x

Drugstores Association of the Philippines, Inc. v NCDA  G.R. No. 194561, Sept. 14, 2016, Third Division Drugstores Assocition o! the "hi#ippines, $nc. nd Northern %u&on Drug 'orportion, petitioners Ntion# 'ounci# on Dis(i#it) A*irs+ D-+ D+ /$R+ D$%G+ DSD, respondents cts n rch 24, 1992, Repu(#ic Act 3R.A. No. 2, the gn 'rt !or Dis(#ed "ersons, 7s pssed into #7. The #7 de8nes dis(#ed persons, ipirent nd dis(i#it). n Apri# :0, 200, Repu(#ic Act No. 9442 3gn 'rt !or "ersons 7ith Dis(i#it) 7s encted ending RA 2. Speci8c##), Sec. :2 o! RA 9442 grnted the "Ds  20; discount on the purchse o! edicine 3upon su(ission s proo! o! his pertins to ther "rivi#eges nd $ncentives, inc#uding the purchse o! edicine 7s ?oint#) prou#gted () sever# governent gencies. n Apri# 2:, 200@, the N'DA issued Adinistrtive rder 3A.. 3A.. No. 1, Series o! 200@, prescri(ing guide#ines 7hich shou#d serve s  echnis !or the issunce o!  "D $denti8ction 'rd 3$D' 7hich sh## (e the (sis !or providing privi#eges nd discounts to (on8de ( on8de "Ds. n Dece(er 9, 200@, the D issued Revenue Regu#tions No. 1 2009 prescri(ing ru#es nd regu#tions to ip#eent R.A. 9442 re#tive to the t= privi#eges o! "Ds nd t= incentives !or est(#ishents grnting the discount. n ) 20, 2009, the D- issued A.. A.. No. 20090011 speci8c##) stting tht the grnt o! 20; discount sh## (e provided in the purchse o! (rnded edicines nd un(rnded generic edicines !ro ## est(#ishents dispensing edicines !or

the e=c#usive use o! the "Ds. n Bu#) 2@, 2009, petitioners 8#ed  "etition !or "rohi(ition 7ith pp#iction !or  TR<"$ (e!ore the 'A to nnu# nd en?oin the ip#eenttion o! the 5 #7s (oveentioned 3in (o#d. n Bu#) 26, 2010, the 'A rendered  Decision upho#ding the constitution#it) o! RA 2 s ended, s 7e## s the ssi#ed dinistrtive issunces. $ssues N the 'A erred in ru#ing the "D discount s  v#id e=ercise o! po#ice po7er insted o! n inv#id e=ercise o! the po7er o! einent doin 3(ecuse it !i#s to provide ?ust copenstion to petitioners N the ssi#ed #7s vio#te the due process c#use N the de8nition o! Cdis(i#ities under the ssi#ed #7s re vgue, (iguous, nd unconstitution# N the "D discount vio#tes the eEu# protection c#use Rtio e den) the petition. The 'A is correct 7hen it pp#ied () n#og) the cse o! 'r#os Superdrug 'orportion et #. v. DSD, et #. 7herein e pronounced tht Sec. 4 o! RA 925 7hich grnts 20; discount on the purchse o! edicine o! senior citi&ens is  #egitite e=ercise o! po#ice po7er. "o#ice po7er is the po7er o! the stte to proote pu(#ic 7e#!re () restrining nd regu#ting the use o! #i(ert) nd propert). n the other hnd, the po7er o! einent doin is the inherent right o! the stte 3nd o! those entities to 7hich the po7er hs (een #7!u##) de#egted to conden privte propert) to pu(#ic use upon p)ent o! ?ust copenstion. $n the e=ercise o! po#ice po7er, propert) rights o! privte individu#s re su(?ected to restrints nd (urdens in order to secure the gener# co!ort, he#th, nd prosperit) o! the stte. A #egis#tive ct (sed on the po#ice po7er reEuires the concurrence o!  #7!u# su(?ect nd  #7!u# ethod. The priorit) given to "Ds 8nds its (sis in the 'onstitution

