Case Summary (G.R. No. 174689)
Petitioner’s Claim and Procedural History
Petitioner, born April 4, 1962 in Manila, sought judicial correction of his birth certificate to change his first name from “Rommel Jacinto” to “Mely” and his recorded sex from “male” to “female.” After undergoing hormone treatment, breast augmentation, and sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok on January 27, 2001, he lived as a female and became engaged. On November 26, 2002, he filed SP No. 02-105207 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 8. No opposition was entered; jurisdictional requirements were met; notices were published and served; and trial was conducted with petitioner and his witnesses testifying.
RTC Decision Granting Petition
On June 4, 2003, the RTC granted the petition, finding that aligning petitioner’s civil registry entries with his post-operative sex promoted justice and equity, caused no prejudice, and fulfilled no unlawful motive. The court ordered the Civil Registrar of Manila to change petitioner’s first name to “MELY” and gender marker to “FEMALE.”
Court of Appeals Reversal
The Republic, through the OSG, filed a certiorari petition in the Court of Appeals. On February 23, 2006, the CA held that no statute authorizes change of first name or sex in the birth certificate on the ground of sex reassignment. It set aside the RTC decision and dismissed the petition. A motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting petitioner’s appeal to the Supreme Court.
Issue on Change of First Name
Whether petitioner may judicially change his first name based solely on sex reassignment surgery.
Analysis on Change of First Name
- Name changes are a statutory privilege, not an inherent right (Civil Code, Art. 376; RA 9048).
- RA 9048 transferred authority over first-name changes to local civil registrars and limits grounds to ridicule, habitually used nicknames, or confusion avoidance.
- Petitioner’s reason—making name “compatible” with post-operative sex—falls outside RA 9048’s permissible grounds.
- The RTC lacked primary jurisdiction, as administrative remedy under RA 9048 was the proper avenue, and petitioner demonstrated no prejudice from his registered name.
Issue on Change of Recorded Sex
Whether any law permits altering the sex entry in the birth certificate following sex reassignment surgery.
Analysis on Change of Sex Entry
- Civil Code Art. 412 requires a judicial order for registry changes; RA 9048 excludes only clerical errors, expressly barring changes in sex.
- Rule 108 applies to substantial registry corrections, but “sex” is neither a clerical error nor among the events listed in Arts. 407–408.
- The Civil Register Law views birth certificates as immutable factual records determined at birth by visual inspection of genitalia.
- Statutory terms “male” and “female” retain their common biological meanings; there is no special law recognizing post-operative sex reassignment for registry purposes.
Public Policy and Equity Considerations
- Allowing regi
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 174689)
Facts
- Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio was born on April 4, 1962 in the City of Manila, registered as male with the first name “Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio” in his birth certificate.
- From childhood, petitioner identified and behaved as female, leading him to seek professional consultation abroad for gender dysphoria.
- Between psychological evaluations, hormone therapy, breast augmentation, and counseling in the United States, petitioner’s medical journey culminated in a sex reassignment surgery on January 27, 2001 in Bangkok, Thailand.
- Postoperatively, petitioner was examined in the Philippines by Dr. Marcelino Reysio-Cruz, Jr., who issued a medical certificate confirming the completion of penectomy, orchiectomy, penile skin inversion vaginoplasty, clitoral hood reconstruction, and breast augmentation.
- Living thereafter as a female and engaged to be married, petitioner filed on November 26, 2002 in the Regional Trial Court of Manila (Branch 8) a petition to change his first name to “Mely” and his sex in the birth certificate from “male” to “female.”
Procedural History
- Trial court published notices for initial hearing in a Metro Manila newspaper for three consecutive weeks and served copies to the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the Manila civil registrar.
- At trial, petitioner testified and presented medical and personal witnesses. No opposition was interposed by the State or any private party.
- On June 4, 2003, the Regional Trial Court granted the petition, finding that equity and justice supported aligning petitioner’s civil registry entries with his post-operative sex.
- The Republic, through the OSG, filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which on February 23, 2006 set aside the trial court’s decision for lack of legal basis and dismissed the petition.
- Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in the CA was denied on September 14, 2006, prompting the elevation of the case to the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari.