REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Regional Trial Court of _________

Branch ____
____________ City

PEOPLES’ COALITION FOR

GOOD GOVERNMENT,
Represented by
___________________,
___________________,
___________________,
Petitioners,

- Versus - CIVIL CASE NO. __________

Petition for Declaratory Relief/
Declare Unconstitutional or
Ultra Vires, C.O. No. ______
With prayer for other relief
CITY OF ____________,
Represented by its Honorable
City Mayor, Vice-Mayor, and
Its Sangguniang Panlungsod,
Respondents.
X------------------x

VERIFIED PETITION

THE ABOVE-NAMED PETITIONERS, through undersigned

counsel, to this Honorable Court, most respectfully aver:

THE PARTIES

The Petitioners:

1. Petitioners are among thousands of members of a

people’s organization called the PEOPLE’S COALITION FOR GOOD
GOVERNMENT (PCFGG)- __________ City Chapter, which is a
broad coalition of God-fearing, conservative, Bible-believing,
nation loving, pro-family, and pro-Constitution citizens,
taxpayers and residents of the City of ______ coming from many
groups and associations, which brings this suit by way of class
suit under Section 12, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court which
provides:
 Section 12. Class suit. — When the subject matter of the controversy is
one of common or general interest to many persons so numerous that it
is impracticable to join all as parties, a number of them which the court
finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully protect the
interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all. Any
party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual
interest. (12a)

2. The coalition in this instance is represented by

___________, ___________, and _______ (state as many but
not too numerous), who are taxpayers, registered voters, and
residents of this City of _________, whose TIN Numbers, Voter’s
precinct number, and residence certificate numbers are indicated
in that attachment marked as ANNEX “A” hereof and adopted and
incorporated into this Petition by reference;

The Respondents:

3. Respondent City of _______ is a local government unit of

the Republic of the Philippines, represented in this instance by:

HON. MAYOR _________

HON. VICE MAYOR (Presiding Officer of the
Sangguniang Panlungsod) ___________
HON. SP MEMBERS:
______
______ etc etc etc

who can all be served with the summons and processes of this
Honorable Court in their official address at _________,
_______________ Street, __________ City.

THE ANTECEDENT FACTS:

4. Respondent City of ___________, last _______ passed

City Ordinance no. ____, entitled “AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING
DISCCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION,
GENDER IDENTITY AND EXPRESSION AND PROVIDING
PENALTIES THEREFOR”, certified true copy of which is hereto
attached as ANNEX “B” hereof and adopted and incorporated to
this Petition by reference;

5. In the said Ordinance, the following concepts were

defined and as follows:

Sec. ___ SEXUAL ORIENTATION

(quote)

Sec. ___ GENDER IDENTITY

(quote)
 Sec. ___ GENDER EXPRESSION
(quote)

Sec. ____ DISCRIMINATION

(quote)

Sec. ____ STIGMA

6. The ordinance further enumerated the following as

discriminatory acts:

Sec. ____(quote)

7. Then, as penalties for commission of any of the so-called

discriminatory acts, it prescribed a penalty as follows:

Sec. ___ (quote)

CAUSES OF ACTION

8. The Honorable Court will please take judicial notice that

there is as yet no national law on SOGIE; it remains a bill in both
Houses of Congress as this Petition is being filed;

9. The said City Ordinance now raises very serious

“ questions of construction" which require, pursuant to
Rule 63, Section 1 of the Rules of Court, a
"determination of the rights and duties of the
parties"; with all due respect to the City of ______ and its
distinguished officials, and without any disrespect meant for the
so-called LGBT ++ community, the said City Ordinance is
respectfully submitted to be unconstitutional and should be
declared of no force and effect on the strength of the following
grounds:

THE ORDINANCE IS ULTRA-VIRES,

ENACTED BEYOND THE AUTHORITY
OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT

10. While the Ordinance purports to be an anti-

discrimination ordinance, it however entered into legislation over
a subject matter it has no authority to define and which would
result in conflict with existing laws and jurisprudence which the
local government unit has no power to amend, repeal or over-
turn;

