CASE DIGEST

G.R. NUMBER 174468

PETITIONER Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio
RESPONDENT Republic of the Philippines

FACTS:  Respondent has undergone sex reassignment surgery

o He went to numerous doctors, both abroad and in the Philippines
 The petitioner lived as a female and is engaged to his American fiancée
 Petitioner filed with the RTC to have the name in his birth certificate to
“Mely” and his sex from male to female
o The initial hearing was published in the People’s Journal Tonight (a
newspaper of general circulation in metro Manila, for three
consecutive weeks)
o Copies of the order were sent to the office of the solicitor general
and the civil registrar of Manila
o The initial hearing was scheduled and there was no opposition to
the petition
o The RTC rendered a decision in favor of the petitioner
 The Republic of the Philippines, through the Office of the Solicitor General,
filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals
 CA rendered a decision in favor of the Republic
o The RTC decision lacked legal basis
o There is no law allowing the change of either name or sex in the
certificate of birth on the ground of sex reassignment through
surgery
 Petitioners filed for Motion of Reconsideration
 CA denied this
 This case is a petition to reconsider the CA’s decision
ISSUE/S:  Whether or not the CA erred in reversing the decision of the RTC to grant
the petitioner’s name and sex change in his birth certificate.
RULING:  NO. When the RTC made the decision, they did not look at it with a legal
standpoint. When the CA reviewed the different statutes related to the
case, it found legal basis to deny the petitioner’s request.

ARGUMENTS MADE
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
PETITIONERS
 No unlawful motive, petitioner only
wanted his birth records to be
compatible to his present sex
CONTENTION
 Granted for the principles of justice and
equity
 Petitioner’s misfortune to be trapped in a
man’s body is not his own doing and should
not be in any way taken against him
 No harm, injury, or prejudice will be caused
to anybody or the community in grating the
petition
 Granting the petition would being the
much-awaited happiness on the part of the
petitioner and her fiancé and the realization
of their dreams
 COURT OF APPEALS
PETITIONERS
 The change of his mane and sex in his
birth certificate is allowed under articles
407, 413, of the Civil code and rules 103
and 108 of the riles of court and R.A.
9048
CONTENTION
 Article 412 of the Civil Code:
o No entry in the civil register shall
be changed or corrected without a
judicial error
 Section 2(c) of R.A. 9048 defines “Clerical or
typographical Error”
o A mistake committed in the
performance of a clerical work in
writing, copying, transcribing or
typing and entry in the civil register
that is harmless and innocuous,
such as misspelled name, etc.
 Under R.A. 9048, the change of sex in the
registry is a substantial change
 Article 407 and 408: enumerates the acts,
events, and judicial decrees to be recorded
in the civil register
o No reasonable interpretation of the
provision can justify the conclusion
that it covers the correction on the
ground of sex reassignment
o To correct simply means “to make
or set right, to removed the fault or
error from”
o To change is “to replace something
with something else of the same
king or with something that serves
as a substitute”
o Sex reassignment is not among
those acts or events mentioned in
Article 407, neither is it recognized
nor even mentioned by any law,
expressly or impliedly
 Status – circumstances
affecting legal situation
 His personal qualities and
relations
 A person’s sex is an essential factor in
marriage and gamily relations, Article 413
o All other matters pertaining to the
registration of civil status shall be
governed by special laws
o No such special law in the Ph
governs sex reassignment and its
effects
o Section 5, of Act 3757
 A birth certificate is a
historical record of the facts
as they existed at the time
of the birth, the persons’
sex is determined at birth
 It cannot be argued that the

 No unlawful motive, petitioner only
wanted his birth records to be
compatible to his present sex
 Petitioner’s misfortune to be trapped in
a man’s body is not his own doing and
should not be in any way taken against
him
 He intended to make his first name
compatible with the sex he thought he
transformed himself into through
surgery
term ”sex” as used than is
something alterable
through surgery or
something that allows a
post-operative male to
female transsexual to be
included in the category
female
 For these reasons, No law authorizes the
change of entry as to sex in the civil
registry for that reason. This, there is not
legal basis for his petition for the
correction or change of the entries in his
birth certificate.
 The State has an interest in the names
borne by individuals and entitles for
purposes of identification
 Name change is a privilege, not a right and
it is controlled by status
 R.A. 9048 states
o No entry in a civil register shall be
changed or corrected without a
judicial order, except for clerical or
typographical errors and change of
first name or nickname which can be
corrected or changed by the
concerned city or municipal civil
registrar of consul general in
accordance with the provisions of
this Act and its implementing rules
and regulations.
 The following are the requisites for name
change:
o The petitioner finds the first name
of nickname to be ridiculous
(tainted with dishonor or difficult to
pronounce or write)
o The new first name or nickname has
been habitually and continuously
used by the petitioner and he has
been publicly known by that first
name or nickname in the
community
o The change will avoid confusion
 Change of name does not alter one’s legal
capacity or civil status
 Rather than avoiding confusion, changing
petitioner’s first name for his declared
purpose may only create grave
complications in the civil registry and the
public interest
 He must present proper or reasonable cause
or any compelling reason justifying such
change

 No harm, injury, or prejudice will be
caused to anybody or the community in
grating the petition
 Granting the petition would being the
much-awaited happiness on the part of
the petitioner and her fiancé and the
realization of their dreams
 He must show that he will be prejudiced by
the used of his true and official name
 He failed to show or even allege any
prejudice that he might suffer as a result of
using his true and official name
 The petition should have been filed with the
local civil registrar – wrong venue
 The changes sought be petitioner will have
wide-ranging legal and public policy
consequences
 If granted, it would be his first step of
getting married (as the RTC stated), but
marriage is a special contract of permanent
union between man and woman
 This would substantially reconfigure and
greatly alter that laws on marriage and
family relations
 There are various laws which apply
particularly to women and these laws
underscore the public policy in the relation
to women which could be sustantially
affected in petitioner’s petition were to be
granted
 Article 9 of the civil code:
o No judge or court shall decline to
render judgment by reason of silence,
obscurity or insufficiency of the law
o However, this is not a silence for
courts to engage in judicial
legislation
o It is for the legislature, should it
choose to do to, to determine what
guidelines should govern the
recognition of the affects of sex
reassignment
 The court recognizes that there are people
whose preferences and orientation do not
fit neatly into the commonly recognized
parameters of social convention and that, at
least for them, life is indeed an ordeal,
however, the remedies the petitioner seeks
involve questions of public policy to be
addressed solely by the legislature, not by
the courts