REPUBLIC ACT No.

2382

THE MEDICAL ACT OF 1959

ARTICLE I
Objectives and Implementation

Section 1. Objectives. This Act provides for and shall govern (a) the standardization and regulation
of medical education; (b) the examination for registration of physicians; and (c) the supervision,
control and regulation of the practice of medicine in the Philippines.

Section 2. Enforcement. For the purpose of implementing the provisions of this Act, there are
created the following agencies: the Board of Medical Education under the Department of Education,
and the Board of Medical Examiners under the Commissioner of Civil Service.

ARTICLE II
The Board of Medical Education Its Functions

Section 3. Composition of Board of Medical Education. The Board of Medical Education shall be
composed of the Secretary of Education or his duly authorized representative, as chairman, and the
Secretary of Health or his duly authorized representative, the Director of the Bureau of Private
Schools or his duly authorized representative, the chairman of the Board of Medical Examiners or
his duly authorized representative, a representative of private practitioners, upon recommendation of
an acknowledged medical association and a representative chosen by the Philippine Association of
Colleges and Universities, as members.

The officials acting as chairman and members of the Board of Medical Education shall hold office
during their incumbency in their respective positions.

Section 4. Compensation and traveling expenses. The chairman and members of the Board of
Medical Education shall not be entitled to any compensation except for traveling expenses in
connection with their official duties as herein provided.

For administrative purposes, the Board shall hold office in the office of its chairman, who may
designate a ranking official in the Department of Education to serve as secretary of the Board.

Section 5. Functions. The functions of the Board of Medical Education shall be:

(a) To determine and prescribe minimum requirements for admission into a recognized
college of medicine;

(b) To determine and prescribe requirements for minimum physical facilities of colleges of
medicine, to wit: buildings, including hospitals, equipment and supplies, apparatus,
instruments, appliances, laboratories, bed capacity for instruction purposes, operating and
delivery rooms, facilities for out-patient services, and others, used for didactic and practical
instructions in accordance with modern trends;
 (c) To determine and prescribe the minimum number and the minimum qualifications of
teaching personnel, including student-teacher ratio and curriculum;

(d) To determine and prescribe the number of students who should be allowed to take up the
preparatory course taking into account the capacity of the different recognized colleges of
medicine.

(e) To select, determine and approve hospitals or some departments of the hospitals for
training which comply with the minimum specific physical facilities as provided in
subparagraph (b) hereof: and

(f) To promulgate and prescribe and enforce necessary rules and regulations for the proper
implementation of the foregoing functions.

Section 6. Minimum required courses. Students seeking admission to the medical course must have
a bachelor of science or bachelor of arts degree or their equivalent and must have taken in four
years the following subjects with their corresponding number of units:

Unit

English 12

Latin 3

Mathematics, including Accounting and Statistics 9

Philosophy, including Psychology and Logic 12

Zoology and Botany 15

Physics 8

Chemistry 21

Library Science 1

Humanities and Social Sciences 12

Twelve units of Spanish shall be required pursuant to Republic Act Numbered Seven hundred nine;
but commencing with the academic year nineteen hundred sixty to nineteen hundred sixty-one,
twenty-four units of Spanish shall be required pursuant to Republic Act Numbered Eighteen hundred
and eighty-one as cultural, social and nationalistic studies.

Provided, That the following students may be permitted to complete the aforesaid preparatory
medical course in shorter periods as follows:

(a) Students whose general average is below eighty-five per cent but without any grade of
failure or condition may be allowed to pursue and finish the course in three academic years
and the intervening summer sessions; and
 (b) Students whose general average is eighty-five per cent or over may be permitted to finish
the course in three academic years by allowing them to take each semester the overload
permitted to bright students under existing regulations of the Bureau of Private Schools.

Provided, That upon failure to maintain the general average of eighty-five per cent, students under
(b) shall automatically revert to the category of students under (a) and those under (a), upon having
any grade of failure or condition, shall automatically revert to the category of students required to
pursue the preparatory course in four years mentioned above.

The medical course shall be at least five years, including not less than eleven rotating internship in
an approved hospital, and shall consist of the following subjects:

Anatomy

Physiology

Biochemistry and Nutrition

Pharmacology

Microbiology

Parasitology

Medicine and Therapeutics

Genycology

Opthalmology, Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology

Pediatrics

Obstetrics

Surgery

Preventive Medicine and Public Health

Legal Medicine, including Medical Jurisprudence and Ethics.

Section 7. Admission requirements. The medical college may admit any student to its first year
class who has not been convicted by any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving
moral turpitude, and who presents (a) a certificate showing completion of a standard high school
course, (b) a record showing completion of a standard preparatory medical course as herein
provided, (c) a certificate of registration as medical student, (d) a certificate of good moral character
issued by two former professors in the pre-medicine course, and (e) birth certificate and marriage
certificate, if any. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to inhibit any college of medicine from
establishing, in addition to the preceding, other entrance requirements that may be deemed
admissible.
For the purposes of this Act, the term "College of Medicine" shall mean to include faculty of
medicine, institute of medicine, school of medicine or other similar institution offering a complete
medical course leading to the degree of Doctor of Medicine or its equivalent.

Every college of medicine must keep a complete record of enrollment, grades and turnover, and
must publish each year a catalogue giving the following information:

1. Date of publication

2. Calendar for the academic year

3. Faculty roll indicating whether on full time part time basis

4. Requirements of admission

5. Grading system

6. Requirements for promotion

7. Requirements for graduation

8. Medical hours per academic year by departments

9. Schedule hours per academic year by departments

10. Number of students enrolled in each class.

ARTICLE III
THE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS; REGISTRATION OF PHYSICIANS

Section 8. Prerequisite to the practice of medicine. No person shall engage in the practice of
medicine in the Philippines unless he is at least twenty-one years of age, has satisfactorily passed
the corresponding Board Examination, and is a holder of a valid Certificate of Registration duly
issued to him by the Board of Medical Examiners.

Section 9. Candidates for board examination. Candidates for Board examinations shall have the
following qualifications:

(1) He shall be a citizen of the Philippines or a citizen of any foreign country who has
submitted competent and conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by the Department of
Foreign Affairs, showing that his country's existing laws permit citizens of the Philippines to
practice medicine under the same rules and regulations governing citizens thereof;

(2) He shall be of good moral character, showing for this purpose certificate of civil status;

(3) He shall be of sound mind;

(4) He shall not have been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of any offense
involving moral turpitude; and
 (5) He shall be a holder of the degree of Doctor of Medicine or its equivalent, conferred by a
college of medicine duly recognized by the Department of Education.

Section 10. Acts constituting practice of medicine. A person shall be considered as engaged in the
practice of medicine (a) who shall, for compensation, fee, salary or reward in any form, paid to him
directly or through another, or even without the same, physical examine any person, and diagnose,
treat, operate or prescribe any remedy for any human disease, injury, deformity, physical, mental or
physical condition or any ailment, real or imaginary, regardless of the nature of the remedy or
treatment administered, prescribed or recommended; or (b) who shall, by means of signs, cards,
advertisements, written or printed matter, or through the radio, television or any other means of
communication, either offer or undertake by any means or method to diagnose, treat, operate or
prescribe any remedy for any human disease, injury, deformity, physical, mental or physical
condition; or (c) who shall use the title M.D. after his name.

Section 11. Exemptions. The preceding section shall not be construed to affect (a) any medical
student duly enrolled in an approved medical college or school under training, serving without any
professional fee in any government or private hospital, provided that he renders such service under
the direct supervision and control of a registered physician; (b) any legally registered dentist
engaged exclusively in the practice of dentistry; (c) any duly registered masseur or physiotherapist,
provided that he applies massage or other physical means upon written order or prescription of a
duly registered physician, or provided that such application of massage or physical means shall be
limited to physical or muscular development; (d) any duly registered optometrist who mechanically
fits or sells lenses, artificial eyes, limbs or other similar appliances or who is engaged in the
mechanical examination of eyes for the purpose of constructing or adjusting eye glasses, spectacles
and lenses; (e) any person who renders any service gratuitously in cases of emergency, or in places
where the services of a duly registered physician, nurse or midwife are not available; (f) any person
who administers or recommends any household remedy as per classification of existing Pharmacy
Laws; and (g) any psychologist or mental hygienist in the performance of his duties, provided such
performance is done in conjunction with a duly registered physician.

Section 12. Limited practice without any certificate of registration. Certificates of registration shall
not be required of the following persons:

(a) Physicians and surgeons from other countries called in consultation only and exclusively
in specific and definite cases, or those attached to international bodies or organization
assigned to perform certain definite work in the Philippines provided they shall limit their
practice to the specific work assigned to them and provided further they shall secure a
previous authorization from the Board of Medical Examiners.

(b) Commissioned medical officers of the United States armed forces stationed in the
Philippines while rendering service as such only for the members of the said armed forces
and within the limit of their own respective territorial jurisdiction.

(c) Foreign physicians employed as exchange professors in special branches of medicine or

surgery whose service may in the discretion of the Board of Medical Education, be
necessary.

(d) Medical students who have completed the first four years of medical course, graduates of
medicine and registered nurses who may be given limited and special authorization by the
Secretary of Health to render medical services during epidemics or national emergencies
whenever the services of duly registered physicians are not available. Such authorization
 shall automatically cease when the epidemic or national emergency is declared terminated
by the Secretary of Health.

Section 13. The Board of Medical Examiners, its composition and duties. The Board of Medical
Examiners shall be composed of six members to be appointed by the President of the Philippines
from a confidential list of not more than twelve names approved and submitted by the executive
council of the Philippine Medical Association, after due consultation with other medical associations,
during the months of April and October of each year. The chairman of the Board shall be elected
from among themselves by the member at a meeting called for the purpose. The President of the
Philippines shall fill any vacancy that may occur during any examination from the list of names
submitted by the Philippine Medical Association in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

No examiner shall handle the examinations in more than four subjects or groups of subjects as
hereinafter provided. The distribution of subject to each member shall be agreed upon at a meeting
called by the chairman for the purpose. The examination papers shall be under the custody of the
Commissioner of Civil Service or his duly authorized representative, and shall be distributed to each
member of the Board who shall correct, grade, and sign, and submit them to the said Commissioner
within one hundred twenty days from the date of the termination of the examinations.

A final meeting of the Board for the deliberation and approval of the grades shall be called by the
Commissioner of Civil Service immediately after receipt of the records from the members of the
Board of Medical Examiners. The secretary of the Board shall submit to the President of the
Philippines for approval the names of the successful candidates as having been duly qualified for
licensure in alphabetical order, without stating the ratings obtained by each.

Section 14. Qualifications of examiners. No person shall be appointed a member of the Board of
Medical Examiners unless he or she (1) is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, (2) is a duly
registered physician in the Philippines, (3) has been in the practice of medicine for at least ten years,
(4) is of good moral character and of recognized standing in the medical profession, (5) is not a
member of the faculty of any medical school and has no pecuniary interest, directly or indirectly, in
any college of medicine or in any institution where any branch of medicine is taught, at the time of
his appointment: Provided, That of the six members to be appointed, not more than two shall be
graduates of the same institution and not more than three shall be government physicians.