3Sec. 6 Art F$$ nd Sec. 11 Art F$$$. Thus, the Dec#rtion o! "o#ic) 3Sec. 2 o! RA 2 recogni&es tht dis(#ed persons re prt o! the "hi#ippine societ), to 7ho the Sente sh## give !u## support !or the iproveent o! their tot# 7e##(eing nd their integrtion into the instre o!  societ). The Stte sh## dopt po#icies ensuring the reh(i#ittion, se#!deve#opent nd se#!re#ince o! dis(#ed persons. -ence, the "D ndtor) discount on the purchse o! edicine is supported ()  v#id o(?ective or purpose. As in the cse o! senior citi&ens, the discount privi#ege to 7hich the "Ds re entit#ed is ctu##)  (ene8t en?o)ed () the gener# pu(#ic to 7hich these citi&ens (e#ong. The ens ep#o)ed in invoing the ctive prticiption o! the privte sector, in order to chieve the purpose or o(?ective o! the #7, is reson(#) nd direct#) re#ted. A#so, the ens ep#o)ed to provide  !ir, ?ust nd Eu#it) he#th cre to "Ds re reson(#) re#ted to its ccop#ishent, nd re not oppressive, considering tht s  !or o! rei(urseent, the discount e=tended to "Ds in the purchse o! edicine cn (e c#ied () the est(#ishents s ##o7(#e t= deductions. The three docuents 3see (ove entioned in Sec. :2 o! RA 2 s ended () RA 9442 to entit#e one to the discount ust (e red 7ith its $RR. N'DA A.. No. 1 provides the reson(#e guide#ines in the issunce o! $D's to "Ds s proo! o! their entit#eent to the privi#eges nd incentives nd 8##s the deti#s in the ip#eenttion o! the #7. "etitionersH insistence tht "rt $> 3D o! sid A is void (ecuse it ##o7s ##eged#) noncopetent persons #ie techers, heds o! est(#ishents nd heds o! NGs to con8r the edic# condition o! the pp#icnt is isp#ced. $t ust (e stressed tht on#) !or pprent dis(i#ities cn the techer 3 Cschoo# ssessent !or students or hed o!  (usiness est(#ishent 3 Ccerti8cte o! dis(i#it) !or ep#o)ees v#id#) issue the entioned reEuired docuent (ecuse, o(vious#), the dis(i#it) is esi#) seen or c#er#)  visi(#e. $t is, there!ore, not n unEu#i8ed grnt o! uthorit) !or the sid nonedic# persons s it is sip#) #iited to

pprent dis(i#ities. n the other hnd, nonpprent dis(i#ities cn on#) (e v#idted ()  #icensed privte or governent ph)sicin, nd  edic# certi8cte hs to (e presented in the procureent o! n $D'. There!ore, the provision cop#ies 7ith the stndrds o! su(stntive due process.  Aside !ro the de8nitions o!  person 7ith dis(i#it) or dis(#ed persons under RA 2 s ended () RA 9442 nd its $RR, N'DA A.. No. 1 speci8es tht $Ds sh## (e issued to those 7ith the !o##o7ing conditions ps)chosoci#, chronic i##ness, #erning, ent#, visu#, orthopedic, speech nd hering conditions. This inc#udes persons su*ering !ro dis(#ing diseses resu#ting to the personHs #iittions to do d) to d) ctivities s nor##) s possi(#e such s (ut not #iited to those undergoing di#)sis, hert disorders, severe cncer cses nd such other sii#r cses resu#ting to teporr) or pernent dis(i#it). Sii#r#), D- A.. No. 20090011 de8nes the di*erent ctegories o! dis(i#it). $n the instnt cse, e do not 8nd the !orestted de8nition o! ters s vgue nd (iguous. Sett#ed is the ru#e tht courts 7i## not inter!ere in tters 7hich re ddressed to the sound discretion o! the governent genc) entrusted 7ith the regu#tion o! ctivities coing under the speci# nd technic# trining nd no7#edge o! such genc). ith respect to RA 9442, its e=pressed pu(#ic po#ic) is the reh(i#ittion, se#!deve#opent nd se#!re#ince o! "Ds. "ersons 7ith dis(i#it) !or  c#ss seprte nd distinct !ro the other citi&ens o! the countr). $ndu(it(#), such su(stnti# distinction is gerne nd intite#) re#ted to the purpose o! the #7. Thus, 'ongress ) pss  #7 providing !or  di*erent tretent to persons 7ith dis(i#it) prt !ro the other citi&ens o! the countr). -e#d -IRIRI, the petition is DIN$ID. The Decision o! the 'ourt o! Appe#s dted Bu#) 26, 2010, nd the Reso#ution

dted Nove(er 19, 2010, in 'AGR. S" No. 10990: re  A$RID. A## concur.