Facts:

The case involves Kaw Seng, the petitioner-appellee, and the Republic of the Philippines, the respondent-appellant. The decision was rendered on January 28, 1971, by the Supreme Court of the Philippines. The case originated from a petition for naturalization filed by Kaw Seng in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo. The petitioner claimed that he had continuously resided in the Philippines for over thirty years, specifically since 1916, and thus believed he was exempt from the requirement of filing a declaration of intention as mandated by Section 5 of Commonwealth Act No. 473. This exemption is provided under Section 6 of the same Act, which states that individuals born in the Philippines and who have received their primary and secondary education in public or government-recognized schools, and who have resided continuously in the Philippines for thirty years or more, may be naturalized without the declaration of intention. However, it was revealed that Kaw Seng had left th...

Facts:

1. Petitioner's Background:

   • Kaw Seng, the petitioner-appellee, sought naturalization as a Philippine citizen.
   • He claimed to have continuously resided in the Philippines for over 30 years, since 1916, and thus argued he was exempt from filing a declaration of intention under Section 6 of Commonwealth Act No. 473, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 535.

2. Residency and Absences:

   • It was undisputed that Kaw Seng had been absent from the Philippines for significant periods:
     • 8 to 9 months in 1921,
     • 10 months in 1927,
     • 8 months in 1932, and
     • 4 months in 1946.

3. Education of Children:

   • Kaw Seng's children were enrolled in the Iloilo Chinese Commercial High School, a private institution not recognized by the government as a school open to all races and nationalities.

4. Legal Basis for Exemption:

   • Section 6 of the amended Naturalization Act exempts applicants from filing a declaration of intention if they have:
     • Resided continuously in the Philippines for 30 years or more, and
     • Provided primary and secondary education to their children in public schools or private schools recognized by the government and not limited to any race or nationality.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• (Unlock)

Ratio:

1. Continuous Residency Requirement:

   • The Court held that Kaw Seng's multiple absences from the Philippines, totaling significant periods, disrupted the continuity of his residency. This was inconsistent with the requirement of "continuous residence" under Section 6 of the Naturalization Act.
   • The Court cited Sy See v. Republic, where it was ruled that frequent and prolonged absences to visit family abroad negate the claim of continuous residency.

2. Education of Children:

   • The enrollment of Kaw Seng's children in a Chinese school, which was not recognized by the government as open to all races and nationalities, demonstrated a failure to comply with the requirement of providing education in institutions that foster integration into Filipino society.
   • This failure indicated a lack of sincere desire to identify with the Filipino community and embrace its customs and traditions.

3. Exemption from Declaration of Intention:

   • Since Kaw Seng failed to meet the requirements for exemption under Section 6, he was not entitled to bypass the declaration of intention required under Section 5 of the Naturalization Act.

4. Precedents:

   • The Court relied on several precedents, including Ong Ching Guan v. Republic and Sy See v. Republic, to emphasize that strict compliance with the Naturalization Act is necessary to ensure that applicants genuinely intend to integrate into Philippine society.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court ruled that Kaw Seng's absences from the Philippines and the enrollment of his children in a Chinese school disqualified him from claiming the benefits of Section 6 of the Naturalization Act. Consequently, his petition for naturalization was dismissed.