Section 15. Tenure of office and compensation of members. The members of the Board of Medical
Examiners shall hold office for one year: Provided, That any member may be reappointed for not
more than one year. Each member shall receive as compensation ten pesos for each candidate
examined for registration as physician, and five pesos for each candidate examined in the
preliminary or final physician examination.

The President of the Philippines, upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Civil Service ,
after due investigation, may remove any member of the Board of Medical Examiners for neglect of
duty, incompetency, or unprofessional or dishonorable conduct.

Section 16. Executive Officer and Secretary of the Board. The Secretary of the Boards of Examiners
appointed in accordance with section ten of Act Numbered Four thousand seven, as amended, shall
also be the secretary of the Board of Medical Examiners, who shall keep all the records, including
examination papers, and the minutes of the deliberations of the Board. He shall also keep a register
of all persons to whom certificates of registration has been granted; set forth the name, sec, age,
and place of birth of each, place of business, post office address, the name of the medical college or
university from which he graduated or in which he had studied, together with time spent in the study
of the profession elsewhere, the name of the country where the institution is located which had
granted to him the degree or certificate of attendance upon clinic and all lectures in medicine and
surgery, and all other degrees granted to him from institutions of learning. He shall keep an up-to-
date registration book of all duly registered physicians in the Philippines. He shall furnish copies of
all examination questions and ratings in each subject of the respective candidates in the physicians
examination, one month after the release of the list of successful examinees, to the deans of the
different colleges of medicine exclusively for the information and guidance of the faculties thereof.
This report shall be considered as restricted information. Any school which violates this rule shall be
deprived of such privilege. The secretary of the Board shall likewise keep a record of all registered
medical students. He shall keep all the records and proceedings, and issue and receive all papers in
connection with any and all complaints presented to the Board.

Section 17. Rules and regulations. The Board of Medical Examiners, with the approval of the
Commissioner of Civil Service, shall promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary for
the proper conduct of the examinations, correction of examination papers, and registration of
physicians. The Commissioner shall supervise each Board examination and enforce the said rules
and regulations. These rules and regulations shall take effect fifteen days after the date of their
publication in the Official Gazette and shall not be changed within sixty days immediately before any
examination. Such rules and regulations shall be printed and distributed for the information and
guidance of all concerned.

Section 18. Dates of examinations. The Board of Medical Examiners shall give examinations for the
registration of physicians, one in May and one in November every year, in the City of Manila or any
of its suburbs after giving not less than ten days' notice to each candidate who had filed his name
and address with the secretary of the Board.

Section 19. Fees. The secretary of the Board, under the supervision of the Commissioner of Civil
Service, shall collect from each candidate the following fees:

For registration as medical student P 5.00

For complete physician examination 75.00

For preliminary or final examination 40.00

For registration as physician 20.00

All fees paid as provided herein shall accrue to the funds of the Board of Medical Examiners and be
expended for the payment of the compensation of the members thereof. No fees other than those
provided herein shall be paid to the Board.

Section 20. Issuance of Certificate of Registration, grounds for refusal of same. The Commissioner
of Civil Service and the secretary of the Board of Medical Examiners shall sign jointly and issue
certificates of registration to those who have satisfactorily complied with the requirements of the
Board. They shall not issue a certificate of registration to any candidate who has been convicted by
a court of competent jurisdiction of any criminal offense involving moral turpitude, or has been found
guilty of immoral or dishonorable conduct after he due investigation by the Board of Medical
Examiners, or has been declared to be of unsound mind.

Section 21. Scope of examination. The examination for the registration of physicians shall consist of
the following subjects: (1) Anatomy and Histology, (2) Physiology, (3) Biochemistry, (4) Microbiology
and Parasitology, (5) Pharcology and Therapeutics, (6) Pathology, (7) Medicine, (8) Obstetrics and
Gynecology, (9) Pediatrics and Nutrition, (10) Surgery and Opthalmology, Otolaryngology and
Rhinology, (11) Preventive Medicine and Public Health, and (12) Legal Medicine, Ethics and Medical
Jurisprudence: Provided, however, That the examination questions in each subject or group of
subject shall at least be ten in number: Provided, further, That the examination questions in Medicine
shall include at least three from the following branches: Infectious diseases, Neurology,
Dermatology, Allergy, Endocrinology and Cardio-Vascular diseases: Provided, finally, That the
examination questions in Surgery shall include at least four questions from the following:
Opthalmology, Otology, Rhinology, Laryngology, Orthopedic Surgery and Anesthesiology.

The questions shall be the same for all applicants. All answers must be written either in English or
Spanish. No name of the examinee shall appear in the examination paper but the examiners shall
devise a system whereby each applicant can be identified by number only.

In order that a candidate may be deemed to have passed his examination successfully he must have
obtained a general average of seventy-five per cent without a grade lower than sixty-five per cent in
Medicine, Pediatrics and Nutrition, Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Preventive Medicine and Public
Health, and no grade lower than fifty per cent in the rest of the subjects.

The preliminary examinations shall comprise of the following subjects:

(1) Gross Anatomy and Histology

(2) Physiology

(3) Biochemistry

(4) Microbiology and Parasitology

Section 22. Administrative investigations. In addition to the functions provided for in the preceding
sections, the Board of Medical Examiners shall perform the following duties: (1) to administer oath to
physicians who qualified in the examination; (2) to study the conditions affecting the practice of
medicine in all parts of the Philippines; (3) to exercise the powers conferred upon it by this article
with the view of maintaining the ethical and professional standards of the medical profession; (4) to
subpoena or subpoena duces tecum witnesses for all purposes required in the discharge of its
duties; and (5) to promulgate, with the approval of the Commissioner of Civil Service, such rules and
regulations as it may deem necessary for the performance of its duties in harmony with the
provisions of this Act and necessary for the proper practice of medicine in the Philippines.

Administrative investigations may be conducted by not less than four members of the Board of
Medical Examiners; otherwise the proceedings shall be considered void. The existing rules of
evidence shall be observed during all administrative investigations. The Board may disapprove
applications for examination or registration, reprimand erring physicians, or suspend or revoke
registration certificates, if the respondents are found guilty after due investigations.

Section 23. Procedure and rules. Within five days after the filling of written charges under oath, the
respondent physician shall be furnished a copy thereof, without requiring him or her to answer the
same, and the Board shall conduct the investigation within five days after the receipt of such copy by
the respondent. The investigation shall be completed as soon as practicable.

Section 24. Grounds for reprimand, suspension or revocation of registration certificate. Any of the
following shall be sufficient ground for reprimanding a physician, or for suspending or revoking a
certificate of registration as physician:
 (1) Conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction of any criminal offense involving moral
turpitude;

(2) Immoral or dishonorable conduct;

(3) Insanity;

(4) Fraud in the acquisition of the certificate of registration;

(5) Gross negligence, ignorance or incompetence in the practice of his or her profession
resulting in an injury to or death of the patient;

(6) Addiction to alcoholic beverages or to any habit forming drug rendering him or her
incompetent to practice his or her profession, or to any form of gambling;

(7) False or extravagant or unethical advertisements wherein other things than his name,
profession, limitation of practice, clinic hours, office and home address, are mentioned.

(8) Performance of or aiding in any criminal abortion;

(9) Knowingly issuing any false medical certificate;

(10) Issuing any statement or spreading any news or rumor which is derogatory to the
character and reputation of another physician without justifiable motive;

(11) Aiding or acting as a dummy of an unqualified or unregistered person to practice

medicine;

(12) Violation of any provision of the Code of Ethics as approved by the Philippine Medical
Association.

Refusal of a physician to attend a patient in danger of death is not a sufficient ground for revocation
or suspension of his registration certificate if there is a risk to the physician's life.

Section 25. Rights of respondents. The respondent physician shall be entitled to be represented by
counsel or be heard by himself or herself, to have a speedy and public hearing, to confront and to
cross-examine witnesses against him or her, and to all other rights guaranteed by the Constitution
and provided for in the Rules of Court.

Section 26. Appeal from judgment. The decision of the Board of Medical Examiners shall
automatically become final thirty days after the date of its promulgation unless the respondent,
during the same period, has appealed to the Commissioner of Civil Service and later to the Office of
the President of the Philippines. If the final decision is not satisfactory, the respondent may ask for a
review of the case, or may file in court a petition for certiorari.

Section 27. Reinstatement. After two years, the Board may order the reinstatement of any
physicians whose certificate of registration has been revoked, if the respondent has acted in an
exemplary manner in the community wherein he resides and has not committed any illegal, immoral
or dishonorable act.
 ARTICLE IV
PENAL AND OTHER PROVISIONS

Section 28. Penalties. Any person found guilty of "illegal practice of medicine" shall be punished by
a fine of not less than one thousand pesos nor more than ten thousand pesos with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, or by imprisonment of not less than one year nor more than five
years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

Section 29. Injunctions. The Board of Medical Examiners may file an action to enjoin any person
illegally practicing medicine from the performance of any act constituting practice of medicine if the
case so warrants until the necessary certificate therefore is secured. Any such person who, after
having been so enjoined, continues in the illegal practice of medicine shall be punished for contempt
of court. The said injunction shall not relieve the person practicing medicine without certificate of
registration from criminal prosecution and punishment as provided in the preceding section.

Section 30. Appropriation. To carry out the provisions of this Act, there is hereby appropriated, out
of any funds in the National Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of twenty thousand pesos.

Section 31. Repealing clause. All Acts, executive orders, administrative orders, rules and
regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are repealed or modified
accordingly.

Section 32. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect upon its approval: Provided, That if it is approved
during the time when examinations for physicians are held, it shall take effect immediately after the
said examinations: Provided, further, That section six of this Act shall take effect at the beginning of
the academic year nineteen hundred sixty to nineteen hundred sixty-one, and the first paragraph of
section seven shall take effect four years thereafter.

Approved: June 20, 1959

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8981

AN ACT MODERNIZING THE PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION, REPEALING FOR

THE PURPOSE PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NUMBERED TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY-THREE,
ENTITLED "CREATING THE PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION AND
PRESCRIBING ITS POWERS AND FUNCTIONS," AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines Congress assembled:

Section 1. Title – This Act shall be called the "PRC Modernization Act of 2000."

Section 2. Statement of Policy – The State recognizes the important role of professionals in nation-
building and, towards this end, promotes the sustained development of a reservoir of professionals
whose competence has been determined by honest and credible licensure examinations and whose
standards of professional service and practice are internationally recognized and considered world-
class brought about the regulatory measures, programs and activities that foster professional growth
and advancement.

Section 3. Professional Regulation Commission – There is hereby created a three-man commission

to be known as the Professional Regulation Commission, hereinafter referred to as the Commission,
which shall be attached to the office of the President for general direction and coordination.

Section 4. Composition – The Commission shall be headed by one (1) full-time Chairperson and
two (2) full-time Commissioners, all to be appointed by the President for a term of seven (7) years
without reappointment to start from the time they assume office. Appointments to a vacancy that
occurs before the expiration of the term of a Commissioner shall cover only the unexpired term of
the immediate predecessor. At the expiration of the Chairperson, the most senior of the
Commissioners shall temporarily assume and perform the duties and functions of the Chairperson
until a permanent Chairperson is appointed by the President.

