Justice minister Koeut Rith during a meeting on resolving outstanding civil registration cases on March 12. MOJ
Civil registration errors, in most cases not caused by citizens, have become burdensome due to the complex procedure of correcting officials’ mistakes in forms.
Panha, using a nickname, shares his experience with a registration error. Last year, when applying for college, he needed his birth certificate for enrolment. His father then sought official copies of the original document from the district hall, which he did not identify, only to find that his son’s birth date in the certified copies was wrong.
When Panha sought correction, he was told that the original document did not match the main list stored in the database of the district where he was born, and that officials had to follow the computerised record.
Panha then approached the Ministry of Interior’s General Department of Identification (GDI) for correction, but was directed to the court instead. The error has led to considerable issues, such as his inability to create a residential book or passport, as these require a birth certificate as a supporting document.
“With this mistake, both the commune and district officials are trading blame. I request the relevant authorities, particularly the … officials, to acknowledge their errors instead of passing the buck to the citizens,” he says.
According to GDI director-general Say Meng Chheang, birth registers include certificates for birth, marriage and death. For some of these, corrections do not require court intervention. The public can seek amendments at the department or at the municipal and district levels where they were registered.
He explains that errors that can be corrected without going to court include: misspellings in the Khmer and Latin names of the individual or their parents; incorrect gender; discrepancies in the ages of parents and children or incorrect birth dates, such as being registered with the birth year 1975 instead of 1957; the individual’s wrong date of birth; and incorrect lunar birthday (such as noting Monday, April 13, 1972, when in fact, April 13, 1972, fell on a Thursday).
He says other cases that do not require court intervention include: confusion over geographical location or administration, for example, listing Kampong Siem district in Kampong Speu province, whereas Kampong Siem district is actually in Kampong Cham province; place of birth differing from the actual place of birth; adding data to the civil registry, except for information that exempts the applicant from legal liability; and invalidating duplicate registrations.
“However, beyond these nine points, such as changing a recorded name to one that is completely different, one must go to court. After receiving the court’s decision, we can make the correction. Sometimes, if a person requests to change their date of birth to a completely different one, the court needs to investigate as well,” he adds.
Courts resolving the issue
Chin Malin, secretary of state and spokesman for the Ministry of Justice, notes that there were 6,850 civil registration cases prior to the campaign in the capital and provincial courts. As of January 31, there were an additional 1,880 new cases following the launch of the campaign, totalling 8,730 cases.
Within 23 days of the campaign’s announcement, the capital and provincial courts resolved 4,120 civil registration cases, accounting for 47.2 per cent of the total nationwide.
On March 13, the ministry reported that it had settled more than 6800 – 99% of the original cases and 77% of the total.
“Wrong registrations are not the citizens’ fault but have become a burden and inconvenience, especially when individuals urgently need documents for employment or daily life. If the procedure in court is prolonged, they can’t wait. This requires appointing a judge to work daily on this matter,” he states.
“It was not the citizen themselves but our officials at the subnational level who made the errors. Therefore, a special measure must be quickly implemented to solve this without charging any fee,” he adds.
Regarding the registration process after a court decision, the applicant must take it to the relevant office and it is the responsibility of the registration official to correct the list as per the court decision and issue a new, correct copy for the individual’s legal use.
“After the court’s decision, the individual can take it to the GDI or to the municipal, town or district hall where the main list is maintained,” Chheang explains.
Yong Kim Eng, president of the People’s Centre for Development and Peace (PDP-Centre), discusses the issue with The Post.
He emphasises the need for stricter oversight of registrar officials and advocated for their training in registration and copying processes. He said the instruction should ensure that officials are diligent and cross-check details with both the list and the individual’s documents.
Kim Eng notes that errors, such as misspellings in family books by local authorities, are common. He says that when citizens inform the registrar about the mistake, the official often defers to the local authority’s version.
“The initial error is due to negligence; the second issue arises when the registrar ignores the person’s explanation. This matter should be addressed to either eliminate or significantly reduce such errors,” he adds.
