Scribd
Upload
41 views2 pages

PFR Digested 2 - Silverio V Republic

The petitioner filed a petition to change the name and gender on their birth certificate after undergoing sex reassignment surgery. The trial court initially ruled in favor of the petitioner but the Court of Appeals overturned this, finding no law allows changes to birth certificates due to sex alterations. The Supreme Court then denied the petitioner's appeal, finding that a birth certificate is an historical record established at birth and current legislation does not allow changes to the recorded sex.

Uploaded by

Paulyn Marie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
41 views2 pages

PFR Digested 2 - Silverio V Republic

The petitioner filed a petition to change the name and gender on their birth certificate after undergoing sex reassignment surgery. The trial court initially ruled in favor of the petitioner but the Court of Appeals overturned this, finding no law allows changes to birth certificates due to sex alterations. The Supreme Court then denied the petitioner's appeal, finding that a birth certificate is an historical record established at birth and current legislation does not allow changes to the recorded sex.

Uploaded by

Paulyn Marie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

ROMMEL JACINTO DANTES SILVERIO, 

petitioner,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

FACTS:
Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 8, to
have his initial name and gender changed on his birth certificate. In his certificate of live birth, his name was listed as
"Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio" (birth certificate). His gender was listed as "male." He had a psychiatric evaluation,
hormone therapy, and a breast augmentation. On January 27, 2001, he had sex reassignment surgery in an attempt to
turn himself into a "woman." Petitioner pretended to be a woman and was engaged to be married. He subsequently
requested that his name be changed from "Rommel Jacinto" to "Mely" on his birth certificate.

The matter was set for an initial hearing, and copies of the order were submitted to the Office of the Solicitor
General (OSG) and Manila's civil registrar. The petition had no opposition.

Ruling of the Trial Court: in favor of petitioner


Reason: Petitioner filed the current petition simply to make his birth records consistent with his current sex, not to
evade any law, judgment, or infringement thereof, or for any criminal reason.

The OSG, filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals.


Reason: There is no law that allows for changes to birth certificate entries due to sex alterations.

Ruling of the CA: in favor of the Republic


The reason for this was that the trial court's decision lacked legal support. There is no law that allows a change of
name or sex on a birth certificate based on sex reassignment through surgery.

Petitioner moved for reconsideration but it was denied.

The petitioner essentially contends that Articles 407 to 413 of the Civil Code, Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of
Court, and RA 9048 enable him to change his name and sex on his birth certificate. The petition is without merit.

ISSUE:
Whether or not petitioner is entitled to the relief asked for.

HELD:
Petitioner filed the existing petition solely to make his birth records compatible with his current sex, not to
evade any law, judgment, or infraction thereof, or for any unlawful motive. For the sake of identification, the State is
interested in the names that persons and entities use. It is a privilege, not a right, to alter one's name.

A change of first name due to sex reassignment is not permitted under RA 9048. Before a person may legally
alter his given name, he must show that he has good cause or another convincing justification for doing so. He must
also demonstrate that using his actual and official name will disadvantage him. He failed to prove, or even suggest,
any discrimination he could have faced as a result of using his actual and official name in this matter.

The petitioner's birth certificate was free of errors. There were no errors in any of the records, including those
related to his initial name and gender. There is no need to make any adjustments.

A birth certificate is a historical record of the facts as they existed at the moment of birth, as defined by the
Civil Register Law. Thus, a person's sex is established at birth by the birth attendant (a physician or midwife) visually
inspecting the infant's genitals. Given that there is no legal recognition of sex reassignment, the sex determination
established at the time of a person's birth, if not tainted by error, is irreversible.

For these reasons, while petitioner may have been able to modify his body and look through contemporary
surgery, no legislation allows for a change of sex in the civil registration for that reason. As a result, his request for the
correction or alteration of his birth certificate information has no legal foundation.

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED.

You might also like