The Chairperson or Commissioner shall be at least forty (40) years of age, holding a valid certificate
of registration/professional license and a valid professional identification card or a valid certificate of
competency issued by the Commission or a valid professional license issued by any government
agency, familiar with the principles and methods of professional regulation and/or licensing and has
had at least five (5) years of executive or management experience: Provided, That, one (1) of the
Commissioners must be a past Chairperson/member of a Professional Regulatory Board.

Section 5. Exercise of Powers and Functions of the Commission – The Chairperson of the
Commission, and the Commissioners as members thereof shall sit and act as a body to exercise
general administrative, executive and policy-making functions of the Commission. The Commission
shall establish and maintain a high standard of admission to the practice of all professions and at all
times ensure and safeguard the integrity of all licensure examinations.

The Chairperson shall act as the presiding and chief executive officer of the Commission. As
presiding officer, he/she shall preside over the meetings of the Commission sitting as a collegial
body. As chief executive officer of the Commission, he/she shall be responsible for the
implementation of the policies and the programs adopted by the Commission for the general
administration of the Commission. He/she shall perform such other activities which are necessary for
the effective exercise of the powers, functions and responsibilities of the Commission.

Section 6. Compensation and Other Benefits – The Chairperson shall receive compensation and
allowances equivalent to that of a Department Secretary while the Commissioners shall receive
compensation and allowances equivalent to that of an Undersecretary. The Chairperson and the
members of the Commission shall be entitled to retirement benefits provided under Republic Act
Numbered Fifteen Hundred and Sixty Eight, as amended by Republic Act Numbered Three
Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Five.

Section 7. Powers, Functions and Responsibilities of the Commission – The powers, functions, and
responsibilities of the Commission are as follows:

(a) To administer, implement and enforce the regulatory policies of the national government
with respect to the regulation and licensing of the various professions and occupations under
its jurisdiction including the enhancement and maintenance of professional and occupational
standards and ethics and the enforcement of the rules and regulations relative thereto:

(b) To perform any and all acts, enter into contracts, make such rules and regulations and
issue such orders and other administrative issuance as may be necessary in the execution
and implementation of its functions and the improvement of its services;

(c) To review, revise, and approve resolutions, embodying policies promulgated by the
Professional Regulatory Boards in the exercise of their powers and functions or in
implementing the laws regulating their respective professions and other official actions on
non-ministerial matters within their respective jurisdictions;

(d) To administer and conduct the licensure examinations of the various regulatory boards in
accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission; determine and
fix the places and dates of examinations; use publicly or privately owned buildings and
facilities for examination purposes; conduct more than one (1) licensure
examination: Provided, That, when there are two (2) or more examinations given in a year, at
least one (1) examinations shall be held on weekdays (Monday to Friday): Provided, further,
That, if only one (1) examination is given in a year, this shall be held only on
weekdays: Provided, finally, That, the Commission is also authorized to require the
completion of a refresher course where the examinee has failed to pass three (3) times,
except as otherwise provided by law; approve the results of examinations and the release of
the same; adopt measures to preserve the integrity and inviolability of licensure
examinations; appoint supervisors and room watchers from among the employees of the
government and/or private individuals with baccalaureate degrees, who have been trained by
the Commission for the purpose and who shall be entitled to a reasonable daily allowance for
every examination day actually attended, to be determined and fixed by the Commission;
publish the list of successful examinees; provide schools, colleges and universities, public
and private, offering courses for licensure examinations, with copies of sample test questions
on examinations recently conducted by the Commission and copies of the syllabi or terms of
specifications of subjects for licensure examinations; and impose the penalty of suspension
or prohibition from taking licensure examinations to any examinee charged and found guilty
of violating the rules and regulations governing the conduct of licensure examinations
promulgated by the Commission;

(e) To admit the successful examinees to the practice of the profession or occupation; cause
the entry of their names on its registry book and computerized database; issue certificates of
registration/professional license, bearing the registrant’s name, picture, and registration
number, signed by all the members of the Board concerned and the Chairperson, with the
official seal of the Board and the Commission affixed thereto which certificate shall be the
authority to practice; and at the option of the professional concerned, ministerially issue the
professional identification card, to be used solely for the purpose of identification, upon
payment of the appropriate amount: Provided, That, marine deck and marine engineer
officers shall also be issued endorsement certificates exclusively by the Commission
pursuant to the 1978 and 1995 Standards of Training, Certification and Watch-keeping
(STCW) Convention, to the exclusion of any other government agency, Section 1(2) of
Executive Order No. 149, Series of 1999 and provisions of other existing laws, executive
orders, administrative issuance/regulations to the contrary notwithstanding: Provided, further,
That, once a certificate of registration/professional license, or certificate of competency, in
the case of marine deck and engine officers are issued, this cannot be withdrawn, cancelled,
revoked, or suspended except for just cause as may be provided by law after due notice and
hearing;

(f) To have custody of all the records of the various Boards, including examination papers,
minutes of deliberation, records of administrative cases and investigations and examination
results for control and disposition;

(g) To determine and fix the amount of fees to be charged and collected for examination,
registration, registration without examination, professional identification card, certification,
docket, appeal, replacement, accreditation, including surcharges and other fees not specified
under the provisions of Republic Act Numbered Four Hundred Sixty Five as amended by
Republic Act Numbered Sixty Five Hundred and Eleven or to charge and collect reasonable
fees at the rates higher than the rates provided thereunder subject to the approval by the
Office of the President.

(h) To appoint subject to the Civil Service laws, rules, and regulations, officials and
employees of the Commission necessary for the effective performance of its functions and
responsibilities; prescribe their duties and fix their compensation subject to the provisions of
Republic Act Numbered Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Eight and allowances
including other fringe benefits; and to assign and/or reassign personnel as the exigency of
the service requires subject to the Civil Service laws, rules and regulations; and to organize
or reorganize the structure of the Commission; and create or abolish positions or change the
designation of existing positions in accordance with a staffing pattern prepared by it and
approved by the Office of the President upon the recommendation of the Department of
Budget and Management (DBM) to meet the changing conditions or as the need
arises: Provided, That, such changes shall not affect the employment status of the
incumbents, reduce their ranks and/or salaries nor shall result in their separation from the
service;

(i) To submit and recommend to the President of the Philippines the names of
licensed/registered professionals for appointment as members of the various Professional
Regulatory Boards from among those nominated to fill up vacancies pursuant to the
provisions of Executive Order No. 496, Series of 1991;

(j) Upon recommendation of the Professional Regulatory Board concerned, to approve the
registration of and authorize the issuance of a certificate of registration/license and
professional identification card with or without examination to a foreigner who is registered
under the laws of his state or country and whose certificate of registration issued therein has
not been suspended or revoked: Provided, That, the requirements for the registration or
licensing in said foreign state or country are substantially the same as those required and
contemplated by the laws of the Philippines and that the laws of such foreign state or country
allow the citizens of the Philippines to practice the profession on the same basis and grant
the same privileges as those enjoyed by the subjects or citizens of such foreign state or
country: Provided, further, That, the Commission may, upon recommendation of the Board
concerned, authorize the issuance of a certificate of registration/license or a special
temporary permit to foreign professionals who desire to practice their professions in the
country under reciprocity and other international agreements; consultants in foreign-funded,
joint venture or foreign-assisted projects of the government, employees of Philippine or
foreign private firms or institutions pursuant to law, or health professionals engaged in
humanitarian mission for a limited period of time: Provided, finally, That agencies,
organizations or individuals whether public or private, who secure he services of a foreign
professional authorized by law to practice in the Philippines for reasons aforementioned,
shall be responsible for securing a special permit from the Professional Regulation
Commission (PRC) and the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), pursuant to PRC
and DOLE rules:

(k) To authorize any officer of the Commission to administer oaths:

(l) To supervise foreign nations who are authorized by existing laws to practice their
professions either as holders of a certificate of registration and a professional identification
card or a temporary special permit in the Philippines; to ensue that the terms and conditions
for their practice or of their employment are strictly complied with; to require the hiring or
employing government agency or private entity/institution to secure a temporary special
permit from the concerned Board subject to approval by the Commission and to file a
criminal complaint against the head of the government agency or officers of the said private
entity/institution, who shall be liable under the penalty provided for in the concerned
professional regulatory law or the penalty imposed pursuant to this Act, when the
professional was hired and allowed to practice his/her profession without permit; to file upon
due process request for deportation with the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID);
and to supervise professionals who were former citizens of the Philippines and who had
been registered and issued a certificate of registration and a professional identification card
prior to their naturalization as foreign citizens, who may, while in the country on a visit,
sojourn or permanent residence, practice their profession: Provided, That, prior to the
practice of their profession they shall have first been issued a special permit and updated
professional identification card by the Board concerned subject to approval by the
Commission and upon payment of the permit and annual registration fees;

(m) To monitor the performance of schools in licensure examinations and publish the results
thereof in a newspaper of national circulation;

(n) To adopt and institute a comprehensive rating system for universities, colleges, and
training institutes based on the passing ratio and overall performance of students in board
examinations;

(o) To exercise administrative supervision over the various professional regulatory boards
and its members;

(p) To adopt and promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary to effectively
implement policies with respect to the regulation and practice of the professions;

(q) To implement the program for the full computerization of all licensure examinations given
by the various professional regulatory boards including the registration of professionals not
later than the year 2003 and other operations of the Commission;

(r) To investigate and decide administrative matters involving officers and employees under
the jurisdiction of the Commission;
 (s) To investigate motu proprio or upon the filing of a verified complaint, any member of the
Professional Regulatory Boards for neglect of duty, incompetence, unprofessional, unethical,
immoral or dishonorable conduct, commission of irregularities in the licensure examinations
which taint or impugn the integrity and authenticity of the results of the said examinations
and, if found guilty, to revoke or suspend their certificates of registration and professional
licenses/identification cards and to recommend to the President of the Philippines their
suspension or removal from office as the case may be;

(t) To issue summons, subpoena and subpoena duces tecum in connection with the
investigation of cases against officials and employees of the Commission and the members
of the Professional Regulatory Boards;

(u) To hold in contempt in erring party or person only upon application with a court of
competent jurisdiction;

(v) To call upon or request any department, instrumentality, office, bureau, institution or
agency of the government including local government units to render such assistance as it
may require, or to coordinate or cooperate in order to carry out, enforce or implement the
professional regulatory policies of the government or any program or activity it may
undertake pursuant to the provisions of this Act;

(w) To initiate an investigation, upon complaint under oath by an aggrieved party, of any
person, whether a private individual or professional, local or foreign, who practices the
regulated profession or occupation without being authorized by law, or without being
registered with and licensed by the concerned regulatory board and issued the
corresponding license/professional identification card or temporary or special permit, or who
commits any of the prohibited acts provided in the regulatory laws of the various professions,
which acts are criminal in nature, and if the evidence so warrants, to forward the records of
the case to the office of the city or provincial prosecutor for the filing of the corresponding
information in court by the lawyers of the legal services of the Commission who may
prosecute said case/s upon being deputized by the Secretary of Justice;

(x) To prepare an annual report of accomplishments on the programs, projects and activities
of the Commission during the year for submission to Congress after the close of its calendar
year and make appropriate recommendations on issues and/or problems affecting the
Commission, the Professional Regulatory Board, and the various professions under its
jurisdiction; and

(y) To perform such other functions and duties as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this Act, the various professional regulatory laws, decrees, executive orders
and other administrative issuance.

