Introduction

In the Philippines, the surname or family name is a fundamental aspect of personal identity, legally tied to filiation and civil status. The desire to remove a father's surname and adopt a mother's maiden name often arises from personal, familial, or social circumstances, such as estrangement, illegitimacy, or a preference for matrilineal identification. This process is not straightforward, as Philippine law prioritizes stability in civil records to prevent fraud and confusion. Changes to surnames are classified as substantial corrections, requiring judicial intervention rather than administrative processes. This article explores the legal basis, grounds, procedures, requirements, potential challenges, jurisprudence, and practical implications of petitioning to remove a father's surname and use a mother's maiden name, within the Philippine legal framework. It encompasses both legitimate and illegitimate children, adults, and minors, emphasizing the balance between individual rights and public interest in accurate civil registration.

Legal Framework

The petition to change one's surname is governed by a combination of constitutional principles, statutory laws, and procedural rules that safeguard civil status records.

Constitutional Basis

The 1987 Philippine Constitution, under Article II, Section 12, recognizes the vital role of the family and protects the right to a name as part of personal dignity (implied in Article III, Section 1 on due process and privacy). However, the right to change one's name is not absolute and must align with public policy against arbitrary alterations that could mislead or defraud.

Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order No. 209)

Legitimate Children: Article 164 mandates that legitimate children use the father's surname. Article 176, as amended by Republic Act No. 9255 (2004), allows illegitimate children to use the father's surname if acknowledged, but otherwise, they bear the mother's surname.
Name Changes: The Family Code does not directly provide for surname changes but defers to civil law principles. Changing from father's to mother's surname implies severing or altering filiation indicators, which requires court approval.

Civil Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 386)

Article 376 prohibits changing one's name or surname without judicial authority, a rule established to maintain order in civil registries.
Article 412 allows corrections of entries in civil registers but distinguishes clerical/typographical errors from substantial changes like surnames.

Republic Act No. 9048 (Civil Registry Law of 2001), as Amended by RA 10172 (2012)

This law authorizes administrative corrections for clerical errors (e.g., misspelled names) by the Local Civil Registrar (LCR) or Consul General, without court involvement.
However, changing surnames (e.g., from father's to mother's) is deemed substantial and falls outside RA 9048's scope. RA 10172 explicitly excludes changes involving paternity, filiation, or legitimacy status, directing such petitions to courts under Rule 108.

Rules of Court: Special Proceedings

Rule 103: Governs change of name petitions for first names or nicknames, but surname changes often overlap.
Rule 108: Specifically for cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry, including substantial changes like surnames. This is the primary rule for petitions to remove a father's surname, as it affects birth certificate entries.
The Supreme Court has clarified in cases that surname changes invoking filiation require Rule 108 proceedings, treating them as adversarial to allow opposition.

Other Relevant Laws

Republic Act No. 9255: Allows illegitimate children to use the father's surname via affidavit of acknowledgment, but reversal (to mother's) requires a petition if already adopted.
Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act (RA 8371): For indigenous persons, cultural naming practices may influence petitions, potentially easing grounds if tied to tradition.
Data Privacy Act (RA 10173): Ensures that personal data in petitions is handled confidentially.
Administrative Orders: Office of the Civil Registrar General (OCRG) issuances, like NSO Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 2001, guide implementation but defer substantial changes to courts.

Grounds for the Petition

Courts grant surname changes only upon showing of proper or compelling reasons, as mere preference is insufficient. Common grounds include:

Dishonor or Embarrassment: If the father's surname is associated with criminality, scandal, or abandonment, causing stigma (e.g., father convicted of a heinous crime).
Avoidance of Confusion: When the father's surname leads to misidentification, such as homonyms or shared names in small communities.
Illegitimacy or Non-Acknowledgment: For unacknowledged illegitimate children already using the mother's surname informally, or to correct de facto usage.
Abandonment or Estrangement: Proof that the father has no relationship, supported by affidavits or records.
Cultural or Personal Reasons: Preference for mother's lineage, especially in matriarchal contexts or after parental separation, though courts scrutinize to prevent whimsy.
Best Interest of the Child: For minors, under the Child and Youth Welfare Code (PD 603), the change must promote welfare, not parental disputes.

Lack of compelling grounds leads to denial, as courts protect the presumption of legitimacy and filiation.

Procedures for Filing the Petition

The process is judicial, initiated in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), and adversarial, requiring notice and hearing.

