Petitioner seeks to become a Filipino citizen.

Petitioner is a citizen of the Chinese Nationalist Republic, He was born on July 8, 1930 in Labo, Camarines Norte, where he has resided continuously since birth up to the present time. He has finished his elementary education at the Labo Elementary School, and his secondary education at the Camarines Norte Institute. He is a graduate in mechanical engineering of the Mapua Institute of Technology. He is single and at present employed with the International Steel Smelting and Refining Co., Inc. at Mandaluyong, Rizal, with a salary of P375.00 a month. He speaks and writes fairly well English and Tagalog.

Petitioner has conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during his residence in the Philippines. He has not been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude. He has mingled socially with the residents of Labo and has evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of our people. He has expressed a desire to fight for the Philippines even against his mother country. He does not believe in polygamy or in the use of violence for the success and predominance of his ideas. He does not believe in communism nor is he affiliated with an organization with communistic leaning. He does not suffer from any incurable disease, and does not have any disqualification provided for by law.

After hearing, the court a quo granted his petition for naturalization subject to the provisions of Republic Act 530.

The government appealed from the decision oil the ground that petitioner has tailed to establish sufficiently his claim that he was born in Labo, Camarines Norte, and that his two character witnesses lack the qualifications necessary to establish some or the important averments of his petition.

It was claimed that petitioner was born in Labo, Camarines Norte on July 8, 1930, and that he has received his primary and secondary education at the Labo Elementary School and Camarines Norte Institute, for which reason he has not filed the declaration of intention to become a Filipino citizen as required by law. But the evidence presented to support such claim is far from convincing, for it only finds support in the testimony of petitioner. While it may be conceded that petitioner's birth certificate could not be obtained due to the destruction of the records of the local civil registrar of Labo during the last world war, the claim of petitioner could have been corroborated by his mother or father who apparently are still living, as there is nothing in the record to show that they | are dead. The claim could have also been corroborated by his baptismal certificate wherein generally the place and date of birth of the neophyte are recorded. But no such thing was done despite his claim that he was baptized in the Roman Catholic church of Labo.

It is true that petitioner submitted as part of his evidence his alien certificate of registration and his immigrant certificate of residence, but such documents do not furnish proof of his date of birth because they merely serve to prove that he is an alien duly registered in the Bureau of Immigration, Moreover, their contents are generally not admissible because the public officer or employee who wrote the data therein contained has merely received them and he has no personal knowledge of them. The government's objection on this point is well-taken.

A circumstance that cannot be overlooked is that while petitioner has been a resident of Labo, Camarines Norte since his birth on July 8, 1930, he has mot however continuously resided therein but a good portion of his time was spent in "Manila where he studied at the Mapua Institute of Technology and graduated with the Degree of Bachelor a Science in Mechanical Engineering. Yet his two character witnesses Victor de Jesus and Rosario Lukban only claim to be both residents of Labo, Camarines Norte and as such cannot qualify to attest to his good conduct and irreproachable character during the time of his residence in the Philippines. Our law requires that petitioner should conduct himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Philippines which must be established by qualified witnesses, and, as we already said, the aforesaid witnesses do not have the requisite qualification.

Finally, the petition fails to mention the different places of residence of petitioner in Manila where he, studied for sometime, and this is another flaw which seriously affects his claim of citizenship.

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is reversed, with costs against petitioner.

Bengzon , C.J., Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.