Section 8. Regional Offices – The Commission is hereby authorized to create regional offices as
may be necessary to carry out their functions mandated under this Act.

Section 9. Powers, Functions and Responsibilities of the Various Professional Regulatory Boards –
The various, professional regulatory boards shall retain the following powers, functions and
responsibilities:

(a) To regulate the practice of the professions in accordance with the provisions of their
respective professional regulatory laws;
(b) To monitor the conditions affecting the practice of the profession or occupation under
their respective jurisdictions and whenever necessary, adopt such measures as may be
deemed proper for the enhancement of the profession or occupation and/or the maintenance
of high professional, ethical and technical standards, and for this purpose the members of
the Board duly authorized by the Commission with deputized employees of the Commission,
may conduct ocular inspection in industrial, mechanical, electrical or chemical plants or
establishments, hospitals, clinics, laboratories, testing facilities, mines and quarries, other
engineering facilities and in the case of schools, in coordination with the Commission on
Higher Education (CHED);

(c) To hear and investigate cases arising from violations of their respective laws, the rules
and regulations promulgated thereunder and their Codes of Ethics and, for this purpose, may
issue summons, subpoena and subpoena duces tecum to alleged violators and/or witnesses
to compel their attendance in such investigations or hearings: Provided, That, the decision of
the Professional Regulatory Board shall, unless appealed to the Commission, become final
and executory after fifteen (15) days from receipt of notice of judgment or decision;

(d) To delegate the hearing or investigation of administrative cases filed before them except
in cases where the issue or question involved strictly concerns the practice of the profession
or occupation, in which case, the hearing shall be presided over by at least one (1) member
of the Board concerned assisted by a Legal or Hearing Officer of the Commission;

(e) To conduct, through the Legal Officers of the Commission, summary proceedings on
minor violations of their respective regulatory laws, violations of the rules and regulations
issued by the boards to implement their respective laws, including violations of the general
instructions to examinees committed by examinees, and render summary judgment thereon
which shall, unless appealed to the Commission, become final and executory after fifteen
(15) days from receipt of notice of judgment or decision;

(f) Subject to final approval by the Commission, to recommend registration without

examination and the issuance of corresponding certificate of registration and professional
identification card;

(g) After due process, to suspend, revoke or reissue, reinstate certificate of registration or
licenses for causes provided by law;

(h) To prepare, adopt and issue the syllabi or tables of specifications of the subjects for
examinations in consultation with the academe; determine and prepare the questions for the
licensure examinations which shall strictly be within the scope of the syllabus or table of
specifications of the subject for examination; score and rate the examination papers with the
name and signature of the Board member concerned appearing thereon and submit the
results in all subjects duly signed by the members of the Board to the Commission within ten
(10) days from the last day of examination unless extended by the Commission for justifiable
cause/s; and subject to the approval by the Commission, determine the appropriate passing
general average rating in an examination if not provided for in the law regulating the
profession; and

(i) To prepare an annual report of accomplishments on programs, projects and activities of

the Board during the year for submission to the Commission after the close of each calendar
year and make appropriate recommendations on issues or problems affecting the profession
to the Commission.
Section 10. Compensation of the Members of the Professional Regulatory Boards – The members
of the Professional Regulatory Boards shall receive compensation equivalent to, at least, two salary
grades lower than the salary grade of the Commissioners: Provided, That the Chairperson of the
Regulatory Board shall receive a monthly compensation of two steps higher than the members of the
Board, and: Provided, further, That they shall be entitled to other allowances and benefits provided
under existing laws.

Section 11. Person to Teach Subjects for Licensure Examination on all Professions – All subjects
for licensure examinations shall be taught by persons who are holders of valid certificates of
registration and valid professional licenses of the profession and who comply with the other
requirements of the CHED.

Section 12. Assistance of Law Enforcement Agency – Any law enforcement agency shall, upon call
or request of the Commission or of any Professional Regulatory Board, render assistance in
enforcing the regulatory law of the profession including the rules and regulations promulgated
thereunder by prosecuting the violators thereof in accordance with law and the rules of court.

Section 13. Appropriations – The amount necessary to carry out the initial implementation of this Act
shall be charged against the current year’s appropriations of the Professional Regulation
Commission. Thereafter, such sums as may be necessary for the continued implementation of this
Act shall be included in the succeeding General Appropriations Act.

Section 14. Authority to Use Income – In addition to the annual appropriations of the Commission
provided under the Annual General Appropriations Act, the Commission is hereby authorized to use
its income not exceeding the amount of Forty-five million pesos (P45,000,000.00) a year for a period
of five (5) years after the effectivity of this Act to implement the program for full computerization of
the operations of the Commission, subject to the usual accounting and auditing requirements.

Section 15. Penalties for Manipulation and Other Corrupt Practices in the Conduct of Professional
Examinations –

(a) Any person who manipulates or rigs licensure examination results, secretly informs or
makes known licensure examination questions prior to the conduct of the examination or
tampers with the grades in professional licensure examinations shall, upon conviction, be
punished by imprisonment of not less than six (6) years and one (1) day to not more than
twelve (12) years or a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) to not more
than One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) or both such imprisonment and fine at the
discretion of the court.

(b) In case the offender is an officer or employee of the Commission or a member of the
regulatory board, he/she shall be removed from office and shall suffer the penalty of
perpetual absolute disqualification from public office to addition to the penalties prescribed in
the preceding section of this Act;

(c) The penalty of imprisonment ranging from four (4) years and one (1) day to six (6) years
or a fine ranging from Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) to not more than Forty-nine
thousand pesos (P49,000.00), or both imprisonment and fine at the discretion of the court,
shall be imposed upon the accomplices. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from two (2)
years and one (1) day to four (4) years or a fine ranging from Five thousand pesos
(P5,000.00) to not more than Nineteen thousand pesos (P19,000.00), or both imprisonment
and fine at the discretion of the court, shall be imposed upon the accessories.
Section 16. Penalties for Violation of Section 7 – Subparagraph (1) by Heads of Government
Agencies or Officers of Private Entities/Institutions – Any head of a government agency or officer(s)
of a private firm/institution who violates Section 7 – subpar. (1) of this Act shall be punished by
imprisonment of not less than six (6) months and one (1) day to not more than six (6) years, or a fine
of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) to not more than Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00) or both at the discretion of the court.

Section 17. Implementing Rules and Regulations – Within ninety (90) days after the approval of this
Act, the Professional Regulation Commission, together with representatives of the various
Professional Regulatory Boards and accredited professional organizations, the DBM, and the CHED
shall prepare and promulgate the necessary rules and regulations needed to implement the
provisions of this Act.

Section 18. Transitory Provisions – The incumbent Commissioner and two (2) incumbent Associate
Commissioners shall serve as Chairperson and Commissioners respectively under the terms for
which they have been appointed without need of new appointments. The incumbent Executive
Director shall likewise serve as Assistant Commissioner without need of new appointment.

Section 19. Separability Clause – If any provision of this Act or the application of such provision to
any person or circumstances is declared invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act or
application of such provisions to other persons or circumstance shall not be affected by such
declaration.

Section 20. Repealing Clause – Republic Act. No. 546, Presidential Decree No. 223, as amended
by Presidential Decree No. 657, Republic Act No. 5181, and Executive Order No. 266, Series of
1995 are hereby repealed. Section 23 (h) of Republic Act No. 7836, Section 4 (m & s). Section 23 of
Republic Act No. 7920, and Section 29 of Republic Act No. 8050, insofar as it requires completion of
the requirements of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) as a condition for the renewal of
the license are hereby repealed. All other laws, orders, rules and regulations or resolutions and all
part/s thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or amended
accordingly.

Section 21. Effectivity – This Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following its publication in
the Official Gazette or in two (2) newspapers of general circulation, whichever is earlier.

Approved: December 05, 2000

(Sgd.)JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA

President of the Philippines

 REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6511

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6511 - AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NUMBERED FOUR HUNDRED
SIXTY-FIVE ENTITLED "AN ACT TO STANDARDIZE THE EXAMINATION AND REGISTRATION
FEES CHARGED BY THE NATIONAL EXAMINING BOARDS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES"

Section 1. Sections one, two, three, four, five and six of Republic Act Numbered Four hundred sixty-
five are hereby amended to read as follows:

"Section 1. The provisions of existing law to the contrary notwithstanding, applicants for any of the
licensure examinations conducted by any of the boards under the Office of the Boards of Examiners
shall pay examination fees as follows;

(a) One hundred pesos:

1) Accountants

2) Agricultural Engineers

3) Architects

4) Chemical Engineers

5) Civil Engineers

6) Customs Brokers

7) Dentists, except Dental Hygienists

8) Electrical Engineers except Master Electricians

9) Electronics and Communications Engineers

10) Foresters

11) Geodetic Engineers

12) Licensing Contractors

13) Master Marine Officers, except Chief, Second, Third Mates, Major, Minor or Harbor Bay Lake-
River Patrons

14) Mechanical Engineers except Certified Plant Mechanics

15) Mining Engineers

16) Physicians except examinees for physician's preliminary examinations

17) Sanitary Engineers

18) Chief Marine Engineers

(b) Seventy-five pesos:

1) Chemists
2) Second Steam and Motor Engineers

3) Dietitians

4) Geologists

5) Medical Technologists

6) Naval Architects and Marine Engineers

7) Nurses

8) Optometrists

9) Pharmacists

10) Social Workers

11) Sugar Technologists

12) Veterinarians

13) Midwives

14) Chief Mates and Major Patrons

15) Master Plumbers or Plumbing Engineers

(c) Fifty pesos:

1) Bay-River-Lake Motor Engineers

2) Harbor-Bay-River-Lake Patrons

3) Minor Patrons

4) Therapists

5) Master Electricians

6) Examinees for physician's preliminary and final examinations

7) Dental Hygienists

8) Certified Plant Mechanics

9) Second and Third Mates

10) Third and Fourth Steam and Motor Engineers

Provided, that in cases where removal examinations are allowed, the examination fee shall fifty per
centum of the original fee prescribed under classifications A, B and C provided for under this section.

"Sec. 2. Every applicant for registration in any of the professions or occupations under regulation by
the Office of the Boards of Examiners who passed the corresponding examination shall pay a
registration fee of fifty pesos for those falling under class (a); forty pesos for those under class (b);
and thirty pesos for those under class (c) provided in section one, except those in the marine
examinations who are registered by the Philippine Coast Guard. An applicant for registration without
examination shall pay also the amount corresponding to the examination fee of the profession or
occupation applied plus the registration fee herein prescribed: provided, that detailmen shall pay
twenty pesos, mine or quarry foreman and chemical technician, thirty pesos: provided, further, that
applicants for registration who qualified in the examination given prior to the approval of this Act, shall
pay the corresponding registration fee heretofore prescribed.