Step-by-Step Process

Verification of Eligibility: Confirm the change is substantial and not administrative. Consult the LCR for birth certificate details.
Preparation of Petition: Draft a verified petition under Rule 108, stating facts, grounds, and proposed new surname (mother's maiden name). Include affidavits, birth certificate, and evidence (e.g., marriage certificate showing mother's maiden name).
Filing: File in the RTC of the place where the birth was registered (Rule 108, Sec. 1). Pay docket fees (around PHP 5,000–10,000, varying by court).
Publication and Notice: Court orders publication of the petition in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for three consecutive weeks (Rule 108, Sec. 4). Post in public places and serve notice to LCR, OCRG, and interested parties (e.g., father, if alive).
Opposition Period: Any person may file opposition within 15 days after last publication.
Hearing: Court conducts hearings; petitioner presents evidence. If unopposed, it may be summary; otherwise, full trial.
Decision: If granted, court orders the LCR to annotate the birth certificate and issue a corrected copy.
Appeal and Finality: Decisions are appealable to the Court of Appeals. Once final, OCRG annotates national records.
Implementation: Update IDs (e.g., passport, driver's license) with the court order.

For minors, the petition is filed by parents/guardians; if contested, the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) may intervene.

Timeline and Costs

Duration: 6–18 months, depending on court backlog and oppositions.
Costs: Filing fees, publication (PHP 10,000–20,000), lawyer's fees (PHP 50,000+), miscellaneous.

Requirements and Documentation

Petitioner's Documents: Birth certificate, IDs, proof of filiation (e.g., parents' marriage certificate).
Evidence of Grounds: Affidavits from witnesses, psychological reports (for stigma), court records (for abandonment).
Clearance Certificates: NBI, police, fiscal clearances to show good moral character.
For Overseas Filipinos: File via consul or authenticate documents abroad.
Special Cases: For adopted children, coordinate with adoption decrees; for married petitioners, note impact on children's surnames.

Jurisprudence and Case Studies

Supreme Court decisions guide applications:

Republic v. Capote (G.R. No. 157043, 2007): Allowed an illegitimate child to use the mother's surname, emphasizing best interest over rigid filiation rules.
In Re: Petition for Change of Name of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang (G.R. No. 159966, 2005): Clarified that changes must have substantial reasons; mere convenience insufficient.
Republic v. Hernandez (G.R. No. 117209, 1997): Upheld denial where change would confuse filiation without compelling cause.
Alfon v. Republic (G.R. No. L-51201, 1980): Permitted change due to estrangement, setting precedent for emotional grounds.
Orola v. Republic (G.R. No. 191548, 2013): Stressed adversarial nature under Rule 108, requiring publication to bind the state.

Cases often involve illegitimate children or post-separation scenarios, with courts favoring stability unless harm is proven.

Challenges and Limitations

Oppositions: Father or relatives may contest, prolonging proceedings.
Denials: Courts deny if seen as evading obligations (e.g., inheritance disputes) or lacking evidence.
Impact on Filiation: Change does not alter legal status (e.g., legitimacy remains); it only modifies the name.
Gender Considerations: Historically paternalistic, but evolving with gender equality under RA 9710 (Magna Carta of Women).
Administrative Hurdles: Delays in publication or OCRG annotation.
International Recognition: Foreign countries may not recognize the change without apostille.
Alternatives: For illegitimate children, RA 9255 allows optional use of father's surname; reversal is simpler if not yet annotated.

Practical Implications

Social Effects: Reduces stigma but may affect family relations or inheritance claims.
Legal Consequences: Updated name must be used consistently; failure could lead to perjury charges.
For Minors: Involves child psychology assessments; post-change counseling recommended.
Trends: Increasing petitions amid rising single parenthood and gender awareness.

Conclusion

Petitioning to remove a father's surname and adopt a mother's maiden name in the Philippines is a judicial process under Rule 108, designed to balance personal autonomy with the integrity of civil records. While grounded in compelling reasons like avoidance of dishonor or child welfare, it requires rigorous evidence, publication, and court scrutiny to prevent abuse. Success hinges on thorough preparation and legal counsel, ensuring the change serves justice without undermining filiation principles. As societal norms evolve, this remedy empowers individuals to align their legal identity with lived realities, though it remains a deliberate and non-trivial undertaking.