9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v.

AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence

December 1989 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court

Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1989 >

December 1989 Decisions >
G.R. No. 89572 December 21,
1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS,
ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. SAN DIEGO, ET AL.:

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 89572. December 21, 1989.]

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 1/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

(DECS) an DIRECTOR OF CENTER FOR EDUCATIONAL

MEASUREMENT, Petitioners, v. ROBERTO REY C. SAN
DIEGO and JUDGE TERESITA DIZON-CAPULONG, in her
capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court
of Valenzuela, Metro Manila, Branch 172, Respondents.

Ramon M. Guevara for Private Respondent.

SYLLABUS

1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; CASE OF TABLARIN V. GUTIERREZ,

(152 SCRA 730) UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF
THE NATIONAL MEDICAL ADMISSION TEST REITERATED IN
CASE AT BAR. — In Tablarin v. Gutierrez, this Court upheld
the constitutionality of the NMAT as a measure intended to
limit the admission to medical schools only to those who have
initially proved their competence and preparation for a
medical education. In the case at bar, respondent judge
agreed with the petitioner that the said case was not
applicable. Her reason was that it upheld only the
requirement for the admission test and said nothing about the
so-called "three-flunk rule." We see no reason why the
rationale in the Tablarin case cannot apply to the case at bar.
The issue raised in both cases is the academic preparation of
the applicant. This may be gauged at least initially by the
admission test and, indeed with more reliability, by the three-
flunk rule. The latter cannot be regarded any less valid than
the former in the regulation of the medical profession.

2. ID.; POLICE POWER; REQUISITES IN THE EXERCISE

THEREOF. — Police power is validly exercised if (a) the
interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those
of a particular class, require the interference of the State, and
(b) the means employed are reasonably necessary to the
attainment of the object sought to be accomplished and not
unduly oppressive upon individuals.

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; COMPLIED WITH IN CASE AT BAR. — The

proper exercise of the police power requires the concurrence
of a lawful subject and a lawful method. The subject of the

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 2/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

challenged regulation is certainly within the ambit of the

police power. It is the right and indeed 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 method employed by the
challenged regulation is not irrelevant to the purpose of the
law nor is it arbitrary or oppressive. The three-flunk rule is
intended to insulate the medical schools and ultimately the
medical profession from the intrusion of those not qualified to
be doctors. While every person is entitled to aspire to be a
doctor, he does not have a constitutional right to be a doctor.
This is true of any other calling in which the public interest is
involved; and the closer the link, the longer the bridge to
one’s ambition. The State has the responsibility to harness its
human resources and to see to it that they are not dissipated
or, no less worse, not used at all. These resources must be
applied in a manner that will best promote the common good
while also giving the individual a sense of satisfaction. A
person cannot insist on being a physician if he will be a
menace to his patients. If one who wants to be a lawyer may
prove better as a plumber, he should be so advised and
adviced. Of course, he may not be forced to be a plumber, but
on the other hand he may not force his entry into the bar. By
the same token, a student who has demonstrated promise as
a pianist cannot be shunted aside to take a course in nursing,
however appropriate this career may be for others.

4. ID.; ID.; ACADEMIC FREEDOM, NOT ABSOLUTE. — The

right to quality education is not absolute. The Constitution
also provides that "every citizen has the right to choose a
profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable and
equitable admission and academic requirements." The private
respondent must yield to the challenged rule and give way to
those better prepared. Where even those who have qualified
may still not be accommodated in our already crowded
medical schools, there is all the more reason to bar those
who, like him, have been tested and found wanting.

