Republic v. Cagandahan (2008): Intersex Person and Civil Registry

The respondent was registered as female at birth. While growing up, the respondent developed male characteristics and was diagnosed with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH), a condition in which a person has both male and female characteristics. A medical expert testified that the respondent's body produced male hormones.

The respondent asked the Regional Trial Court of Siniloan, Laguna to correct the birth certificate: to change the sex entry from female to male and the first name to a male name. The trial court granted the petition. The Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General, appealed directly to the Supreme Court on questions of law. It argued that the requirements of Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of Court were not met, because the local civil registrar had not been made a party, and that a correction under Rule 108 does not allow a change of the sex entry on the ground of this condition.

Were Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of Court followed, and can the sex entry and first name of an intersex person be changed in the birth certificate?

The Supreme Court denied the Republic's petition and affirmed the trial court.

Procedure. The local civil registrar was not formally named a party. But the Court found "substantial compliance with Rule 108 when respondent furnished a copy of the petition to the local civil registrar." As in Silverio, it said that a change of the sex entry is a substantial change, not a mere clerical or typographical error, so Rule 108 applies.

The intersex rule. The Court held: "Ultimately, we are of the view that where the person is biologically or naturally intersex the determining factor in his gender classification would be what the individual, like respondent, having reached the age of majority, with good reason thinks of his/her sex." It explained that for intersex persons, sexual development makes the classification at birth inconclusive, and the gender is fixed at maturity.

Applied to the respondent. The respondent identified as male, and the body produced high levels of male hormones, which the Court found to be preponderant biological support. The Court noted that the respondent had simply let nature take its course and had not taken steps to interfere with the condition present at birth. In the absence of a law on the matter, it said it would not dictate on a matter as private as one's sexuality, including whether to undergo medical treatment for the condition. It said it respected the respondent's "congenital condition and his mature decision to be a male."

First name. Since the change of name merely recognized the respondent's preferred gender, the Court found merit in it.

Where a person is biologically or naturally intersex, the sex entered at birth is inconclusive, and the deciding factor is what the person, having reached the age of majority, with good reason thinks of his or her sex; the sex entry and the first name may be changed through a Rule 108 proceeding on that basis.

Cagandahan is read together with Silverio v. Republic (2007). In Silverio, the petitioner had undergone sex reassignment surgery and the Court found no error in the entry at birth, so it refused the change. In Cagandahan, the respondent was born with a congenital intersex condition, so the entry at birth was inconclusive and the change was allowed. The two rulings turn on different facts.

A 2012 law, Republic Act No. 10172, now lets the local civil registrar correct a clerical or typographical mistake in the sex entry without going to court (as described in Republic v. Gallo, 2018). Cagandahan was decided before that law and concerned a change that the Court treated as substantial.

For how to request a copy of a birth certificate, see the PSA birth certificate guide.

Read the full decision on the Supreme Court E-Library (link in the sources below). For a case on a civil registry entry, see where to find legal help.