Republic of the Philippines have initially proved their competence and preparation

SUPREME COURT for a medical education. Justice Florentino P. Feliciano

Manila declared for a unanimous Court:

EN BANC Perhaps the only issue that needs some

consideration is whether there is some
G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 reasonable relation between the prescribing of
passing the NMAT as a condition for admission
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND to medical school on the one hand, and the
SPORTS (DECS) and DIRECTOR OF CENTER FOR securing of the health and safety of the general
community, on the other hand. This question is
EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT, petitioners,
vs. perhaps most usefully approached by recalling
ROBERTO REY C. SAN DIEGO and JUDGE that the regulation of the pratice of medicine in
all its branches has long been recognized as a
TERESITA DIZON-CAPULONG, in her capacity as
Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of reasonable method of protecting the health and
Valenzuela, Metro Manila, Branch 172, respondents. 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
Ramon M. Guevara for private respondent. those authorized to practice medicine, is also
well recognized. Thus, legislation and
CRUZ, J.: administrative regulations requiring those who
wish to practice medicine first to take and pass
The issue before us is mediocrity. The question is medical board examinations have long ago been
whether a person who has thrice failed the National recognized as valid exercises of governmental
Medical Admission Test (NMAT) is entitled to take it power. Similarly, the establishment of minimum
again. medical educational requirements-i.e., the
completion of prescribed courses in a
The petitioner contends he may not, under its rule that- recognized medical school-for admission to the
medical profession, has also been sustained as
a legitimate exercise of the regulatory authority
h) A student shall be allowed only three (3)
of the state. What we have before us in the
chances to take the NMAT. After three (3)
instant case is closely related: the regulation of
successive failures, a student shall not be
access to medical schools. MECS Order No. 52,
allowed to take the NMAT for the fourth time.
s. 1985, as noted earlier, articulates the rationale
of regulation of this type: the improvement of the
The private respondent insists he can, on constitutional professional and technical quality of the
grounds. graduates of medical schools, by upgrading the
quality of those admitted to the student body of
But first the facts. the medical schools. That upgrading is sought
by selectivity in the process of admission,
The private respondent is a graduate of the University of selectivity consisting, among other things, of
the East with a degree of Bachelor of Science in limiting admission to those who exhibit in the
Zoology. The petitioner claims that he took the NMAT required degree the aptitude for medical studies
three times and flunked it as many times.1 When he and eventually for medical practice. The need to
applied to take it again, the petitioner rejected his maintain, and the difficulties of maintaining, high
application on the basis of the aforesaid rule. He then standards in our professional schools in general,
went to the Regional Trial Court of Valenzuela, Metro and medical schools in particular, in the current
Manila, to compel his admission to the test. state of our social and economic development,
are widely known.
In his original petition for mandamus, he first invoked his
constitutional rights to academic freedom and quality We believe that the government is entitled to
education. By agreement of the parties, the private prescribe an admission test like the NMAT as a
respondent was allowed to take the NMAT scheduled on means of achieving its stated objective of
April 16, 1989, subject to the outcome of his petition. 2 In "upgrading the selection of applicants into [our]
an amended petition filed with leave of court, he medical schools" and of "improv[ing] the quality
squarely challenged the constitutionality of MECS Order of medical education in the country." Given the
No. 12, Series of 1972, containing the above-cited rule. widespread use today of such admission tests
The additional grounds raised were due process and in, for instance, medical schools in the United
equal protection. States of America (the Medical College
Admission Test [MCAT] and quite probably, in
After hearing, the respondent judge rendered a decision other countries with far more developed
on July 4, 1989, declaring the challenged order invalid educational resources than our own, and taking
and granting the petition. Judge Teresita Dizon- into account the failure or inability of the
Capulong held that the petitioner had been deprived of petitioners to even attempt to prove otherwise,
his right to pursue a medical education through an we are entitled to hold that the NMAT is
arbitrary exercise of the police power. 3 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
We cannot sustain the respondent judge. Her decision the public from the potentially deadly effects of
must be reversed. incompetence and ignorance in those who would
undertake to treat our bodies and minds for
In Tablarin v. Gutierrez, 4 this Court upheld the disease or trauma.
constitutionality of the NMAT as a measure intended to
limit the admission to medical schools only to those who
However, the respondent judge agreed with the more reason to bar those who, like him, have been
petitioner that the said case was not applicable. Her tested and found wanting.
reason was that it upheld only the requirement for the
admission test and said nothing about the so-called The contention that the challenged rule violates the
"three-flunk rule." equal protection clause is not well-taken. A law does not
have to operate with equal force on all persons or things
We see no reason why the rationale in the Tablarin case to be conformable to Article III, Section 1 of the
cannot apply to the case at bar. The issue raised in both Constitution.
cases is the academic preparation of the applicant. This
may be gauged at least initially by the admission test There can be no question that a substantial distinction
and, indeed with more reliability, by the three-flunk rule. exists between medical students and other students who
The latter cannot be regarded any less valid than the are not subjected to the NMAT and the three-flunk rule.
former in the regulation of the medical profession. The medical profession directly affects the very lives of
the people, unlike other careers which, for this reason,
There is no need to redefine here the police power of the do not require more vigilant regulation. The accountant,
State. Suffice it to repeat that the power is validly for example, while belonging to an equally respectable
exercised if (a) the interests of the public generally, as profession, does not hold the same delicate
distinguished from those of a particular class, require the responsibility as that of the physician and so need not be
interference of the State, and (b) the means employed similarly treated.
are reasonably necessary to the attainment of the object
sought to be accomplished and not unduly oppressive There would be unequal protection if some applicants
upon individuals.5 who have passed the tests are admitted and others who
have also qualified are denied entrance. In other words,
In other words, the proper exercise of the police power what the equal protection requires is equality among
requires the concurrence of a lawful subject and a lawful equals.
method.
The Court feels that it is not enough to simply invoke the
The subject of the challenged regulation is certainly right to quality education as a guarantee of the
within the ambit of the police power. It is the right and Constitution: one must show that he is entitled to it
indeed the responsibility of the State to insure that the because of his preparation and promise. The private
medical profession is not infiltrated by incompetents to respondent has failed the NMAT five times. 7 While his
whom patients may unwarily entrust their lives and persistence is noteworthy, to say the least, it is certainly
health. misplaced, like a hopeless love.

