Case Digest (G.R. No. 174689)
Facts:
Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio v. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 174689, October 19, 2007, the Supreme Court First Division, Corona, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio (hereafter petitioner) filed a petition on November 26, 2002 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 8, docketed as SP Case No. 02-105207, seeking judicial change of his first name and the sex entry in his birth certificate. The civil registrar of Manila was impleaded as respondent. Petitioner alleged he was born male on April 4, 1962, but identified as female from childhood, underwent psychological evaluation, hormone therapy, and breast augmentation, and ultimately underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok on January 27, 2001; a Philippine surgeon issued a certificate confirming the operation. He thereafter lived as a female and became engaged; he sought to change his registered name from Rommel Jacinto to Mely and his sex from male to female.
The RTC (Judge Felixberto T. Olalia, Jr.) conducted publication, established jurisdiction, received testimony (including petitioner, his surgeon Dr. Reysio‑Cruz, Jr., and his fiancé), and on June 4, 2003 rendered judgment granting the petition and ordering the Manila Civil Registrar to change petitioner's first name to MELY and gender to FEMALE. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing the Republic, filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals (CA), docketed CA‑G.R. SP No. 78824, arguing no law permits registry changes on the ground of sex alteration.
On February 23, 2006 the Court of Appeals (Special Sixth Division, Romilla‑Lontok, J., penned the decision) granted the Republic's petition, held the RTC decision lacked legal basis, set it aside and dismissed SP Case No. 02-105207; its denial of petitioner's motion for reconsideration was resolved by a September 14, 2006 resolution. Petitioner elevated the matter to the Supreme Court by petition (challenging the CA decision), and the Court issued the present decision. The case raised statutory i...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the RTC the proper forum and procedure to grant petitioner's request to change his first name, or is the administrative procedure under RA 9048 the exclusive remedy?
- Can a person's first name be changed on the ground of sex reassignment under the applicable statutes and rules?
- Can the sex entry in a birth certificate be changed on the ground of sex reassignment; that is, does any law authorize changing the sex entry after birth becaus...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)