Case Digest: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CARLITO I. KHO et al.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CARLITO I. KHO et al.

526 SCRA 177 (2007), SECOND DIVISION

Carlito Kho (Kho) and his family applied for the correction of various details in their birth certificate. Kho petitioned for (1) change the citizenship of his mother from “Chinese” to “Filipino”; (2) delete “John” from his name; and (3) delete the word “married” opposite the date of marriage of his parents. The last correction was ordered to be effected likewise in the birth certificates of respondents Michael, Mercy Nona, and Heddy Moira.

The petition from a non-adversarial nature of the change is premised on Republic Act No. 9048, which allows first name and nickname in birth certificates without judicial order. The Municipal officer approved of the change. The Solicitor General objected to the correction on the ground that the correction not merely clerical but requires an adversarial proceeding. The Court of Appeals found in favor of Kho.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Kho‘s request for change in the details of their birth certificate requires an adversarial proceeding

HELD:

It can not be gainsaid that the petition, insofar as it sought to change the citizenship of Carlito‘s mother as it appeared in his birth certificate and delete the “married” status of Carlito‘s parents in his and his siblings‘ respective birth certificates, as well as change the date of marriage of Carlito and Marivel involves the correction of not just clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous nature. Rather, the changes entail substantial and controversial amendments.

For the change involving the nationality of Carlito‘s mother as reflected in his birth certificate is a grave and important matter that has a bearing and effect on the citizenship and nationality not only of the parents, but also of the offspring.

Further, the deletion of the entry that Carlito‘s and his siblings‘ parents were “married” alters their filiation from “legitimate” to “illegitimate,” with significant implications on their successional and other rights. Clearly, the changes sought can only be granted in an adversary proceeding.

The enactment in March 2001 of Republic Act No. 9048, otherwise known as “An Act Authorizing the City or Municipal Civil Registrar or the Consul General to Correct A Clerical or Typographical Error In An Entry and/or Change of First Name or Nickname in the Civil Register Without Need of Judicial Order,” has been considered to lend legislative affirmation to the judicial precedence that substantial corrections to the civil status of persons recorded in the civil registry may be effected through the filing of a petition under Rule 108.

When all the procedural requirements under Rule 108 are thus followed, the appropriate adversary proceeding necessary to effect substantial corrections to the entries of the civil register is satisfied.