Case Digest (G.R. No. 212054)
Facts:
On October 13, 2004, Petitioner filed a petition for naturalization under C.A. No. 473 with the Regional Trial Court, Branch 45, Manila, alleging birth in Manila to Chinese parents, continuous residence and education in the Philippines, and presenting five witnesses and medical and character evidence; the Solicitor General initially presented no evidence but later moved to reopen the case submitting NBI and BOI reports. The RTC granted the petition on November 18, 2008 and denied the OSG’s motions for reopening and reconsideration; the Court of Appeals reversed and dismissed the petition without prejudice on January 18, 2012 for lack of credible witnesses and omission of a former place of residence, and Petitioner brought this Rule 45 petition to the Supreme Court.Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals correctly find that Petitioner failed to prove the credibility of his character witnesses?
- Did the omission of a former place of residence in the petition deprive the trial court o
Case Digest (G.R. No. 212054)
Facts:
- Background of the petition and jurisdictional steps
- On October 13, 2004, Dennis L. Go filed a petition for naturalization under Commonwealth Act No. 473 in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 45, Manila, docketed as Naturalization Case No. 03-107591.
- The petition alleged: birth on May 7, 1982 in Manila to spouses Felix and Emma Go, both Chinese nationals; legal age; Chinese national; single; residence at No. 1308-1310 Oroquieta Street, Sta. Cruz, Manila since birth; proficiency in English and Tagalog and Philippine primary, secondary and tertiary education; belief in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution; good moral character; not opposed to organized government; not an advocate of violence; not a polygamist; no conviction for crimes involving moral turpitude; not afflicted with mental alienation or incurable contagious disease; not a citizen of a nation at war with the Philippines; intention to renounce foreign allegiance, particularly to China; intention to reside continuously in the Philippines from filing until admission to citizenship; and exemption from filing a Declaration of Intention under Section 5 of C.A. No. 473 because he was born in the Philippines and received primary, secondary and tertiary education there.
- The RTC set the initial hearing and the petition was published and posted pursuant to Section 9 of C.A. No. 473 (publication once a week for three consecutive weeks in the Official Gazette and a newspaper of general circulation, and posting of petition and notice in clerk’s office).
- Trial evidence and RTC disposition
- Petitioner testified and proffered witnesses: Dr. Joseph Anlacan (psychiatric examination finding no psychiatric abnormality), Dr. Edward C. Tordesillas (medical examination normal), Silvino J. Ong (neighbor and family acquaintance), Teresita M. Go (relative who knew petitioner since birth and described him as peace-loving and active in school and barangay activities), and Juan C. Go (businessman who knew petitioner and executed an Affidavit of Support).
- The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) initially raised no objection to petitioner’s documentary evidence and manifested that it had no evidence and requested submission for decision based on petitioner’s evidence.
- The OSG later moved to reopen the trial to admit a National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) report dated November 23, 2006 allegedly tending to prove petitioner’s non-compliance with naturalization requirements.
- Petitioner produced an NBI clearance and asserted he was not the person in the NBI report. After a clarificatory hearing, the RTC issued an October 24, 2008 order admitting both parties’ evidence but denying the OSG’s motion to reopen trial.
- On November 18, 2008, the RTC rendered a decision granting the petition, finding that petitioner possessed the qualifications and none of the disqualifications under C.A. No. 473, and directing that petitioner take the oath of allegiance and register his naturalization pursuant to Republic Act 530.
- The OSG filed a motion for reconsideration and a further motion to reopen trial to admit a Bureau of Immigration (BOI) background investigation report dated March 29, 2005 that alleged, among other matters, that petitioner’s parents remained Chinese citizens, that a relative refused interviews, and that the family business warranted investigation for unexplained wealth and tax deficiencies.
- The RTC denied the OSG’s motion for reconsideration on May 18, 2009.
- Court of Appeals proceedings and outcome prior to Supreme Cou...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Issues presented for review by the Supreme Court
- Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing and setting aside the RTC’s grant of petitioner’s application for naturalization.
- Whether petitioner proved, to the satisfaction of the trial court, that he had all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications under C.A. No. 473.
- Whether the character witnesses presented by petitioner met the statutory requirements of credibility and competence to vouch for petitioner under Section 7 of C.A. No. 473.
- Whether the OSG could properly present or seek to present investigative reports (NBI/BOI) after petitioner’s evidence had been submitted and whether the RTC abused disc...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)