The TC protects the rights of a family so that parents can choose the order of their children’s surnames

He constitutional Court approved the freedom for parents to choose the the order of their children’s surnames. In other words, the daughters and sons of a citizen couple can take the mother’s surname as their first surname, after mutual agreement.

In detail, the TC released the sentence in which it protects the rights of the said family so that fathers and mothers freely decide the order of surnames.

The decision was approved with four votes for: Morales Saravia, Domínguez Haro, Monteagudo Valdez and Ochoa Cardich. Judge Pacheco Zerga and Judge Gutiérrez Ticse cast singular votes to declare the amparo motion unfounded.

The judgment calls the Congress of the Republic to modify article 20 of the Civil Code which stipulates that the paternal name must take precedence.

“URGE the Congress of the Republic to modify article 20 of the Civil Code in accordance with the jurisprudential interpretation established in the sentence rendered in case no. 02970-2019-PHC/TC, and to specify that the order of priority of the surnames of the children are freely decided by the parents by mutual agreement; It must also determine a solution mechanism for the disagreement of the parents in the attribution of the order of the surnames of the children, under the imperative of protection of the right to equality and non-discrimination based on sex. says the judgment.

Also, order the Reniec to allow the order of surnames to be changed and to bear the costs of the procedure.

“Consequently, it is ORDERED that the National Registry of Identification and Civil Status (Reniec) proceed in accordance with the provisions of foundation 60 of this judgment, in order to give the parents the opportunity to determine by mutual agreement the order of the surnames of his daughter and, failing such agreement, proceed immediately in accordance with the provisions of foundation 60 of this judgment; and, on the other hand, the provisions of foundation 61 are complied with, as the case may be”, they detail.

the magistrate Pacheco Zergawho voted against the lawsuit, argued that “I do not necessarily find it discriminatory towards women that in Peru the paternal surname is registered first and then the maternal name, in accordance with article 20 of the aforementioned Civil Code” .

For his part, TC member Gutiérrez Ticse warned that “a decision such as that proposed in the majority judgment means reducing – if not eliminating – the margin of development and configuration that is constitutionally reserved for the Congress of the Republic, as a representative body of the electorate, and to which the constituent has entrusted the definition of the lines of collective action that the citizens must respect in order to move towards a harmonious and orderly coexistence”.