November 11, 2020 | G.R. No. 216425
Anacleto Ballaho Alanis III, petitioner
Court of Appeals, Cagayan de Oro City, and Hon. Gregorio de la Pena III of RTC Branch 12 of Zamboanga City, respondents
FACTS:
Anacleto Ballaho Alanis III was born to Mario Cimafranca Alanis (father) and Jarmila Imelda Al-Raschid Ballaho (mother). His parents separated when he was 5 years old. As such, he and his siblings were raised alone by his mother.
Subsequently, he filed a petition before the RTC of Zamboanga City to change his name to Abdulhamid Ballaho, for two reasons: (a) he wanted to remove the name of his father; and (b) he has always been known as Abdulhamid Ballaho, as evidenced by his yearbook, campus newspaper, non-professional driver's license, and community tax certificate, among others.
RTC: Denied petition on the ground that petitioner failed to prove any of the grounds to warrant a change of name. The RTC also held that to allow him to drop his last name was to disregard the surname of his natural and legitimate father, in violation of the Family Code and Civil Code, which provide that legitimate children shall principally use their fathers' surnames.
CA denied petitioner's Petition for Certiorari based on procedural lapses.
Hence, the instant petition.
ISSUE:
Whether or not legitimate children have the right to use their mothers' surnames as their surnames. -- YES.
HELD:
- The RTC's application of Article 364 of the Civil Code is incorrect. Indeed, the provision states that legitimate children shall "principally" use the surname of the father, but "principally" does not mean "exclusively." This gives ample room to incorporate into Article 364 the State policy of ensuring the fundamental equality of women and men before the law, and no discernible reason to ignore it. This Court has explicitly recognized such interpretation in Alfon v. Republic.
- The fundamental equality of women and men before the law shall be ensured by the State. This is guaranteed by no less than the Constitution, Republic Act No. 7192, or the Women in Development and Nation Building Act, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, to which the Philippines is a party.
- Reading Article 364 of the Civil Code together with the State's declared policy to ensure the fundamental equality of women and men before the law, a legitimate child is entitled to use the surname of either parent as a last name.
On the change of name to avoid confusion:
- Further, the SC granted petitioner's request to change name in order to avoid confusion.
- Whether people inquire deeper into petitioner's parentage or paternity because of a name is inconsequential here, and seems to be more a matter of intrigue and gossip than an issue for courts to consider. Regardless of which name petitioner uses, his father's identity still appears in his birth certificate, where it will always be written, and which can be referred to in cases where paternity is relevant.
- Aside from being unduly restrictive and highly speculative, the trial court's reasoning is also contrary to the spirit and mandate of the Convention, the Constitution, and Republic Act No. 7192, which all require that the State take the appropriate measures to ensure the fundamental equality of women and men before the law.
- Patriarchy becomes encoded in our culture when it is normalized. The more it pervades our culture, the more its chances to infect this and future generations.
- The trial court's reasoning further encoded patriarchy into our system. If a surname is significant for identifying a person's ancestry, interpreting the laws to mean that a marital child's surname must identify only the paternal line renders the mother and her family invisible. This, in turn, entrenches the patriarchy and with it, antiquated gender roles: the father, as dominant, in public; and the mother, as a supporter, in private.