Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5666)
Facts:
In the Matter of the Petition of Chan Ho Lay to Be Admitted a Citizen of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-5666, March 30, 1954, the Supreme Court En Banc, Concepcion, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner-appellant Chan Ho Lay is a Chinese national born in Amoy, China, on November 1, 1906, who arrived in the Philippines in 1918 and continuously resided here thereafter, except for two short prewar visits to China. He lived in Bauang, La Union, conducted business there as a Caltex agent and tobacco buyer, invested about P20,000, earned about P5,000 yearly, and owned land and buildings assessed at P21,630. He is Protestant, active in civic causes, employed eight Filipinos, and his eight children were baptized in the Protestant Church with Filipino sponsors.The Court of First Instance of La Union denied Chan Ho Lay’s application for naturalization. The sole statutory issue was compliance with the schooling requirement of Section 2(6) of Commonwealth Act No. 473, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 535, which requires that an applicant “must have enrolled his minor children of school age, in any of the public schools or private schools recognized by the Office of Private Education of the Philippines, where Philippine history, government and civics are taught … during the entire period of the residence in the Philippines required of him prior to the hearing of his petition for naturalization.”
Two of petitioner’s children, Chan Pia Hoy and Chan Hoy Lu, born in the 1930s (dates vary between the application and testimony), were residing in China and had never been enrolled in Philippine schools, nor in schools recognized by the Philippine Office of Private Education where Philippine history, government and civics are taught. Petitioner testified he had attempted to bring them but could not because of the Communist occupation of China; the trial court rejected this claim as unsupported and noted several inconsistencies: petitioner’s application earlier stated the two children were enrolled in the “Amoy Public School, China,” and el...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did petitioner satisfy the statutory requirement in Section 2(6) of Commonwealth Act No. 473, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 535, to have his minor children of school age enrolled in Philippine or government-recognized schools where Philippine history, government and civics are taught?
- If not, does petitioner’s asserted impossibility (children in China and prevented from coming by wartime/Communist conditions) excuse his...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)