11. These areas over which it has no power to legislate are

the following:
 a. AMENDING OR EXPANDING THE DEFINITION
OF GENDER OR UNDOING IT BY THE DEVICE
OF “GENDER IDENTITY”, without due regard
to Civil Code and RA 3753 otherwise known
as the Civil Register Law;

b. Its “legalization” of homosexuality,

lesbianism, and bisexuality, thereby creating
confusion with Art. 55 of the Family Code,
among others

c. Its legalization of the concept of

“transgender” which violates the ruling of
the Supreme Court in the landmark case of
Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio versus
Republic of the Philippines, GR No. 174689,
October 22, 2007 which explicitly ruled that
there is no such thing as a transgender male
or female in our jurisdiction

d. Its failure to provide recognition and

protection of the Constitutional freedom of
religion, religious expression, freedom of
conscience, free speech and expression for
those who do not subscribe to the gay and
lesbian lifestyle and worldview.

DISCUSSION:

Anent the First Cause of Action:

The Ordinance is ultra-vires as it

AMENDS OR EXPANDS THE
DEFINITION OF GENDER OR
UNDOES IT BY THE DEVICE OF
“GENDER IDENTITY”, without due
regard RA 3753 otherwise known as
the Civil Register Law, in relation
Art. 412, 407, and 408 of the Civil
Code of the Philippines;

12. It is elementary in our jurisdiction that the State has an

interest in the personal data of its citizen, including among
others, one’s full and correct name and one’s gender.

13. Both the Civil Code and the Civil Register Law require
entries in one’s certificate of birth to be declared and properly
recorded, and major corrections or change of the same require
judicial order, thus:
 ART. 407. Acts, events and judicial decrees concerning
the civil status of persons shall be recorded in the civil
register.

ART. 408. The following shall be entered in the civil

register:
(1) Births; (2) marriages; (3) deaths; (4) legal
separations; (5) annulments of marriage; (6)
judgments declaring marriages void from the
beginning; (7) legitimations; (8) adoptions; (9)
acknowledgments of natural children; (10)
naturalization; (11) loss, or (12) recovery of
citizenship; (13) civil interdiction; (14) judicial
determination of filiation; (15) voluntary emancipation
of a minor; and (16) changes of name.

ART. 412. No entry in the civil register shall be

changed or corrected without a judicial order.

14. The foregoing provisions of the Civil Code must be read

together with Section 5 of Act 3753 (the Civil Register Law),
which states:

SEC. 5. Registration and certification of births. –

“The declaration of the physician or midwife in

attendance at the birth or, in default thereof, the
declaration of either parent of the newborn child, shall
be sufficient for the registration of a birth in the civil
register.” X x x

“In such declaration, the person above mentioned

shall
certify to the following facts: (a) date and hour of
birth;
(b) sex and nationality of infant; (c) names,
citizenship and religion of parents or, in case the
father is not known, of the mother alone; (d) civil
status of parents;
(e) place where the infant was born; and (f) such
other data as may be required in the regulations to be
issued.

15. It is very clear and obvious that one’s sex or gender

(whether male or female) is a matter of government record which
cannot be altered or changed without the appropriate court
order;

16. Yet the City Ordinance No. ___ of _________ ASSUMES

AND PRESUMES THAT JUST BY THE SAY SO OF A MEMBER OF
THE SO-CALLED LGBT ++ community, he/she can DEMAND
RESPECT FOR WHAT HE/SHE DECLARES HIMSELF/HERSELF TO
BE, even without a court order, and anyone who “impairs or
nullifies that recognition” is committing an act of discrimination;

17. In effect, C.O. ____ AMENDS OR REPEALS SECTIONS

407, 408, AND 412 OF THE CIVIL CODE IN RELATION TO
SECTION 5 OF ACT 3753 which requires that data appearing in
one’s certificate of birth CAN ONLY BE CHANGED BY COURT
ORDER; thus, C.O. ___ is unconstitutional for being ultra-vires,
that is, beyond the power of the local government unit to enact;

Anent the Second Cause:

The Ordinance is ultra-vires as

it recognizes homosexuality,
lesbianism, bi-sexuality
etcetera, thus nullifying or
challenging Art. 55 of the
Family Code that explicit
recognizes AS IN THE SAME
CLASS SEXUAL INFIDELITY OR
PERVERSION

18. Article 55 of the Family Code provides ten grounds for

legal separation, four among them being “homosexuality or
lesbianism” (no. ___, Art. 55), and “sexual infidelity or
perversion” (no. ____, Art. 55);