The method employed by the challenged regulation is No depreciation is intended or made against the private
not irrelevant to the purpose of the law nor is it arbitrary respondent. It is stressed that a person who does not
or oppressive. The three-flunk rule is intended to insulate qualify in the NMAT is not an absolute incompetent unfit
the medical schools and ultimately the medical for any work or occupation. The only inference is that he
profession from the intrusion of those not qualified to be is a probably better, not for the medical profession, but
doctors. for another calling that has not excited his interest.

While every person is entitled to aspire to be a doctor, In the former, he may be a bungler or at least lackluster;
he does not have a constitutional right to be a doctor. in the latter, he is more likely to succeed and may even
This is true of any other calling in which the public be outstanding. It is for the appropriate calling that he is
interest is involved; and the closer the link, the longer the entitled to quality education for the full harnessing of his
bridge to one's ambition. The State has the responsibility potentials and the sharpening of his latent talents toward
to harness its human resources and to see to it that they what may even be a brilliant future.
are not dissipated or, no less worse, not used at all.
These resources must be applied in a manner that will We cannot have a society of square pegs in round holes,
best promote the common good while also giving the of dentists who should never have left the farm and
individual a sense of satisfaction. engineers who should have studied banking and
teachers who could be better as merchants.
A person cannot insist on being a physician if he will be
a menace to his patients. If one who wants to be a It is time indeed that the State took decisive steps to
lawyer may prove better as a plumber, he should be so regulate and enrich our system of education by directing
advised and adviced. Of course, he may not be forced to the student to the course for which he is best suited as
be a plumber, but on the other hand he may not force his determined by initial tests and evaluations. Otherwise,
entry into the bar. By the same token, a student who has we may be "swamped with mediocrity," in the words of
demonstrated promise as a pianist cannot be shunted Justice Holmes, not because we are lacking in
aside to take a course in nursing, however appropriate intelligence but because we are a nation of misfits.
this career may be for others.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The decision
The right to quality education invoked by the private of the respondent court dated January 13, 1989, is
respondent is not absolute. The Constitution also REVERSED, with costs against the private respondent.
provides that "every citizen has the right to choose a It is so ordered.
profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable
and equitable admission and academic requirements.6 Fernan, C.J., Narvasa Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr.,
Paras, Feliciano, Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Sarmiento,
The private respondent must yield to the challenged rule Cortes, Griño-Aquino, Medialdea and Regalado, JJ.,
and give way to those better prepared. Where even concur.
those who have qualified may still not be accommodated
in our already crowded medical schools, there is all the
Footnotes

1 A check with the Department of Education showed that

the private respondent had actually taken and flunked
four tests already and was applying to take a fifth
examination. 2 He also failed this fifth test.

2 Rollo, pp. 26-34.

3 152 SCRA 730.

4 US vs. Toribio, 15 Phil. 85; Fabie v. City of Manila, 21

Phil. 486; Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 148
SCRA 659.

5 Article XIV, Section 5(3).

6 Footnote Nos. 1 & 2.