Using an Alias in the Philippines: When It Becomes a Crime and the Pequero Case

Using a name other than the one on your birth certificate is not always illegal—but it can become a crime when done to deceive. A recent Supreme Court ruling clarifies when using an alias crosses the line into criminal conduct, and why a man posing as a deceased lawyer faced conviction for some offenses but not others.

The case serves as a practical reminder: verify the credentials of anyone you hire, especially lawyers, and understand the legal limits on name usage in the Philippines.

The Legal Framework: Three Laws That Govern Name Usage

Three key laws define the boundaries of permissible name usage and professional representation:

The law regulating the use of aliases states that no person shall use any name different from the one with which they were registered at birth, with limited exceptions—such as pseudonyms for literary, cinema, television, radio, or other entertainment purposes, and in athletic events where pseudonyms are normally accepted practice. The specific statute number for this issuance is not available in the ASG law library, but its substance is well-established in Philippine law.

Article 178 of the Revised Penal Code (as amended by Republic Act No. 10951) penalizes the use of fictitious names. The penalty is arresto mayor (imprisonment of one month and one day to six months) and a fine not exceeding PHP 100,000. The offense applies when a person publicly uses a fictitious name to conceal a crime, evade the execution of a judgment, or cause damage.

Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions is addressed under the Revised Penal Code. It penalizes those who falsely represent themselves as government officers or perform acts pertaining to public office without legal authority. For example, someone pretending to be a police officer during a traffic stop could be charged under this provision.

The Pequero Case: A Timeline of Deception

The case centers on Pedro Pequero, who presented himself as "Atty. Epafrodito Nollora"—a real lawyer who had already passed away. The key events unfolded as follows:

• 2005: Ponciano Banjao met Pedro, who claimed to be a lawyer and the brother of a security guard.
• June 22, 2011: Banjao filed a complaint with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), alleging that Pedro was falsely representing himself as a lawyer.
• October 14, 2011: An NBI entrapment operation caught Pedro representing a client as Atty. Epafrodito Nollora at the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Binangonan, Rizal.
• 2016: Pedro was arraigned and pleaded not guilty to charges of using an illegal alias, using a fictitious name, and usurpation of authority.
• April 26, 2019: The MTC found Pedro guilty of all charges.
• October 17, 2019: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) affirmed the MTC's decision.
• March 23, 2022: The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed Pedro's Petition for Review and affirmed the RTC's Decision.
• August 7, 2024: The Supreme Court partially granted Pedro's Petition, affirming his conviction for use of illegal alias and use of fictitious name, but acquitting him of usurpation of authority.

The Supreme Court's Reasoning

The Supreme Court emphasized that Pedro's registered name was Pedro Pequero y Nollora, not Atty. Epafrodito Nollora. The Court also noted that the real Atty. Epafrodito Nollora had already passed away. Key evidence included notarized documents and pleadings signed by Pedro as Atty. Epafrodito Nollora.

The Court ruled that Pedro's alias was not used for literary, entertainment, or athletic purposes, but to represent himself as a lawyer to the prejudice of the believing public. Pedro had no authority to use the alias. By assuming the identity of the deceased lawyer, Pedro successfully used a fictitious name that caused damage to the public—especially his paying clients who believed they were being represented by a genuine lawyer.

However, the Court acquitted Pedro of usurpation of authority. The reason: under the Revised Penal Code provision on usurpation of authority, a lawyer is not deemed a "person in authority." While lawyers performing their duties are considered persons in authority for purposes of direct assault or resistance to authority, this classification does not extend to usurpation of official functions.

Practical Takeaways

• Verify credentials before hiring a professional. Check a lawyer's bar number and standing with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
• Understand the limits of alias use. Pseudonyms are permitted for literary, entertainment, and athletic purposes, but using a different name to deceive is a crime.
• Know the penalties. Using a fictitious name to conceal a crime, evade judgment, or cause damage carries arresto mayor and a fine of up to PHP 100,000.
• Report suspected impostors. If someone is falsely representing themselves as a lawyer, report them to the NBI or the IBP for investigation.
• Note the distinction in law. Not every false representation amounts to usurpation of authority—the law applies only to persons in authority, a category that excludes lawyers under the usurpation provision.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.