Silverio V Republic
Silverio V Republic
Silverio V Republic
FACTS:
Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a petition for the
change of his first name and sex in his birth certificate in the Regional
Trial Court of Manila. Petitioner was registered as "Rommel Jacinto
Dantes Silverio" in his birth certificate and his sex was registered as
"male."
The trial court ruled in favor of the petitioner. However, the Court
of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial court and ruled in favor of
the Republic. The Court of Appeals ruled that 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.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioner should be allowed to change his
name and sex on the ground of sex reassignment through surgery
HELD:
No.
Article 407 of the Civil Code authorizes the entry in the civil
registry of certain acts (such as legitimations, acknowledgments of
illegitimate children and naturalization), events (such as births,
marriages, naturalization and deaths) and judicial decrees (such as
legal separations, annulments of marriage, declarations of nullity of
marriages, adoptions, naturalization, loss or recovery of citizenship,
civil interdiction, judicial determination of filiation and changes of
name). 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.
Under Section 5 of Act 3753 (the Civil Register Law), the sex of a
person is determined at birth, visually done by the birth attendant (the
physician or midwife) by examining the genitals of the infant.
Considering that there is no law legally recognizing sex reassignment,
the determination of a person’s sex made at the time of his or her
birth, if not attended by error, is immutable.