Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-21078. April 29, 1966.]

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF ANTONIO L. CO. FOR NATURALIZATION. ANTONIO L. CO, Petitioner-Appellee, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Oppositor-Appellant.

Solicitor General Arturo A. Alafriz, Assistant Solicitor General E. Umali and Solicitor A.M. Consing, for the oppositor and Appellant.

Juan G. Lagman for petitioner and appellee.


SYLLABUS


1. NATURALIZATION; REQUIREMENTS; INCOME; LACK OF LUCRATIVE INCOME DISQUALIFIES APPLICANT. — Applicant’s income of P200.00 per month, as assistant manager of his parent’s sugar cane farm cannot be considered lucrative for purposes of naturalization.


D E C I S I O N


MAKALINTAL, J.:


Antonio L. Co, born in Pampanga in 1937, citizen of Nationalist china, applied for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of said province. In its decision of March 24, 1962 the court found him qualified and granted his application. The Solicitor General appealed on one ground: that appellee does not fulfill the requirement of lucrative trade or occupation.

In other respects indeed the record discloses that the applicant’s qualifications adequately meet the legal requirements. He has lived in the Philippines continuously, leaving only once in 1947 for a four-month visit in Amoy with his parents. He received his elementary and secondary education in the Guagua National Colleges, Pampanga, and obtained the degree of Bachelor of Science from the University of the East, Manila. His conduct, moral character, association with Filipinos and desire to embrace the native customs, ideals and traditions are duly vouched for and established by the evidence. So are his political convictions and sympathies, his knowledge of the principles underlying the Constitution, his lack of criminal record, his physical and mental health, and his sincerity and good faith in desiring Philippine citizenship.

On the issue raised by the Solicitor General however, this appeal must be sustained. For the applicant’s income of P200.00 a month, received by him, he testified, as assistant manager of his parent’s sugar cane farm, cannot be considered lucrative for purposes of naturalization. Our ruling to this effect has been laid down in so many recent decisions that an extensive review thereof is unnecessary (see Antonio Dy v. Republic, G.R. No. L-20348, December 24, 1965 and cases cited).

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is reversed and the petition for naturalization is dismissed. Costs against Petitioner-Appellee.

Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Dizon, Regala, Bengzon, J.P., Zaldivar and Sanchez, JJ., concur.

Top of Page