5. ID.; ID.; EQUAL PROTECTION CAUSE NOT VIOLATED IN

CASE AT BAR. — The contention that the challenged rule
violates the equal protection clause is not well-taken. A law
does not have to operate with equal force on all persons or

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 3/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

things to be conformable to Article III, Section 1 of the

Constitution. There can be no question that a substantial
distinction exists between medical students and other
students who are not subjected to the NMAT and the three-
flunk rule. The medical profession directly affects the very
lives of the people, unlike other careers which, for this
reason, do not require more vigilant regulation. The
accountant, for example, while belonging to an equally
respectable profession, does not hold the same delicate
responsibility as that of the physician and so need not be
similarly treated. There would be unequal protection if some
applicants who have passed the tests are admitted and others
who have also qualified are denied entrance. In other words,
what the equal protection requires is equality among equals.
The Court feels that it is not enough to simply invoke the right
to quality education as a guarantee of the Constitution: one
must show that he is entitled to it because of his preparation
and promise. The private respondent has failed the NMAT five
times. While his persistence is noteworthy, to say the least, it
is certainly misplaced, like a hopeless love.

DECISION

CRUZ, J.:

The issue before us is mediocrity. The question is whether a

person who has thrice failed the National Medical Admission Test
(NMAT) is entitled to take it again.

The petitioner contends he may not, under its rule that —

h) A student shall be allowed only three (3) chances to take the

NMAT. After three (3) successive failures, a student shall not be
allowed to take the NMAT for the fourth time.

The private respondent insists he can, on constitutional grounds.

But first the facts.

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 4/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

The private respondent is a graduate of the University of the East

with a degree of Bachelor of Science in Zoology. The petitioner
claims that he took the NMAT three times and flunked it as many
times. 1 When he applied to take it again, the petitioner rejected
his application on the basis of the aforesaid rule. He then went to
the Regional Trial Court of Valenzuela, Metro Manila, to compel his
admission to the test.

chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

In his original petition for mandamus, he first invoked his

constitutional rights to academic freedom and quality education.
By agreement of the parties, the private respondent was allowed
to take the NMAT scheduled on April 16, 1989, subject to the
outcome of his petition. 2 In an amended petition filed with leave
of court, he squarely challenged the constitutionality of MECS
Order No. 12, Series of 1972, containing the above-cited rule. The
additional grounds raised were due process and equal protection. chanrobles

virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

After hearing, the respondent judge rendered a decision on July

4, 1989, declaring the challenged order invalid and granting the
petition. Judge Teresita Dizon-Capulong held that the petitioner
had been deprived of his right to pursue a medical education
through an arbitrary exercise of the police power. 3

We cannot sustain the respondent judge. Her decision must be

reversed.

In Tablarin v. Gutierrez, 4 this Court upheld the constitutionality

of the NMAT as a measure intended to limit the admission to
medical schools only to those who have initially proved their
competence and preparation for a medical education. Justice
Florentino P. Feliciano declared for a unanimous Court:

chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Perhaps the only issue that needs some consideration is whether

there is some reasonable relation between the prescribing of
passing the NMAT as a condition for admission to medical school
on the one hand, and the securing of the health and safety of the
general community, on the other hand. This question is perhaps
most usefully approached by recalling that the regulation of the
practice of medicine in all its branches has long been recognized

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 5/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

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. What we have before us in the instant case is closely
related: the regulation of access to medical schools. MECS Order
No. 52, s. 1985, as noted earlier, 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 state of our social and
economic development, are widely known.

chanrobles law library : red

We believe that the government is entitled to prescribe an

admission test like the NMAT as a means of 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." Given the widespread use today of such
admission tests in, for instance, medical schools in the United
States of America (the Medical College Admission Test [MCAT])
and quite probably, in other countries with far more developed
educational resources than our own, and taking into account the
failure or inability of the petitioners to even attempt to prove
otherwise, 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

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 6/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

treat our bodies and minds for disease or trauma.

chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

However, the respondent judge agreed with the petitioner that

the said case was not applicable. Her reason was that it upheld
only the requirement for the admission test and said nothing
about the so-called "three-flunk rule."

cralaw virtua1aw library

We see no reason why the rationale in the Tablarin case cannot

apply to the case at bar. The issue raised in both cases is the
academic preparation of the applicant. This may be gauged at
least initially by the admission test and, indeed with more
reliability, by the three-flunk rule. The latter cannot be regarded
any less valid than the former in the regulation of the medical
profession.

chanrobles law library

There is no need to redefine here the police power of the State.