19. Now City Ordinance, by defining sexual orientation to

include “sexual attraction towards a member of the same sex”
(homosexual orientation) as well as “sexual attraction to
members of both sexes” (“bi-sexual orientation”), just undid
Article 55 of the Family Code and made it nugatory, something
which the City of _____ has no power to do; meaning, if
homosexuality or lesbianism is already a right, it cannot anymore
be a ground for legal separation under Art. 55 of the Family
Code;

20. It is obvious that the trajectory and intention of the

Ordinance is to recognize and legitimize the homosexual lifestyle,
that is why, it is prohibiting discrimination on the basis of SOGIE
and provide penalties for violation thereof;

21. Obviously, the City of ________ has overstepped its

powers by passing an ordinance the idea and contents of which
run afoul with existing national law, such as the Family Code;

Anent the Third Cause:

The Ordinance is ultra-vires because
it legitimizes the concept of
“transgender” which is expressly
debunked by the Supreme Court in
the landmark case of Rommel
Jacinto Dantes Silverio versus
Republic of the Philippines, GR No.
174689, October 22, 2007 which
explicitly ruled that there is no such
thing as a transgender male or
female in our jurisdiction

22. In the landmark case of Rommel Jacinto Dantes

Silverio versus Republic of the Philippines, GR No.
174689, October 22, 2007, the Supreme succinctly
stated:

“ The acts, events or factual errors contemplated

under Article 407 of the Civil Code include even those
that occur after birth. However, no reasonable
interpretation of the provision can justify the
conclusion that it covers the correction on the
ground of sex reassignment.

“The status of a person in law includes all his

personal qualities and relations, more or less
permanent in nature, not ordinarily terminable
at his own will, such as his being legitimate or
illegitimate, or his being married or not. The
comprehensive term status… include such matters
as the beginning and end of legal personality,
capacity to have rights in general, family relations,
and its various aspects, such as birth, legitimation,
adoption, emancipation, marriage, divorce, and
sometimes even succession.” (emphasis supplied)
Salonga, Jovito, Private International Law, 1995
Edition, Rex Bookstore, p. 238.

“When words are not defined in a statute they

are to be given their common and ordinary meaning
in the absence of a contrary legislative intent. The
words "sex," "male" and "female" as used in
the Civil Register Law and laws concerning the
civil registry (and even all other laws) should
therefore be understood in their common and
ordinary usage, there being no legislative intent
to the contrary…”

Reiterating what the Supreme Court said quoted

 earlier:

“Female is "the sex that produces ova or

bears young" and male is "the sex that has
organs to produce spermatozoa for fertilizing
ova." Thus, the words "male" and "female" in
everyday understanding do not include persons who
have undergone sex reassignment. Furthermore,
"words that are employed in a statute which had at
the time a well-known meaning are presumed to
have been used in that sense unless the context
compels to the contrary." Since the statutory
language of the Civil Register Law was enacted in the
early 1900s and remains unchanged, it cannot be
argued that the term "sex" as used then is
something alterable through surgery or
something that allows a post-operative male-to-
female transsexual to be included in the
category "female."

-- end of quote.

33. And yet, the City of _____, through a mere Ordinance,

with all due respect, just recognized and legitimized the concept
of a transgender, giving it rights and prerogatives even without a
court order, even when the Supreme Court has explained so
clearly that there is no such thing as “sex re-assignment” or a
transgender in our jurisdiction; clearly, on this score again, C.O
No. ____ is ultra-vires;

Anent the Fourth Cause:

Its failure to provide recognition

and protection of the Constitutional
freedom of religion, religious
expression, freedom of conscience,
free speech and expression for
those who do not subscribe to the
gay and lesbian lifestyle and
worldview.

34. A quick perusal of City Ordinance would show that there

is nothing there that even remotely recognizes a citizen’s freedom
of religion, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, or
freedom of speech, so that any person who does not agree that a
person can change his or her gender or declare what he or she is
not physiologically or biologically, or that same-sex sex is
abomination to the Lord or wickedness, will run afoul with the
Ordinance and be subject to penalty under the same.
 35. The non-recognition and non-protection of the aforesaid
fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution is one
more reason why the C.O. No. ____ is ultra-vires and must be
struck down for being unconstitutional.

