Tablarin
vs. Gutierrez, 152 SCRA 730
Nature:
• Petitioners
filed with the RTC: Petition for Declaratory Judgment and prohibition with a
prayer for TRO and Preliminary Injunction. DENIED.
• Filed
this Special Civil Action for Certiorari to set aside said order. DENIED.
Keywords: NMAT case. Police
Power. Equal Protection Clause.
Summary: Petitioners sought admission into schools
of medicine. However, petitioners did not pass the NMAT required by the Board
of Medical Education.
Facts: The petitioners
sought to stop 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 No. 2382, as amended, and MECS Order No. 52, series of 1985, dated
23 August 1985 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. The trial court denied
said petition on 20 April 1987. The NMAT was conducted and administered as previously
scheduled.
Petitioners have
contended, finally, that MECS Order No. 52, s. 1985, is in conflict with the
equal protection clause of the Constitution. More specifically, petitioners
assert that that portion of the MECS Order which provides that the cut-off score for the
successful applicants, based on the scores on the NMAT, shall be determined
every-year by the Board of
Medical Education after consultation with the Association of Philippine Medical
Colleges infringes the requirements of equal protection. They assert, in other
words, that students seeking admission during a given school year, e.g.,
1987-1988, when subjected to a different cut-off score than that established
for an, e.g., earlier school year, are discriminated against and that this
renders the MECS Order "arbitrary and capricious."
Issues: Whether or not
Section 5 (a) and (f) of Republic Act No. 2382, as amended, and MECS Order No.
52, s. 1985 are constitutional.
Ratio: No.
Ruling: We
conclude that prescribing the NMAT and requiring certain minimum scores therein
as a condition for admission to medical schools in the Philippines,
do not constitute an unconstitutional imposition.
There is another reason why the petitioners' arguments must fail: the legislative and administrative provisions impugned by them constitute, to the mind of the Court, a valid exercise of the police power of the state. The police power, it is commonplace learning, is the pervasive and non-waivable power and authority of the sovereign to secure and promote the important interests and needs — in a word, the public order — of the general community. An important component of that public order is the 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
MECS Order No. 52, s. 1985 articulates the rationale of regulation of this type: the improvement of the professional and technical quality of the graduates of medical schools, by upgrading the quality of those admitted to the student body of the medical schools. That upgrading is sought by selectivity in the process of admission, selectivity consisting, among other things, of limiting admission to those who exhibit in the required degree the aptitude for medical studies and eventually for medical practice. The need to maintain, and the difficulties of maintaining, high standards in our professional schools in general, and medical schools in particular, in the current stage of our social and economic development, are widely known. We believe that the government is entitled to prescribe an admission test like the NMAT as a means for achieving its stated objective of "upgrading the selection of applicants into [our] medical schools" and of "improv[ing] the quality of medical education in the country. We are entitled to hold that the NMAT is reasonably related to the securing of the ultimate end of legislation and regulation in this area. That end, it is useful to recall, is the protection of the public from the potentially deadly effects of incompetence and ignorance in those who would undertake to treat our bodies and minds for disease or trauma.
WHEREFORE, the Petition for Certiorari is DISMISSED and the Order of the respondent trial court denying the petition for a writ of preliminary injunction is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioners.
There is another reason why the petitioners' arguments must fail: the legislative and administrative provisions impugned by them constitute, to the mind of the Court, a valid exercise of the police power of the state. The police power, it is commonplace learning, is the pervasive and non-waivable power and authority of the sovereign to secure and promote the important interests and needs — in a word, the public order — of the general community. An important component of that public order is the 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
MECS Order No. 52, s. 1985 articulates the rationale of regulation of this type: the improvement of the professional and technical quality of the graduates of medical schools, by upgrading the quality of those admitted to the student body of the medical schools. That upgrading is sought by selectivity in the process of admission, selectivity consisting, among other things, of limiting admission to those who exhibit in the required degree the aptitude for medical studies and eventually for medical practice. The need to maintain, and the difficulties of maintaining, high standards in our professional schools in general, and medical schools in particular, in the current stage of our social and economic development, are widely known. We believe that the government is entitled to prescribe an admission test like the NMAT as a means for achieving its stated objective of "upgrading the selection of applicants into [our] medical schools" and of "improv[ing] the quality of medical education in the country. We are entitled to hold that the NMAT is reasonably related to the securing of the ultimate end of legislation and regulation in this area. That end, it is useful to recall, is the protection of the public from the potentially deadly effects of incompetence and ignorance in those who would undertake to treat our bodies and minds for disease or trauma.
WHEREFORE, the Petition for Certiorari is DISMISSED and the Order of the respondent trial court denying the petition for a writ of preliminary injunction is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioners.
Notes:
Republic Act 2382, as amended by Republic Acts Nos. 4224 and 5946, known as the "Medical Act of 1959" defines its basic objectives in the following manner:
"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."
The statute, among other things, created a Board of Medical Education. Its functions as specified in Section 5 of the statute include the following:
"(a) To determine and prescribe requirements for admission into a recognized college of medicine;
x xx
(f) To accept applications for certification for admission to a medical school and keep a register of those issued said certificate; and to collect from saidapplicants the amount of twenty-five pesos each which shall accrue to the operating fund of the Board of Medical Education;”
Section 7 prescribes certain minimum requirements for applicants to medical schools:
"Admission requirements. — The medical college may admit any student who has not been convicted by any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving moral turpitude and who presents (a) a record of completion of a bachelor's degree in science or arts; (b) a certificate of eligibility for entrance to a medical school from the Board of Medical Education; (c) a certificate of good moral character issued by two former professors in the college of liberal arts; and (d) birth certificate. 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.”
Republic Act 2382, as amended by Republic Acts Nos. 4224 and 5946, known as the "Medical Act of 1959" defines its basic objectives in the following manner:
"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."
The statute, among other things, created a Board of Medical Education. Its functions as specified in Section 5 of the statute include the following:
"(a) To determine and prescribe requirements for admission into a recognized college of medicine;
x xx
(f) To accept applications for certification for admission to a medical school and keep a register of those issued said certificate; and to collect from saidapplicants the amount of twenty-five pesos each which shall accrue to the operating fund of the Board of Medical Education;”
Section 7 prescribes certain minimum requirements for applicants to medical schools:
"Admission requirements. — The medical college may admit any student who has not been convicted by any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving moral turpitude and who presents (a) a record of completion of a bachelor's degree in science or arts; (b) a certificate of eligibility for entrance to a medical school from the Board of Medical Education; (c) a certificate of good moral character issued by two former professors in the college of liberal arts; and (d) birth certificate. 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.”
No comments:
Post a Comment