Suffice it to repeat that the power is validly exercised if (a) the
interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a
particular class, require the interference of the State, and (b) the
means employed are reasonably necessary to the attainment of
the object sought to be accomplished and not unduly oppressive
upon individuals. 5

In other words, the proper exercise of the police power requires

the concurrence of a lawful subject and a lawful method.

The subject of the challenged regulation is certainly within the

ambit of the police power. It is the right and indeed 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 method employed by the challenged regulation is not

irrelevant to the purpose of the law nor is it arbitrary or
oppressive. The three-flunk rule is intended to insulate the
medical schools and ultimately the medical profession from the
intrusion of those not qualified to be doctors.
cralawnad

While every person is entitled to aspire to be a doctor, he does

not have a constitutional right to be a doctor. This is true of any
other calling in which the public interest is involved; and the

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 7/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

closer the link, the longer the bridge to one’s ambition. The State
has the responsibility to harness its human resources and to see
to it that they are not dissipated or, no less worse, not used at all.
These resources must be applied in a manner that will best
promote the common good while also giving the individual a
sense of satisfaction.

chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

A person cannot insist on being a physician if he will be a menace

to his patients. If one who wants to be a lawyer may prove better
as a plumber, he should be so advised and adviced. Of course, he
may not be forced to be a plumber, but on the other hand he may
not force his entry into the bar. By the same token, a student who
has demonstrated promise as a pianist cannot be shunted aside
to take a course in nursing, however appropriate this career may
be for others.

chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

The right to quality education invoked by the private respondent

is not absolute. The Constitution also provides that "every citizen
has the right to choose a profession or course of study, subject to
fair, reasonable and equitable admission and academic
requirements." 6

The private respondent must yield to the challenged rule and give
way to those better prepared. Where even those who have
qualified may still not be accommodated in our already crowded
medical schools, there is all the more reason to bar those who,
like him, have been tested and found wanting.

The contention that the challenged rule violates the equal

protection clause is not well-taken. A law does not have to
operate with equal force on all persons or things to be
conformable to Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution.

There can be no question that a substantial distinction exists

between medical students and other students who are not
subjected to the NMAT and the three-flunk rule. The medical
profession directly affects the very lives of the people, unlike
other careers which, for this reason, do not require more vigilant
regulation. The accountant, for example, while belonging to an
equally respectable profession, does not hold the same delicate
responsibility as that of the physician and so need not be similarly
treated.

chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 8/32
9/6/22, 5:38 PM G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 - DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, ET AL. v. ROBERTO REY C. S…

There would be unequal protection if some applicants who have

passed the tests are admitted and others who have also qualified
are denied entrance. In other words, what the equal protection
requires is equality among equals.

The Court feels that it is not enough to simply invoke the right to
quality education as a guarantee of the Constitution: one must
show that he is entitled to it because of his preparation and
promise. The private respondent has failed the NMAT five times. 7
While his persistence is noteworthy, to say the least, it is certainly
misplaced, like a hopeless love.

chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad

No depreciation is intended or made against the private

Respondent. It is stressed that a person who does not qualify in
the NMAT is not an absolute incompetent unfit for any work or
occupation. The only inference is that he is a probably better, not
for the medical profession, but for another calling that has not
excited his interest.

chanrobles.com : virtual law library

In the former, he may be a bungler or at least lackluster; in the

latter, he is more likely to succeed and may even be outstanding.
It is for the appropriate calling that he is entitled to quality
education for the full harnessing of his potentials and the
sharpening of his latent talents toward what may even be a
brilliant future.

We cannot have a society of square pegs in round holes, of

dentists who should never have left the farm and engineers who
should have studied banking and teachers who could be better as
merchants.

It is time indeed that the State took decisive steps to regulate

and enrich our system of education by directing the student to
the course for which he is best suited as determined by initial
tests and evaluations. Otherwise, we may be "swamped with
mediocrity," in the words of Justice Holmes, not because we are
lacking in intelligence but because we are a nation of misfits.

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The decision of the

respondent court dated January 13, 1989, is REVERSED, with
costs against the private Respondent. It is so ordered.

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1989decemberdecisions.php?id=953 9/32