Republic of the Philippines vs. Lim

An illegitimate child of a Filipino mother and an alien father is a Filipino citizen from birth and is not required to elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.

Respondent Chule Y. Lim filed a petition for correction of entries in her birth certificate under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. Her birth was registered in Kauswagan, Lanao del Norte, and later transferred to Iligan City. Both records contained erroneous entries regarding her surname, her father's name, her nationality, and her legitimacy. Her father was Chinese, and her mother was Filipina, but they never married because the father had a prior subsisting marriage in China.

Respondent Chule Y. Lim was born on October 29, 1954 in Buru-an, Iligan City. Her birth was registered in Kauswagan, Lanao del Norte, but the Municipal Civil Registrar later transferred her record to Iligan City. Both her Kauswagan and Iligan City birth records contained four erroneous entries. She sought their correction, claiming that her surname "Yu" was misspelled as "Yo," which she had consistently used in her school records, marriage certificate, and NBI clearance. She also claimed that her father's name was misspelled as "Yo Diu To (Co Tian)" instead of "Yu Dio To (Co Tian)."

Regarding her nationality, her birth record indicated she was Chinese, but she asserted she is Filipino because her parents never married. Her mother, Placida Anto, is a Filipina, while her deceased father was Chinese. Placida testified that she and respondent's father never married because he had a prior subsisting marriage in China. A certification from the local civil registries of Iligan City and Kauswagan confirmed the absence of any marriage record between them. Consequently, respondent argued that she should be considered an illegitimate child, not legitimate as erroneously indicated in her birth certificate. She also presented her registration as a voter to attest to her Filipino citizenship.

The Republic, through the City Prosecutor of Iligan City, actively participated in the hearings and cross-examined respondent and her witnesses but did not present any evidence. The trial court granted the petition and ordered the correction of the four entries. The Republic appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the trial court's decision.

• Election of Citizenship: Petitioner argued that respondent never demonstrated compliance with the legal requirements for the election of Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority, citing Article IV, Section 1(3) of the 1935 Constitution and Commonwealth Act No. 625.
• Use of Father's Surname: Petitioner assailed the Court of Appeals' decision allowing respondent to use her father's surname despite the finding that she is an illegitimate child.

• Citizenship: Whether respondent, an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother and an alien father, is required to elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority to be considered a Filipino citizen.
• Use of Surname: Whether respondent, an illegitimate child, can continue using her father's surname which she has been using since childhood.

• Citizenship: No. Respondent, being an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother, automatically became a Filipino citizen upon birth and was not required to elect Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
• Use of Surname: Yes. The correction of the misspelled surname of the father, which respondent has been using since childhood, was properly allowed as it avoids confusion and does not require judicial authority for continued use.

• Citizenship: The constitutional and statutory requirements for electing Filipino citizenship apply only to legitimate children born of Filipino mothers and alien fathers. Since respondent's parents were never married, she is an illegitimate child. As an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother, she automatically became a Filipino upon birth without having to elect Filipino citizenship. Furthermore, the records showed that she registered as a voter at age 18, which constitutes a positive act of election of Philippine citizenship.
• Use of Surname: The Court of Appeals did not allow respondent to use her father's surname; it merely allowed the correction of the misspelled surname she has been using for four decades. Under Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. 142, a person is allowed to use a name "by which he has been known since childhood." Judicial authority is required for a change of name, but not for the continued use of a surname already being used. The change avoids confusion, and the Republic failed to show that the Yu family in China would be prejudiced.

• Rule on Citizenship of Illegitimate Children — An illegitimate child of a Filipino mother and an alien father is a Filipino citizen from birth. The constitutional and statutory requirements for electing Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority apply only to legitimate children.
• Use of Surname — Under Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. 142, a person is allowed to use a name "by which he has been known since childhood." While judicial authority is required for a change of name, no such requirement exists for the continued use of a surname already being used since childhood, provided it does not cause prejudice or future mischief to the family or the community.

• "Plainly, the above constitutional and statutory requirements of electing Filipino citizenship apply only to legitimate children. These do not apply in the case of respondent who was concededly an illegitimate child, considering that her Chinese father and Filipino mother were never married. As such, she was not required to comply with said constitutional and statutory requirements to become a Filipino citizen. By being an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother, respondent automatically became a Filipino upon birth." — This passage articulates the ratio decidendi on the citizenship of illegitimate children born to Filipino mothers.
• "While judicial authority is required for a change of name or surname, there is no such requirement for the continued use of a surname which a person has already been using since childhood." — This defines the rule on the continued use of a surname used since childhood without need of judicial authority.

• Republic vs. Valencia, 141 SCRA 462 — Cited for the ruling that substantial errors in a civil registry may be corrected under Rule 108 provided the appropriate adversary proceeding is availed of.
• In re: Florencio Mallare, 59 Phil. 45 — Cited for the doctrine that a natural child of a Filipina is a Filipino citizen without need of any other act to confer citizenship rights.
• Pabellar vs. Rep. of the Phils., 162 Phil. 22 — Cited for the rule that a person is allowed to use a name by which they have been known since childhood under Commonwealth Act No. 142.

• Article IV, Section 1(3), 1935 Constitution — Provides that the citizenship of a legitimate child born of a Filipino mother and an alien father follows the citizenship of the father, unless the child elects Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. The Court held this applies only to legitimate children.
• Section 1, Commonwealth Act No. 625 — Governs the election of Philippine citizenship by legitimate children born of Filipino mothers. The Court found this inapplicable to respondent as an illegitimate child.
• Section 1, Commonwealth Act No. 142 — Regulates the use of aliases and allows a person to use a name "by which he has been known since childhood." The Court applied this to justify respondent's continued use of her father's surname.
• Rule 108, Rules of Court — Governs the cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry. The Court clarified that substantial corrections may be made under this Rule through an appropriate adversary proceeding.

Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), Panganiban, Carpio, and Azcuna, JJ., concur.