"Sec. 3. Every practicing professional or practitioner of any of the occupations regulated by the Office
of the Boards of Examiners shall pay an annual registration fee of five pesos: provided, that major or
minor patrons, second, third, or fourth motor or steam engineers, harbor-river-lake patrons, bay-river-
lake-motor engineers, master electricians, certified plant mechanics, master plumbers, midwives,
chemical technicians and mine or quarry foremen shall pay two pesos: provided, further, that licensed
contractors and detailmen shall be exempt from the payment of the annual registration fee as they are
required to renew their licenses or registrations annually. Failure to pay the annual registration fee on
or before January twenty of the year next following the calendar year in which it is due, shall bear a
surcharge of twenty per centum for each calendar year in which payment has not been made: provided,
that after the lapse of five continuous years from the year it was last paid if the annual registration fee
has never been paid, the delinquent's certificate of registration shall be considered suspended and his
name shall be dropped from the annual roster for not having been good standing and may be reinstated
only upon application and payment of the fee herein provided for registration without examination.
When a registered practitioner desires to stop practicing his profession, he shall inform the board
concerned in writing within one year from the time he stopped practicing in order to exempt him from
the payment of the annual registration fee: provided, that when he intends to resume the practice of
his professions, he shall likewise inform the board concerned in writing and pay the annual registration
fee for the current year without any surcharge and his name shall be reinstated in the annual roster.

The annual registration card, at least for the calendar year immediately preceding, shall be presented
to the collection agent of the Bureau of Internal Revenue when paying his professional tax and the
registration number, date of issuance and the year shown on the card shall be indicated on the official
receipt as evidence that the payor is authorized by law to practice the profession.

"Sec. 4. Every applicant for duplicate certificate of registration shall pay a fee of twenty-five pesos
and for certifications or true copies of records with the official seal of the office or of the board
concerned, two pesos for the first one hundred words and in excess thereof fifty centavos for every
one hundred words or a fraction thereof.

"Sec. 5. All examination, registration and other fees shall be paid to the collecting officer of the Office
of the Boards of Examiners which shall be deposited in a special trust account to constitute the
professional regulation special fund and which shall be expended solely for the operational expenses of
the Office of the Boards of Examiners, for compensation of members of the board and salaries of
officials and employees including the hiring of temporary personnel as the exigencies of the service
require, for the purchase, acquisition and improvement of equipment, furniture, and fixtures, motor
vehicles, sites and construction of building for office spaces and examination halls, for conducting
research to keep the office abreast with recent trends in regulation of professions and occupations and
in all other matters that would enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the office.

"Sec. 6. Each Chairman and member of the Board of Examiners, whether a government employee or
not, shall receive as compensation a fee not exceeding fifteen pesos per capita of the candidates
examined or registered without examination, and a per diem not exceeding ten (P10.00) pesos for
each day of attendance in administrative investigations and ocular inspections lasting not less than one
hour at a time: provided, that the total compensation of any Chairman or member shall not be less
than three thousand six hundred pesos, but not more than twenty-four thousand pesos for participating
in all examinations given by their respective board during the fiscal year. Any member whose term
expires before the end of the fiscal year shall receive only the compensation equivalent to the number
of candidates examined and/or registered without examination wherein he last participated or at the
rate of five hundred pesos per month computed from the beginning of fiscal year until the last day of
his term of office or until his successor shall have been appointed and qualified, whichever is higher:
provided, that the Chairman or member whose term expires before the result of the examination he
last participated in his released shall be allowed to continue correcting his examination papers and to
perform his other duties relative to the release of the results thereof until he shall signed the certificate
of registration of those who have qualified in the examination or were registered without examination,
without additional compensation except those allowed herein, and that the full compensation due him
shall be paid only after he shall have been cleared of all his responsibilities."

Sec. 2. All laws, executive orders, administrative orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

Sec. 3. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Approved: July 1, 1972

 Allowing Former Filipino
Professionals to Practice Their
Respective Professions in the
Philippines
Presidential Decree No. 541
President of the Philippines
16 September 1974

WHEREAS, a considerable number of Filipino professionals have, with the passage of time,
gone to other countries to pursue further studies and/or take up specialized studies in their
chosen fields of endeavor while others emigrated to other lands in search of better job
opportunities;

WHEREAS, since their departure from the Philippines some of these professionals have
become naturalized citizens of their host countries so that they are now barred from the
practice of their profession in our country;

WHEREAS, a considerable number of these erstwhile Filipino professionals are now desirous
to come home under the Balikbayan Program and, while here, would like to serve our people
or share their advanced knowledge and expertise with their local professional colleagues;

WHEREAS, for the sake of faster national development our government is now trying to
attract these erstwhile Filipino professionals to return and reside permanently in the
Philippines so that they can provide the talent and expertise urgently needed by the
homeland;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue of

the powers vested in me by the Constitution, do hereby decree and order the following:
 SECTION 1. The provisions of all existing laws, rules and regulations, decrees, orders, and
instructions to the contrary notwithstanding, professionals who were formerly citizens of the
Philippines and who have previously passed licensure examinations in the Philippines for the
practice of their profession, may, while in this country on a visit, sojourn or permanent
residence, practice their profession: Provided, That they are professional practitioners of
good standing prior to their departure from the Philippines and in their adopted country:
Provided further, That prior to the practice of their profession they shall have first registered
with the Professional license fee; and Provided finally, That they shall pay the corresponding
income tax due on all incomes realized by them in the practice of their respective professions
in the Philippines.

SECTION 2. The Professional Regulations Commission shall promulgate the necessary

rules and regulations to implement and carry out the purposes of this Decree.

SECTION 3. This Decree shall take effect immediately.

Section 14. The sustained development of a reservoir of national talents consisting of
Filipino scientists, entrepreneurs, professionals, managers, high-level technical
manpower and skilled workers and craftsmen in all fields shall be promoted by the
State. The State shall encourage appropriate technology and regulate its transfer for the
national benefit
















MARQUEZ vs THE BOARD OF MEDICAL
EXAMINERS G.R. No. L-24119, August 8, 1925
Fact:

The petitioner is a graduate of the Chicago Medical College, having received the degree of
M.D. from said institution on June 8, of the year 1922. However, the said college has been
classified as a Class C medical college by the National Medical State Board of the United
States after his graduation. For this reason the respondents, in accordance with the
regulations of the board now in effect, have denied the requisite standing to said
institution and excluded petitioner. In the argument for the petitioner it is admitted that
under Act No. 3111, and the regulations now in force, the petitioner is disqualified to take
the examinations; but it is pointed out that at the time he began and even when he
conducted his course in the Chicago Medical School, said institution was still recognized
as a reputable medical institution; and the question submitted is whether the petitioner’s
case should be governed by the law and regulations in force at the time of his enrollment
in and graduation from the Chicago Medical School, or by those in force at the time he
filed his application for admission, on or about September 26, 1924. It is submitted for
the petitioner that his case should be governed by the law and regulations at the time of
his graduation. To hold otherwise, it is insisted, is to make the law retroactive in effect
and to do irreparable damage to the petitioner, who has pursued his work in the
institution referred to in good faith, believing that said school had the status necessary to
qualify him from examination. Hence this case.

Issue:

Whether the Board of Medical Examiners may make law with retroactive effect?

Held:

Yes, the question whether a medical institution is “a reputable medical school,” in the
sense intended by the law, is vested in the Board of Medical Examiners, and although the
action taken by them may conceivably, in isolated cases, result in hardship, nevertheless
the interests of the public require that the board should be free to exercise its judgment
and discretion without reference to the effect of the determination of the question in
particular instances. There can in the nature of things be no vested right in an existing
law, which would preclude its change or repeal. No one who has commenced preparation
in a particular institution has any inchoate right on account of that fact. If the law were
otherwise upon this point, it would be impossible for the Board of Medical Examiners to
give effect to the knowledge which they from time to time acquire as to the standing of
medical schools; and an intending physician, upon matriculating in a particular college,
takes upon himself the risk of changes that may be made in the standing of the institution
by the board.
 EN BANC

G.R. No. L-25135 September 21, 1968

PHILIPPINE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, Petitioner, vs. BOARD OF

MEDICAL EXAMINERS and JOSE MA. TORRES, Respondents.

Seva-Albert-Vergara and Julio V. Presbitero for petitioner.

Regino Hermosisima, Jr., for respondent Jose Ma. Torres.
Solicitor General for respondent Board of Medical Examiners.

CONCEPCION, C.J.: chanrobles virtual law library

Original action for certiorari and mandamus, against the

Board of Medical Examiners and Jose Ma. Torres, to annul a
resolution of the former and a certificate issued by the same
authorizing the latter to practice medicine in the Philippines without
examination. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

The facts are not disputed. Jose Ma. Torres - hereinafter

referred to as respondent - is a Spanish subject and a member of
the Missionary Sons of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, otherwise
known as the Claretian Missionaries. Having graduated from the
University of Barcelona, Spain, with the degree of Licentiate in
Medicine and Surgery, he is entitled, under the laws of Spain, to
practice medicine and surgery throughout the territory thereof. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

On January 21, 1955, respondent was granted special

authority to practice medicine in Lamitan, Basilan City, where he
resides, pursuant to Section 771(e) of the Revised Administrative
Code reading:

SEC. 771. Persons exempt from registration. - Registration

shall not be required of the following classes of persons: . . . chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library
 (e) In cases of epidemic or in municipalities where there is
no legally qualified practicing physician, or when the circumstances
require it, in the interest of the public health, the Director of Health
may issue special authorizations, to all medical students who have
completed the first three years of their studies, or to persons who
have qualified in medicine, and to graduate or registered nurses,
who may request it.

This authority was revoked, on November 8, 1960, by the

then Secretary of Health, upon the ground that "the conditions
under which it was granted no longer obtained in Lamitan Basilan
City, there being enough practising physicians in that locality." Said
officer restored the authority on December 19, 1960, to be revoked
again, on January 22, 1963. It was renewed once more, on
September 1, 1963, and, once again, it was revoked on February
10, 1964, upon the recommendation of the Board of Medical
Examiners - hereinafter referred to as the Board. On motion for
reconsideration filed by respondent, the Board issued, on April 6,
1965, its Resolution No. 25, series of 1965, which was approved by
the President, granting respondent a certificate to practice medicine
in the Philippines without the examination required in Republic Act
No. 2882, otherwise known as the Medical Act of 1959. The
resolution relied therefor upon The Treaty on the Validity of
Academic Degrees and The Exercise of the Professions between the
Republic of the Philippines and the Spanish State, signed at Manila
on March 4, 1949, and ratified on May 19, 1949. 1 chanrobles virtual law library

Petitioner herein, Philippine Medical Association, is a

domestic corporation. On June 14, 1965, it addressed the Chairman
of the Board a communication requesting reconsideration of said
resolution No. 25, upon the ground that, pursuant to said Medical
Act of 1959, respondent has to take and pass the examination
therein prescribed, before he can be allowed to practice medicine in
the Philippines. This letter was followed by another, dated October
6, 1965, to which said Chairman replied on October 8, 1965, stating
"that the final decision on the matter will have to come from the
President of the Philippines upon whose authority said resolution
has been finally approved and implemented." chanrobles virtual law library
 Thereupon, or, on October 18, 1965, petitioner commenced
the present action, for the purpose stated at the beginning of this
decision, upon the theory that the Board had violated Republic Act
No. 2882 in granting respondent's certificate for the general practice
of medicine in the Philippines without the examination prescribed in
said Act; that the Board had exceeded its authority in passing said
Resolution, because of which the same is null and void; that the
Board should, therefore, be ordered to cancel the certificate issued
in pursuance of said resolution; and that petitioner has no other
plain, adequate and speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law.
virtual law library
chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles

In their respective answers, respondents admit the basic

facts, but not the conclusions drawn therefrom by the petitioner and
allege that the resolution in question is sanctioned by the provisions
of the Treaty above referred to; that petitioner has no cause of
action; and that the petition should be dismissed for failure of the
petitioner to exhaust the available administrative remedies. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Respondents cite the cases of Costas vs.