The Questions of Construction

Justifying this Petition
Under Rule 63 of the Rules of Court

36. Based on the foregoing discussion, the City Ordinance

in question raises the following questions of construction
requiring a determination of the rights of the parties:

a. What are the rights of citizens and residents of

the City of ________ who do not subscribe to
the LGBTQI ++ worldview or lifestyle;

b. Are they obliged to recognize transgenders,

such as when a man transitions supposedly to
being a woman, can he enter into any toilet for
women because he is now a “woman”:

c. What happens to the freedom of religion,

conscience, speech or expression of those who
do not agree to the Ordinance?

d. While all the rest are made to comply with the

provisions of the Civil Code and the Civil
Register Law concerning concerning correction
of entries in their birth certificates, can the
LGBTQI++ community just demand recognition
for their preferred gender identity even when
their physiological characteristics are
otherwise?

SPECIAL PRAYER FOR ISSUANCE OF TRO AND/ OR

WRIT OF PRELIM INARY INJUNCTION

37. Petitioners hereby replead and re-affirm by way of

reference all the foregoing allegations insofar as the same are
relevant and material to the herein application for Temporary
Restraining Order and a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory and
Prohibitory Injunction as against Respondent City of ______
and/or its officials;

38. If the City Ordinance is not temporarily restrained,

there is immediate fear or trepidation among Petitioners as to
the exercise of their constitutional rights as explained herein
for fear of running afoul with the Ordinance;

39. The City Ordinance being patently ultra-vires and

unconstitutional as explained in all the foregoing, Petitioners will
suffer immediate loss, injury or damage in that their
Constitutional freedoms are unduly threatened by the Ordinance;

40. Petitioners have no immediate and adequate

remedy available in the ordinary course of law except said
temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction;

41. In order to prevent the City of ________ from

enforcing the Ordinance and thus violate the Constitutional
rights of the Petitioners without due process of law, a Writ of
Preliminary Injunction may be issued by this Honorable Court
pursuant to Section 1, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court which
provides as follows:

“Section 1. Preliminary Injunction defined;

classes. - A preliminary injunction is an order
granted at any stage of an action or proceeding
prior to the judgment or final order, requiring a
party or a court, agency or a person to refrain from
a particular act or acts. It may also require the
performance of a particular act or acts, in which
case it shall be known as a preliminary
mandatory injunction.”

42. With respect to the requirement of posting of bond

for the issuance of the said Temporary Restraining Order
or Writ of Preliminary Injunction the Petitioner hereby
most respectfully manifest her intention and willingness to
post the requisite bond, in such sum or sums of money
that this Honorable Court may deem reasonable and proper
under the premises;

43. In sum, there are sufficient bases for the issuance

of the Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of
Preliminary Injunction, for the following reasons:

a. Petitioners are entitled to the relief demanded, and

the whole or part of such relief consists in restraining
the commission or continuance of the act or acts
complained of, or in requiring the performance of an act
or acts, either for a limited period or perpetually;

b. The commission, continuance or non- performance

of the act or acts complained of during the litigation
would probably work injustice to the application;
 c. The City of ________ has already committed, is
actually committing, or i s attempting to commit or
otherwise procure to be done some act or acts
probably in violation of Petitioner's rights respecting the
subject of the action or proceeding and tending to
render the judgment ineffectual.

44. Finally, to further amplify the bases for the filing of

this Petition, particularly the prayer for the i s s u a n c e of
Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary
Injunction, attached and incorporated herewith as ANNEX “C”
is a copy of the Affidavit of Merit executed by the Petitioners
for the ready perusal and reference of this Honorable Court.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully

p r a y e d of this Honorable Court to:

1. Immediately and ex-parte upon the filing of this

Petition, issue a Temporary Restraining Order or a Writ of
Preliminary and Prohibitory Injunction, enjoining the
Respondents from further enforcing or implementing C.O.
No. _____

2. After trial, to make said Writ of Injunction

permanent;

3. Declare City Ordinance No. ___ as ultra-vires, for

grounds cited herein;

4. To determine the rights and duties of the parties

in under the Ordinance in the remote possibility that the
constitutionality of the same is upheld.

Other relief and remedies, just and proper under the

premises are likewise most respectfully prayed for.

Most respectfully submitted this _________________,

_________________ City, Philippines.