONCEPCION, J.:
The Solicitor General seeks the review of a decision of the Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental granting the petition for naturalization of appellee Juan Yap. Appellant maintains that petitioner does not have a lucrative trade or occupation, and that his witnesses are not credible persons.
Indeed, it is admitted that petitioner owns no real estate whatsoever. Moreover, his only income is P150.00 a month, as a weigher in the Western Products, Co., Inc. As we ruled in Ong vs. Republic (G.R. No. L-15754, May 19, 1961), such income is insufficient to warrant the conclusion that he has a lucrative trade, particularly considering that he has to support a wife and three children (Jew Chong vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-14343, May 23, 1961; Tan vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-14860, May 30, 1961; Sy Cesar vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-14009, May 31, 1961; Ong Tai vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-19418, December 23, 1964).1äwphï1.ñët
Again, petitioner's character witnesses were Benedicto Labastida and Severo E. Banci. The former is an administrative deputy in the office of the city treasurer of Ozamis City, whereas the latter had been its municipal treasurer from 1923 to 1930. The records do not show that petitioner has complied with his duty to prove affirmatively that these witnesses enjoy such a general reputation for honesty and integrity as to qualify them, to the extent required by the Naturalization Law, to vouchsafe for herein applicant appellee as one suitable for naturalization (Te Tay Seng vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-15956, March 30, 1963; Sehwani vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-18219, December 27, 1963; Ong Ling Chuan vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-18550, February 28, 1964).
WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby reversed, with costs against the petitioner. It is so ordered.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P., and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.
Dizon, J., took no part.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