Aldanese2 and Almario vs. City Mayor 3 in support of the theory that
petitioner herein has no sufficient interest or "personality" to
maintain the present case. In the first case, it was held that the
President of the Association of Philippine (Marine) Engineers4 had no
particular "individual" interest, and, hence,no cause of action
for mandamus to compel the Collector of Customs to implement
section 1203(j) of the Administrative Code, providing that steamers
making round trips of more than 48 hours or travelling at night shall
carry the complement of marine engineers therein specified. In the
second case, a citizen of the Philippines, as such, who is not an
Applicant for any stall or booth, or the representative of any such
applicant, stallholder or any association of persons who are deprived
of the right to occupy stalls in said market, "is not the real party in
interest who has the capacity, right or personality" to bring an
action for mandamus, to compel the office of Pasay City to comply
with the provisions of Republic Act No. 37, by ejecting, from the
public market of said City, stallholders who are not nationals of the
Philippines. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library
 Said cases are not in point. To begin with, both are actions
for mandamus, whereas the case at bar is mainly one for certiorari.
Although, petitioner herein, likewise, seeks a writ of mandamus,
directing the Board to cancel the certificate of registration issued to
the respondent, this would be a necessary consequence of the writ
of certiorari annulling the disputed resolution. Moreover, said two
(2) cases were commenced by individuals, who, as such, had no
special interest in the relief therein prayed for. Indeed, in
the Almario case it was intimated that the result might have been
otherwise had it been brought by an "association" whose members
have an interest in the subject matter of the action. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

This was confirmed by PHILCONSA vs. Gimenez,5 in which

we sustained the right of the Philippine Constitution Association to
assail the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 3836, insofar as it
allowed retirement gratuity and commutation of vacation and sick
leave to members of Congress and to elective officials thereof.
Further authority in favor of petitioner herein is supplied
by Nacionalista Party vs. F. Bautista Angelo 6 in which the
Nacionalista Party successfully impugned the validity of the
designation of the then Solicitor General as Acting Member of the
Commission on Elections. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

It is our considered opinion that the view adopted in the last

three (3) cases should be maintained and that, in line therewith,
petitioner herein has sufficient interest to prosecute the case at bar
and a cause of action against respondents herein. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

As regards their objection based upon petitioner's failure to

appeal to the President, suffice it to say that the rule requiring
exhaustion of administrative remedies is concededly subject to
exceptions, among which are cases involving only questions of law
or when jurisdiction is in issue7or the action complained of bears the
approval of a department secretary, as the disputed resolution,
which was approved by the Executive Secretary "by authority of the
President," or as an alter ego of the Executive. 8 The case at bar falls
under these exceptions to said rule. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

The main issue herein hinges on the interpretation of Article I

of the Treaty aforementioned, reading as follows:
 The nationals of both countries who shall have obtained
degrees or diplomas to practice the liberal professions in either of
the Contracting States, issued by competent national authorities,
shall be deemed competent to exercise said professions in the
territory of the Other, subject to the laws and regulations of the
latter. When the degree or diploma of Bachelor, issued by
competent national authorities allows its holder without requiring
further evidence of proficiency to pursue normally higher courses of
study, he shall also be deemed qualified to continue his studies in
the territory of either Party in conformity with the applicable laws
and regulations of the State which recognizes the validity of the title
or diploma in question, and with the rules and regulations of the
particular educational institution in which he intends to pursue his
studies.

This Treaty provision was the subject matter of our

resolution of August 15, 1961, in connection with the petition of
Arturo Efren Garcia for admission to the Philippine Bar without
taking the Bar Examinations. After completing, in Spain, the course
prescribed therefor, Garcia had been graduated from the College of
Law of the Universidad Central de Madrid with the degree of
"Licenciado en Derecho", which entitled him to practice law in Spain.
Having invoked the provisions of said treaty in support of his claim
of exemption from the requisite bar examinations, this Court denied
his petition upon the ground, among others ". . . that the privileges
provided in the Treaty invoked by the applicant are made expressly
subject to the laws and regulations of the contracting State in
whose territory it is desired to exercise the legal profession; and
Section 1 of Rule 127, in connection with Sections 2, 9, and 16
thereof, which have the force of law, require that before anyone can
practice the legal profession in the Philippines he must first
successfully pass the required bar examinations; . . ."chanrobles virtual law library

We find no plausible reason to depart from this view. On the

contrary, we reiterate the same, inasmuch as the theory of
respondent herein cannot be accepted without placing graduates
from our own educational institutions at a disadvantage vis-a-
vis Spanish graduates from Spanish schools, colleges or
universities. Indeed, the latter could - under respondent's pretense
- engage in the practice of medicine in the Philippines without taking
the examination prescribed in Republic Act No. 2882, whereas the
former would have to take and pass said examination. Worse still,
since - as we ruled in the Garciacase - the benefits of the
aforementioned Treaty cannot be availed of in the Philippines except
by Spanish subjects, the result would be - should respondent's
contention be sustained - that graduates from Spanish schools of
medicine would be entitled to practice medicine in the Philippines
without examination, if they were Spanish subjects, but not if they
are Filipinos. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Surely said treaty was not made to discriminate against

Philippine schools, colleges or universities, much less against
nationals of the Philippines. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, we hold that said Treaty merely extended to

diplomas issued or degrees conferred by educational institutions of
Spain the same recognition and treatment that we accord to similar
diplomas or degrees from local institutions of learning; that holders
of said Spanish diplomas or degrees must take the examination
prescribed by our laws for holders of similar diplomas or degrees
from educational institutions in the Philippines; that resolution No.
25, series of 1965, of respondent Board is violative of Republic Act
No. 2882 and hence, null and void; and that, respondent Board of
Medical Examiners should be, as it is hereby ordered to cancel the
certificate of registration, for the practice of medicine in the
Philippines, issued in favor of respondent Jose Ma. Torres, without
special pronouncement as to costs. It is so ordered.

Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Makalintal, Zaldivar, Sanchez, Castro, Angeles

and Fernando, JJ., concur.

Tablarin vs. Gutierrez (G.R. No. 78164)

Facts:
Teresita Tablarin, Ma. Luz Ciriaco, Ma. Nimfa B. Rovira, and Evangelina S. Labao sought
admission into colleges or schools of medicine for the school year 1987-1988. However, they
either did not take or did not successfully take the National Medical Admission Test (NMAT)
required by the Board of Medical Education and administered by the Center for Educational
Measurement (CEM). On 5 March 1987, Tablarin, et. al., in behalf of applicants for
admission into the Medical Colleges who have not taken up or successfully hurdled the
NMAT, filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), National Capital Judicial Region, a
Petition for Declaratory Judgment and Prohibition with a prayer for Temporary
Restraining Order (TRO) and Preliminary Injunction, to enjoin the Secretary of Education,
Culture and Sports, the Board of Medical Education and the Center for Educational
Measurement from enforcing Section 5 (a) and (f) of Republic Act 2382, as amended, and
MECS Order 52 (series of 1985), dated 23 August 1985 [which established a uniform
admission test (NMAT) as an additional requirement for issuance of a certificate of eligibility
for admission into medical schools of the Philippines, beginning with the school year 1986-
1987] and from requiring the taking and passing of the NMAT as a condition for securing
certificates of eligibility for admission, from proceeding with accepting applications for
taking the NMAT and from administering the NMAT as scheduled on 26 April 1987 and in
the future. After hearing on the petition for issuance of preliminary injunction, the trial court
denied said petition on 20 April 1987. The NMAT was conducted and administered as
previously scheduled. Tablarin, et. al. accordingly filed a Special Civil Action for Certiorari
with the Supreme Court to set aside the Order of the RTC judge denying the petition for
issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction.

Issue:
Whether NMAT requirement for admission to medical colleges contravenes the
Constitutional guarantee for the accessibility of education to all, and whether such regulation
is invalid and/or unconstitutional.

Held:
No. Republic Act 2382, as amended by Republic Acts 4224 and 5946, known as the “Medical
Act of 1959″ defines its basic objectives to govern (a) the standardization and regulation of
medical education; (b) the examination for registration of physicians; and (c) the supervision,
control and regulation of the practice of medicine in the Philippines. The Statute created a
Board of Medical Education and prescribed certain minimum requirements for applicants
to medical schools.

The petitioners invoke a number of provisions of the 1987 Constitution which are, in their
assertion, violated by the continued implementation of Section 5(a) and (f) of RA 238, as
amended, and MECS Order No. 52 series 1985. One of the provision is Article 14, Section 1
which states “The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education
at all levels and take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all.
The State is not really enjoined to take appropriate steps to make quality education
“accessible to all who might for any number of reasons wish to enroll in a professional school
but rather merely to make such education accessible to all who qualify under “fair,
reasonable and equitable admission and academic requirements.”

Also, the legislative and administrative provisions impugned by the petitioners, to the mind
of the Court, is a valid exercise of the Police Power of the State. The police power is the
pervasive and non-waivable power and authority of the sovereign to secure and promote
important interest and needs -- in other words, the public order -- of the general community.
An important component of that public order is health and physical safety and well being of
the population, the securing of which no one can deny is a legitimate objective of
governmental effort and regulation.

The regulation of the practice of medicine in all its branches has long been recognized as a
reasonable method of protecting the health and safety of the public. The power to regulate
and control the practice of medicine includes the power to regulate admission to the ranks
of those authorized to practice medicine. Legislation and administrative regulations
requiring those who wish to practice medicine first to take and pass medical board
examinations have long ago been recognized as valid exercises of governmental powers.
Similarly, the establishment of minimum medical educational requirements for admission to
the medical profession, has also been sustained as a legitimate exercise of the regulatory
authority of the state.

Thus, prescribing the NMAT and requiring certain scores as a condition for admission to
medical schools do not constitute unconstitutional imposition.

Wherefore, the petition is DISMISSED.

 Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 166097 July 14, 2008

BOARD OF MEDICINE, DR. RAUL FLORES (now DR. JOSE S. RAMIREZ), in his capacity as
Chairman of the Board, PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION, through its Chairman,
HERMOGENES POBRE (now DR. ALCESTIS M. GUIANG), Petitioners,
vs.
YASUYUKI OTA, Respondent.

