View full case

ROMMEL JACINTO DANTES SILVERIO v. REPUBLIC

FACTS:

On November 26, 2002, petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a petition for the change of his first name and sex in his birth certificate. He alleged that he is a male transsexual and had undergone a sex reassignment surgery to become a female. The trial court rendered a decision in favor of the petitioner, granting the change of name and sex in the birth certificate. However, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision, stating that there is no law allowing such changes. The petitioner then filed a petition with the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

  1. Can a person's first name be legally changed on the ground of sex reassignment?

  2. Is there a legal basis for changing the entry of sex on a birth certificate due to sex reassignment?

RULING:

  1. First Name Change No, the petitioner's request to change his first name based on sex reassignment lacks merit. The governing law (RA 9048) does not permit changing a first name on this ground. The change of name is an administrative remedy and not within the jurisdiction of the trial court. Additionally, the existing legal name does not prejudice the petitioner, and the grounds for legally changing a name do not include sex reassignment.

  2. Change of Entry as to Sex No, there is no law in the Philippines that allows the alteration of the sex entry in the civil registry due to sex reassignment. The determination of a person's sex at birth is considered immutable unless attended by error, and there is currently no legislative framework that recognizes or regulates sex reassignment. Policy considerations and public interest require that any changes related to sex reassignment be addressed by legislation rather than judicial decision.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. Legal Status and Name Change The change of a person's name must be based on proper cause, as stipulated by statute law. RA 9048 governs such changes and does not include sex reassignment as a justifiable ground.

  2. Sex Determination The sex of a person as recorded at birth remains consistent unless corrected due to an initial error. The concept of legal sex is tied to observable physical characteristics at birth, not subsequent surgical interventions.

  3. Legislative Authority Legal recognition of sex reassignment and any related changes in legal documents is within the purview of the legislature, not the judiciary. Courts cannot engage in judicial legislation by creating protocols not provided by law.

  4. Public Policy and Legal Capacity Changes to personal legal documents such as birth certificates based on sex reassignment have wide-ranging implications for marriage, family relations, and other gender-specific legal provisions. Such issues are to be addressed explicitly by legislative action rather than through judicial discretion.

  5. Role of Equity Although equity considerations can guide judicial decisions, they do not override clear statutory requirements or create rights or remedies not recognized by law.