Yu Singco vs. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-6152, 50 O.G.
104;
In the Matter of the Petition of Yu Singco for Naturalization
Facts:
Yu Singco, a Chinese citizen, petitioned for naturalization in the Philippines.
The government opposed the petition on the grounds of Yu Singco's alleged immoral
conduct, including maintaining two wives and having an illicit relationship with Pura
Ortuoste, with whom he had three children.
The court found no evidence of the alleged illicit relationship with Pura Ortuoste, but
established that Yu Singco had lived with Conception Cua and fathered five children
with her.
Yu Singco admitted to the relationship with Conception Cua and acknowledged
supporting her and their children.
He also had ten children with his legal wife, Chua Hoc Ty, whom he married in
Amoy, China, in 1924.
Issue:
Did Yu Singco demonstrate "proper and irreproachable conduct" required for
naturalization under Philippine law?
Held:
The Supreme Court reversed the trial court's approval of Yu Singco's petition for
naturalization. It concluded that his conduct did not meet the standards of "proper and
irreproachable conduct" as defined by the Revised Naturalization Law.
Doctrine:
The determination of "proper and irreproachable conduct" for naturalization
applicants is based on the prevailing moral standards and societal norms of the
Philippines, rather than the laws of the applicant's country of origin.
In a predominantly Catholic society where polygamy and illicit relationships are
frowned upon, conduct that might be socially acceptable in another culture can be
deemed immoral and unacceptable in the Philippines, disqualifying individuals from
naturalization.
G.R. No. L-6162 December 29, 1953
In the matter of the petition of YU SINGCO, to be admitted as citizen
of the Philippines. YU SINGCO, petitioner-appellee,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents-appellees.
Assistant Solicitor General Lucas Lacson and Solicitor Isidro C.
Borromeo for appellant.
Bausa and Ampil and Jose E. Suarez for appellee.
LABRADOR, J.:
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of
Cotabato, the Hon. Juan A. Sarenas, presiding, approving the petition
for naturalization of petitioner Yu Singco, a Chinese citizen. Opposition
to the petition was presented by the Government on the ground that "he
had lived an immoral life by maintaining two Chinese wives and had
formerly illicit relationship with one Pura Ortuoste, with whom he had
begotten three children." There is no evidence of the supposed illicit
relations between Pura Ortuoste and the petitioner. However, there is
evidence to the effect that a certain Conception Cua had relations with
the petitioner, as a result of which five children were born to her.
Petitioner did not deny the relationship or that the children were his. He
even admitted that he had lived in the same home with her and had
been giving her money, although the excuse he gives is that he had
received help from Cua's father, when still living with the latter. The
petitioner now has ten children with Chua Hoc Ty whom she married in
Amoy, China in 1924. As to all other qualifications, there was sufficient
evidence that petitioner was fully qualified for naturalization.
The trial court held:
. . . There must be some grain of truth in this piece of evidence that
cannot be entirely ignored, especially in the case of Conception
Cua with whom, it is alleged, the petitioner has begotten some
children. But the court, however, believes that such love affair if at
all true, did exist once upon a time when the petitioner was still a
young married man. This case is not unusual in life and is true in
any part of the world. The allegation with respect to the regular
support and maintenance that the petitioner is extending to his
alleged children with Conception Cua, were it a fact, militates more
in his favor than not, because it only goes to prove the grandeur of
heart and consciousness of a grace responsibility on the part of
the petitioner. Not many people, the court has observed, are gifted
with such a noble human sentiment and gentlemanliness.
On this appeal, the Solicitor General contends that the petitioner has not
conducted himself "in a proper and irreproachable manner during the
entire period of his residence in the Philippines . . . ", as required by
section 2 of the Revised Naturalization Law. We are constrained to
uphold this contention. What constitutes "proper and irreproachable
conduct" within the meaning of the law must be determined, not by the
law of the country of which the petitioner is a citizen (polygamy is
allowed in China), but by the standards of morality prevalent in this
country, and these in turn by the religious beliefs and social concepts
existing therein. This country is predominantly Catholic and universally
Christian in religious belief. Both seduction and bigamy are punished as
crimes, and while seduction is a private crime and illegitimates declared
legal heirs, a man and a woman living together as husband and wife, if
known to be unmarried, are in general despised and avoided in society,
even if not considered social outcasts. Society may pardon the sins of
their members, but such pardon should not be confused with approval.
In the case at bar, we disagree with the conclusions of the trial court and
hold that as petitioner had previously lived with another woman with
whom he has had five children and subsequently abandoned them,
marrying another, his conduct can under no circumstances be
considered "proper and irreproachable" within the meaning of the law,
even if he actually gives support to his children.1awphil.net
The judgment appealed from is, therefore, hereby reversed and the
petition for naturalization denied. So ordered.