DECISION

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.:

Before the Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari assailing the Decision1 of the Court of Appeals
(CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 849452 dated November 16, 2004 which affirmed the Decision3 of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 22, Manila, dated October 19, 2003.4

The facts are as follows:

Yasuyuki Ota (respondent) is a Japanese national, married to a Filipina, who has continuously
resided in the Philippines for more than 10 years. He graduated from Bicol Christian College of
Medicine on April 21, 1991 with a degree of Doctor of Medicine.5 After successfully completing a
one-year post graduate internship training at the Jose Reyes Memorial Medical Center, he filed an
application to take the medical board examinations in order to obtain a medical license. He was
required by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) to submit an affidavit of undertaking,
stating among others that should he successfully pass the same, he would not practice medicine
until he submits proof that reciprocity exists between Japan and the Philippines in admitting
foreigners into the practice of medicine.6

Respondent submitted a duly notarized English translation of the Medical Practitioners Law of Japan
duly authenticated by the Consul General of the Philippine Embassy to Japan, Jesus I. Yabes;7 thus,
he was allowed to take the Medical Board Examinations in August 1992, which he subsequently
passed.8

In spite of all these, the Board of Medicine (Board) of the PRC, in a letter dated March 8, 1993,
denied respondent's request for a license to

practice medicine in the Philippines on the ground that the Board "believes that no genuine
reciprocity can be found in the law of Japan as there is no Filipino or foreigner who can possibly
practice there."9

Respondent then filed a Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus against the Board before the RTC of
Manila on June 24, 1993, which petition was amended on February 14, 1994 to implead the PRC
through its Chairman.10
In his petition before the RTC, respondent alleged that the Board and the PRC, in refusing to issue
in his favor a Certificate of Registration and/or license to practice medicine, had acted arbitrarily, in
clear contravention of the provision of Section 20 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 2382 (The Medical Act
of 1959), depriving him of his legitimate right to practice his profession in the Philippines to his great
damage and prejudice.11

On October 19, 2003, the RTC rendered its Decision finding that respondent had adequately proved
that the medical laws of Japan allow foreigners like Filipinos to be granted license and be admitted
into the practice of medicine under the principle of reciprocity; and that the Board had a ministerial
duty of issuing the Certificate of Registration and license to respondent, as it was shown that he had
substantially complied with the requirements under the law.12 The RTC then ordered the Board to
issue in favor of respondent the corresponding Certificate of Registration and/or license to practice
medicine in the Philippines.13

The Board and the PRC (petitioners) appealed the case to the CA, stating that while respondent
submitted documents showing that foreigners are allowed to practice medicine in Japan, it was not
shown that the conditions for the practice of medicine there are practical and attainable by a foreign
applicant, hence, reciprocity was not established; also, the power of the PRC and the Board to
regulate and control the practice of medicine is discretionary and not ministerial, hence, not
compellable by a writ of mandamus.14

The CA denied the appeal and affirmed the ruling of the RTC.15

Hence, herein petition raising the following issue:

WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED A REVERSIBLE ERROR IN FINDING

THAT RESPONDENT HAD ESTABLISHED THE EXISTENCE OF RECIPROCITY IN THE
PRACTICE OF MEDICINE BETWEEN THE PHILIPPINES AND JAPAN.16

Petitioners claim that: respondent has not established by competent and conclusive evidence that
reciprocity in the practice of medicine exists between the Philippines and Japan. While documents
state that foreigners are allowed to practice medicine in Japan, they do not similarly show that the
conditions for the practice of medicine in said country are practical and attainable by a foreign
applicant. There is no reciprocity in this case, as the requirements to practice medicine in Japan are
practically impossible for a Filipino to comply with. There are also ambiguities in the Medical
Practitioners Law of Japan, which were not clarified by respondent, i.e., what are the provisions of
the School Educations Laws, what are the criteria of the Minister of Health and Welfare of Japan in
determining whether the academic and technical capability of foreign medical graduates are the
same or better than graduates of medical schools in Japan, and who can actually qualify to take the
preparatory test for the National Medical Examination. Consul General Yabes also stated that there
had not been a single Filipino who was issued a license to practice medicine by the Japanese
Government. The publication showing that there were foreigners practicing medicine in Japan, which
respondent presented before the Court, also did not specifically show that Filipinos were among
those listed as practicing said profession.17 Furthermore, under Professional Regulation Commission
v. De Guzman,18the power of the PRC and the Board to regulate and control the practice of medicine
includes the power to regulate admission to the ranks of those authorized to practice medicine,
which power is discretionary and not ministerial, hence, not compellable by a writ of mandamus.19

Petitioners pray that the CA Decision dated November 16, 2004 be reversed and set aside, that a
new one be rendered reinstating the Board Order dated March 8, 1993 which disallows respondent
to practice medicine in the Philippines, and that respondent's petition before the trial court be
dismissed for lack of merit.20
In his Comment, respondent argues that: Articles 2 and 11 of the Medical Practitioners Law of Japan
and Section 9 of the Philippine Medical Act of 1959 show that reciprocity exists between the
Philippines and Japan concerning the practice of medicine. Said laws clearly state that both
countries allow foreigners to practice medicine in their respective jurisdictions as long as the
applicant meets the educational requirements, training or residency in hospitals and pass the
licensure examination given by either country. Consul General Yabes in his letter dated January 28,
1992 stated that "the Japanese Government allows a foreigner to practice medicine in Japan after
complying with the local requirements." The fact that there is no reported Filipino who has
successfully penetrated the medical practice in Japan does not mean that there is no reciprocity
between the two countries, since it does not follow that no Filipino will ever be granted a medical
license by the Japanese Government. It is not the essence of reciprocity that before a citizen of one
of the contracting countries can demand its application, it is necessary that the interested citizen’s
country has previously granted the same privilege to the citizens of the other contracting
country.21 Respondent further argues that Section 20 of the Medical Act of 195922 indicates the
mandatory character of the statute and an imperative obligation on the part of the Board inconsistent
with the idea of discretion. Thus, a foreigner, just like a Filipino citizen, who successfully passes the
examination and has all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications, is entitled as a matter of
right to the issuance of a certificate of registration or a physician’s license, which right is enforceable
by mandamus.23

Petitioners filed a Reply24 and both parties filed their respective memoranda25 reiterating their
arguments. 1avvphi1

The Court denies the petition for lack of merit.

There is no question that a license to practice medicine is a privilege or franchise granted by the
government.26 It is a right that is earned through years of education and training, and which requires
that one must first secure a license from the state through professional board examinations.27

Indeed,

[T]he regulation of the practice of medicine in all its branches has long been recognized as a
reasonable method of protecting the health and safety of the public. That the power to regulate and
control the practice of medicine includes the power to regulate admission to the ranks of those
authorized to practice medicine, is also well recognized. Thus, legislation and administrative
regulations requiring those who wish to practice medicine first to take and pass medical board
examinations have long ago been recognized as valid exercises of governmental power. Similarly,
the establishment of minimum medical educational requirements – i.e., the completion of prescribed
courses in a recognized medical school – for admission to the medical profession, has also been
sustained as a legitimate exercise of the regulatory authority of the state."28

It must be stressed however that the power to regulate the exercise of a profession or pursuit of an
occupation cannot be exercised by the State or its agents in an arbitrary, despotic, or oppressive
manner. A political body which regulates the exercise of a particular privilege has the authority to
both forbid and grant such privilege in accordance with certain conditions. As the legislature cannot
validly bestow an arbitrary power to grant or refuse a license on a public agency or officer, courts will
generally strike down license legislation that vests in public officials discretion to grant or refuse a
license to carry on some ordinarily lawful business, profession, or activity without prescribing definite
rules and conditions for the guidance of said officials in the exercise of their power.29

R.A. No. 2382 otherwise known as the Medical Act of 1959 states in Section 9 thereof that:
Section 9. Candidates for Board Examinations.- Candidates for Board examinations shall have the
following qualifications:

1. He shall be a citizen of the Philippines or a citizen of any foreign country who has submitted
competent and conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by the Department of Foreign Affairs,
showing that his country’s existing laws permit citizens of the Philippines to practice medicine under
the same rules and regulations governing citizens thereof;

xxxx

Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 22330 also provides in Section (j) thereof that:

j) The [Professional Regulation] Commission may, upon the recommendation of the Board
concerned, approve the registration of and authorize the issuance of a certificate of registration with
or without examination to a foreigner who is registered under the laws of his country: Provided, That
the requirement for the registration or licensing in said foreign state or country are substantially the
same as those required and contemplated by the laws of the Philippines and that the laws of such
foreign state or country allow the citizens of the Philippines to practice the profession on the same
basis and grant the same privileges as the subject or citizens of such foreign state or country:
Provided, finally, That the applicant shall submit competent and conclusive documentary evidence,
confirmed by the Department of Foreign Affairs, showing that his country's existing laws permit
citizens of the Philippines to practice the profession under the rules and regulations governing
citizens thereof. The Commission is also hereby authorized to prescribe additional requirements or
grant certain privileges to foreigners seeking registration in the Philippines if the same privileges are
granted to or some additional requirements are required of citizens of the Philippines in acquiring the
same certificates in his country;

xxxx

As required by the said laws, respondent submitted a copy of the Medical Practitioners Law of
Japan, duly authenticated by the Consul General of the Embassy of the Philippines in Japan, which
provides in Articles 2 and 11, thus:

Article 2. Anyone who wants to be medical practitioner must pass the national examination for
medical practitioner and get license from the Minister of Health and Welfare.

xxxx

Article 11. No one can take the National Medical Examination except persons who conform to one of
the following items:

1. Persons who finished regular medical courses at a university based on the School
Education Laws (December 26, 1947) and graduated from said university.

2. Persons who passed the preparatory test for the National Medical Examination and
practiced clinics and public sanitation more than one year after passing the said test.

3. Persons who graduated from a foreign medical school or acquired medical practitioner
license in a foreign country, and also are recognized to have the same or more academic
ability and techniques as persons stated in item 1 and item 2 of this article.31
Petitioners argue that while the Medical Practitioners Law of Japan allows foreigners to practice
medicine therein, said document does not show that conditions for the practice of medicine in said
country are practical and attainable by a foreign applicant; and since the requirements are practically
impossible for a Filipino to comply with, there is no reciprocity between the two countries, hence,
respondent may not be granted license to practice medicine in the Philippines.

The Court does not agree.

R.A. No. 2382, which provides who may be candidates for the medical board examinations, merely
requires a foreign citizen to submit competent and conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by
the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), showing that his country’s existing laws permit citizens of
the Philippines to practice medicine under the same rules and regulations governing citizens thereof.

Section (j) of P.D. No. 223 also defines the extent of PRC's power to grant licenses, i.e., it may, upon
recommendation of the board, approve the registration and authorize the issuance of a certificate of
registration with or without examination to a foreigner who is registered under the laws of his
country, provided the following conditions are met: (1) that the requirement for the registration or
licensing in said foreign state or country are substantially the same as those required and
contemplated by the laws of the Philippines; (2) that the laws of such foreign state or country allow
the citizens of the Philippines to practice the profession on the same basis and grant the same
privileges as the subject or citizens of such foreign state or country; and (3) that the applicant shall
submit competent and conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by the DFA, showing that his
country's existing laws permit citizens of the Philippines to practice the profession under the rules
and regulations governing citizens thereof.

The said provision further states that the PRC is authorized to prescribe additional requirements or
grant certain privileges to foreigners seeking registration in the Philippines if the same privileges are
granted to or some additional requirements are required of citizens of the Philippines in acquiring the
same certificates in his country.

Nowhere in said statutes is it stated that the foreign applicant must show that the conditions for the
practice of medicine in said country are practical and attainable by Filipinos. Neither is it stated that it
must first be proven that a Filipino has been granted license and allowed to practice his profession in
said country before a foreign applicant may be given license to practice in the Philippines. Indeed,
the phrase used in both R.A. No. 2382 and P.D. No. 223 is that:

[T]he applicant shall submit] competent and conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by the
Department of Foreign Affairs, showing that his country's existing laws permit citizens of the
Philippines to practice the profession [of medicine] under the [same] rules and regulations governing
citizens thereof. x x x (Emphasis supplied)

It is enough that the laws in the foreign country permit a Filipino to get license and practice therein.
Requiring respondent to prove first that a Filipino has already been granted license and is actually
practicing therein unduly expands the requirements provided for under R.A. No. 2382 and P.D. No.
223.

While it is true that respondent failed to give details as to the conditions stated in the Medical
Practitioners Law of Japan -- i.e., the provisions of the School Educations Laws, the criteria of the
Minister of Health and Welfare of Japan in determining whether the academic and technical
capability of foreign medical graduates are the same as or better than that of graduates of medical
schools in Japan, and who can actually qualify to take the preparatory test for the National Medical
Examination – respondent, however, presented proof that foreigners are actually practicing in Japan
and that Filipinos are not precluded from getting a license to practice there.

Respondent presented before the trial court a Japanese Government publication, Physician-Dentist-
Pharmaceutist Survey, showing that there are a number of foreign physicians practicing medicine in
Japan.32 He also presented a letter dated January 28, 1992 from Consul General Yabes,33 which
states:

Sir:

With reference to your letter dated 12 January 1993, concerning your request for a Certificate of
Confirmation for the purpose of establishing a reciprocity with Japan in the practice of medical
profession relative to the case of Mr. Yasuyuki Ota, a Japanese national, the Embassy wishes to
inform you that inquiries from the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Health and
Welfare as well as Bureau of Immigration yielded the following information:

1. They are not aware of a Filipino physician who was granted a license by the
Japanese Government to practice medicine in Japan;

2. However, the Japanese Government allows a foreigner to practice medicine in

Japan after complying with the local requirements such as holding a valid visa for the
purpose of taking the medical board exam, checking the applicant's qualifications to
take the examination, taking the national board examination in Japanese and filing
an application for the issuance of the medical license.

Accordingly, the Embassy is not aware of a single Filipino physician who was issued by the
Japanese Government a license to practice medicine, because it is extremely difficult to pass the
medical board examination in the Japanese language. Filipino doctors here are only allowed to work
in Japanese hospitals as trainees under the supervision of a Japanese doctor. On certain occasions,
they are allowed to show their medical skills during seminars for demonstration purposes only.
(Emphasis supplied)

Very truly yours,

Jesus I. Yabes
Minister Counsellor &
Consul General

From said letter, one can see that the Japanese Government allows foreigners to practice medicine
therein provided that the local requirements are complied with, and that it is not the impossibility or
the prohibition against Filipinos that would account for the absence of Filipino physicians holding
licenses and practicing medicine in Japan, but the difficulty of passing the board examination in the
Japanese language. Granting that there is still no Filipino who has been given license to practice
medicine in Japan, it does not mean that no Filipino will ever be able to be given one.

Petitioners next argue that as held in De Guzman, its power to issue licenses is discretionary, hence,
not compellable by mandamus.

The Court finds that the factual circumstances of De Guzman are different from those of the case at
bar; hence, the principle applied therein should be viewed differently in this case. In De Guzman,
there were doubts about the integrity and validity of the test results of the examinees from a
particular school which garnered unusually high scores in the two most difficult subjects. Said doubts
called for serious inquiry concerning the applicants’ satisfactory compliance with the Board
requirements.34 And as there was no definite showing that the requirements and conditions to be
granted license to practice medicine had been satisfactorily met, the Court held that the writ
of mandamus may not be granted to secure said privilege without thwarting the legislative will.35

Indeed, to be granted the privilege to practice medicine, the applicant must show that he possesses
all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications. It must also appear that he has fully complied
with all the conditions and requirements imposed by the law and the licensing authority.36

In De Guzman itself, the Court explained that:

A careful reading of Section 2037 of the Medical Act of 1959 discloses that the law uses the word
"shall" with respect to the issuance of certificates of registration. Thus, the petitioners [PRC] "shall
sign and issue certificates of registration to those who have satisfactorily complied with the
requirements of the Board." In statutory construction the term "shall" is a word of command. It is
given imperative meaning. Thus, when an examinee satisfies the requirements for the grant of his
physician's license, the Board is obliged to administer to him his oath and register him as a
physician, pursuant to Section 20 and par. (1) of Section 22 of the Medical Act of 1959.38

In this case, there is no doubt as to the competence and qualifications of respondent. He finished his
medical degree from Bicol Christian College of Medicine. He completed a one-year post graduate
internship training at the Jose Reyes Memorial Medical Center, a government hospital. Then he
passed the Medical Board Examinations which was given on August 8, 1992 with a general average
of 81.83, with scores higher than 80 in 9 of the 12 subjects.

In fine, the only matter being questioned by petitioners is the alleged failure of respondent to prove
that there is reciprocity between the laws of Japan and the Philippines in admitting foreigners into
the practice of medicine. Respondent has satisfactorily complied with the said requirement and the
CA has not committed any reversible error in rendering its Decision dated November 16, 2004 and
Resolution dated October 19, 2003.

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED for lack of merit.

SO ORDERED.

 DECS and Dir. of Educational Measurement vs. Roberto Rey San Diego and Judge
Dizon-Capulong
G.R. No. 89572, December 21, 1989

FACTS: Roberto Rey San Diego, a graduate of the University of the East with a degree
of B.S. Zoology, had taken and flunked 4 National Medical Admission Tests and was
applying to take another test. NMAT Rule provides that a student shall be allowed only
three (3) chances to take the test. After three successive failures, a student shall not be
allowed to take the NMAT for the fourth time. The Regional Trial Court held that the
petitioner had been deprived of his right to pursue a medical education through an
arbitrary exercise of the police power.
ISSUE: Whether or not the respondent has been deprived of his right to quality
education.
RULING: NMAT is a measure intended to limit the admission to medical schools to
those who have initially proved their competence and preparation for a medical
education. The regulation of practice of medicine is a reasonable method of protecting
the health and safety of the public. This regulation includes the power to regulate
admission to the ranks of those authorized to practice medicine. NMAT is a means of
achieving the country’s objective of “upgrading the selection of applicants into medical
schools” and of “improving the quality of medical education in the country” It is the
responsibility of the State to insure that the medical profession is not infiltrated by
incompetents to whom patients may unwarily entrust their lives and health.
The right to quality education is not absolute. The Constitution provides that every
citizen has the right to choose a profession or course of study, subject to fair,
reasonable, and equitable admission and academic requirement.
The equal protection requires equality among equals. There would be unequal
protection if some applicants who have passed the tests are admitted and others who
have also qualified are denied entrance.
The petition has been granted and the decision of the respondent court has been
reversed.














BOARD OF MEDICINE v. YASUYUKI OTA, GR No. 166097, 2008-07-14
Facts:
Yasuyuki Ota (respondent) is a Japanese national, married to a Filipina, who has
continuously resided in the Philippines for more than 10 years. He graduated from Bicol
Christian College of Medicine on April 21, 1991 with a degree of Doctor of
Medicine.[5] After successfully completing a one-year post graduate internship training at
the Jose Reyes Memorial Medical Center, he filed an application to take the medical board
examinations in order to obtain a medical license. He was required by the
Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) to submit an affidavit of undertaking, stating
among others that should he successfully pass the same, he would not practice medicine
until he submits proof that reciprocity exists between Japan and the Philippines in
admitting foreigners... into the practice of medicine.[6]
Respondent submitted a duly notarized English translation of the Medical Practitioners
Law of Japan duly authenticated by the Consul General of the Philippine Embassy to
Japan, Jesus I. Yabes; [7] thus, he was allowed to take the Medical Board Examinations...
in August 1992, which he subsequently passed.[8]
Board of Medicine (Board) of the PRC, in a letter dated March 8, 1993, denied
respondent's request for a license to practice medicine in the Philippines on the ground
that the Board "believes that no genuine reciprocity can be found in the law of Japan... as
there is no Filipino or foreigner who can possibly practice there." [9]
Respondent then filed a Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus against the Board before the
RTC of Manila on June 24, 1993, which petition was amended on February 14, 1994 to
implead the PRC through its Chairman.
On October 19, 2003, the RTC rendered its Decision finding that respondent had
adequately proved that the medical laws of Japan allow foreigners like Filipinos to be
granted license and be admitted into the practice of medicine under the principle of
reciprocity; and that the
Board had a ministerial duty of issuing the Certificate of Registration and license to
respondent, as it was shown that he had substantially complied with the requirements
under the law.[12] The RTC then ordered the Board to issue in favor of... respondent the
corresponding Certificate of Registration and/or license to practice medicine in the
Philippines.[13]
The Board and the PRC (petitioners) appealed the case to the CA, stating that while
respondent submitted documents showing that foreigners are allowed to practice
medicine in Japan, it was not shown that the conditions for the practice of medicine there
are practical and... attainable by a foreign applicant, hence, reciprocity was not
established; also, the power of the PRC and the Board to regulate and control the practice
of medicine is discretionary and not ministerial, hence, not compellable by a writ of
mandamus.[14]
The CA denied the appeal and affirmed the ruling of the RTC.[15]
Hence, herein petition
Issues:
WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED A REVERSIBLE ERROR IN FINDING
THAT RESPONDENT HAD ESTABLISHED THE EXISTENCE OF RECIPROCITY IN THE
PRACTICE OF MEDICINE BETWEEN THE PHILIPPINES AND JAPAN.
Ruling:
The Court denies the petition for lack of merit.
R.A. No. 2382, which provides who may be candidates for the medical board
examinations, merely requires a foreign citizen to submit competent and conclusive
documentary evidence, confirmed by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), showing
that his country's existing laws... permit citizens of the Philippines to practice medicine
under the same rules and regulations governing citizens thereof.
Section (j) of P.D. No. 223 also defines the extent of PRC's power to grant licenses, i.e., it
may, upon recommendation of the board, approve the registration and authorize the
issuance of a certificate of registration with or without examination to a foreigner who is...
registered under the laws of his country, provided the following conditions are met: (1) that
the requirement for the registration or licensing in said foreign state or country are
substantially the same as those required and contemplated by the laws of the Philippines;
(2) that... the laws of such foreign state or country allow the citizens of the Philippines to
practice the profession on the same basis and grant the same privileges as the subject or
citizens of such foreign state or country; and (3) that the applicant shall submit competent
and... conclusive documentary evidence, confirmed by the DFA, showing that his country's
existing laws permit citizens of the Philippines to practice the profession under the rules
and regulations governing citizens thereof.
The said provision further states that the PRC is authorized to prescribe additional
requirements or grant certain privileges to foreigners seeking registration in the Philippines
if the same privileges are granted to or some additional requirements are required of...
citizens of the Philippines in acquiring the same certificates in his country.
Nowhere in said statutes is it stated that the foreign applicant must show that the
conditions for the practice of medicine in said country are practical and attainable by
Filipinos. Neither is it stated that it must first be proven that a Filipino has been... granted
license and allowed to practice his profession in said country before a foreign applicant
may be given license to practice in the Philippines.