Law writers use the word "shall" to denote a duty imposed on a person or an entity.
Law writers use the word "must" to connote a prerequisite or condition precedent that requires meeting certain conditions, consisting of certain components, or possessing certain characteristics.
Law writers sometimes prefer "must" if the word is used in a sentence in which the subject is an inanimate object rather than a person or entity on which a duty can be imposed. ~ Example: "A grievance must be filed within 90 days of the adverse action."
At times, either "shall" or "must" is correct. So, a law writer will consider the context and desired point of emphasis. ~ Example 1: "Notice must be given in writing." versus Example 2: "A review shall be conducted within 45 days of the filing of a formal request for review." ~ Consider that Example 1 relates to a required characteristic of the notice, while Example 2 relates to a person with the duty to conduct the review.
Law writers can often avoid the entire issue by writing the "facts and nothing but the facts" when appropriate. Example: "The successful candidate qualifies for the position by scoring the highest on the test."
Source:
http://lawist.blogspot.com/2009/12/zen-of-law-writing-must-vs-shall.html
Review Quizzes
EnP Review Quiz
Sunday, March 20, 2011
STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR CPE
CPE IS BACK
Continuing Professional Education (CPE) was implemented again by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) through PRC Resolution No. 2004 – 179 dated March 10, 2004.
Highlights
Republic of the Philippines
Professional Regulation Commission
Manila
Resolution No. 2004 ・179
Series of 2004
STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION FOR ALL PROFESSIONS
ARTICLE I
CPE OBJECTIVES, DEFINITION, NATURE, AND RATIONALE
Section 1. Objectives ・The CPE programs shall have these objectives: (1) To provide and ensure the continuous education of a registered professional with the latest trends in the profession brought about by modernization and scientific and technological advancement; (2) To raise and maintain the professional's capability
for delivering professional services; (3) To attain and maintain the highest standard and quality in the practice of his profession; (4)To make the professional globally competitive; and (5) To promote the general welfare of the public.
Section 2. Definition ・Continuing Professional Education (CPE) refers to the inculcation, assimilation and acquisition of knowledge, skills, proficiency and ethical and moral values, after the initial registration of a professional, that raise and enhance the professional's technical skills and competence.
Section 3. Nature ・The CPE programs consist of properly planned and structured activities, the implementation of which requires the participation a determinate group of professionals to meet the requirements of voluntary maintaining and improving the occupational standards and ethics of the professionals.
Section 4. Rationale ・Voluntary compliance with the CPE program is an effective and credible means of insuring competence, integrity and global competitiveness of professionals in order to allow him/her to continue the practice of his/her profession.
ARTICLE II
THE CPE COUNCILS: CREATION, COMPOSITION, TERMS OF OFFICE, FUNCTIONS, MEETINGS.
Section 5. CREATION ・Each of the concerned professional regulatory boards (PRBs), upon approval by the PRC, shall create a council within thirty days from the effectively of this resolution shall be known as the CPE council which shall assist its corresponding PRB in implementing its CPE programs.
Section 6. COMPOSITION ・Each CPE council shall be composed of a chairperson and two members. The chairperson of each CPE council shall be chosen from among the members of the PRB by the members themselves. The first member shall be the president or, in
his absence or incapacity, any officer chosen by the board of directors of the Accredited Professional Organization (APO). The second member shall be the president or, in his absence or incapacity, any officer of the organization of the deans or
department heads or schools, colleges or universities offering the course requiring licensure examination. In the absence of such organization, the second member shall be chosen and appointed by the PRC from at least three recommendees of the PRB concerned. Said recommendees shall be well known academicians.
Section 7. Terms of Office ・The term of office of the chairperson of each CPE council shall be co-terminus with his/her incumbency in the PRC. The first member shall have a term of office co-terminus with his/her incumbency as officer of the APO; the second member shall have a term of office co-terminus with his/her
incumbency as officer of the organization of deans or heads of the departments. In case of the academinician-member, upon the expiration of their respective terms of office in the PRB, APO or organization of deans of heads departments, the chairperson, first member and second member shall continue to function as such in the CPE Council until the appointment or election of their respective
successors in the PRB, APO or organization.
Section 8. Exercise of Powers and Functions ・Each CPE Council shall upon majority vote, exercise powers and functions which shall include but shall not be limited to the following:
1. Accept evaluate and approve applications for accreditation of CPE providers
2. Accept, evaluate and approve applications for accreditation of CPE programs, activities or sources as to their relevance to the profession and determine the number of CPE credit units to be earned on the basis of the contents of the program, activity or source submitted by the CPE providers.
3. Accept, evaluate and approve applications for exemptions from CPE requirements.
4. Monitor the implementation by the CPE providers of their programs, activities or sources.
5. Assess periodically and upgrade criteria for accreditation of CPE providers and CPE programs, activities or sources.
6. Perform such other related functions that may be incidental to the implementation of the CPE programs or policies.
ARTICLE III
CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION OF PROVIDERS, PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES OR SOURCES; EQUIVALENT CREDIT UNITS; CREDIT REQUIREMENTS; EXEMPTIONS AND OTHER MATTERS
Section 12. Criteria for Accreditation. In order to merit accreditation, the following criteria shall be complied with:
A. For CPE Provider
1. Must be a duly registered organization, firm, institution or agency, or a professional of good standing and has never been convicted of a crime.
2. Shall have an established mechanism for measuring the quality of the program being offered or administered;
3. Must have adequate, modern and updated instructional materials to carry out the CPE programs and activities;
4. Shall have instructors, lecturers and resource speakers with good moral character and technical competence and are, preferably, holders of current professional licenses.
B. For CPE programs, activities or sources
1. The scope shall be beyond the basic preparation for admission to the practice of the profession. The contents shall be relevant/related, but not limited to the practice of the profession.
2. The programs, activities or sources shall enhance the competence of the professional by upgrading and updating knowledge and skills for the practice of the profession as brought about by modernization and scientific and technical advancements in the profession.
MATRIX FOR CPE PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES OR SOURCES
PROGRAMS CREDIT UNITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
1. SEMINARS/CONVENTION
1.1 PARTICIPANT 1 CU PER HOUR CERTIFICATE OF ATTENDANCE WITH NUMBER OF HOURS, SEMINAR PROGRAMS CERTIFIED LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
1.2 RESOURCE SPEAKER 5 CU PER HOUR PHOTOCOPY OF PLAQUE
CERTIFICATION AND COPY OF PAPER, PROGRAM INVITATION
2.1 MASTER'S DEGREE 1 CU PER ACADEMIC UNIT
30 ADDITIONAL UPON COMLPETION OF DEGREE UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATION DIPLOMA AND TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS
Section 14. CPE Credit Units. The total CPE units for registered professionals with baccalaureate degree shall be sixty (60) credit units for three (3) years. Any excess credit units earned shall not be carried over to the next three-year period except credit units earned for doctoral and masteral degrees.
The total CPE credit units for registered professionals without baccalaureate degree shall not be carried over the next three-year period.
One credit hour of CPE program, activity or source shall be equivalent to one credit unit.
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE: FEBRARY 23, 2004
DATE OF EFFECTIVITY: MARCH 10, 2004
Continuing Professional Education (CPE) was implemented again by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) through PRC Resolution No. 2004 – 179 dated March 10, 2004.
Highlights
Republic of the Philippines
Professional Regulation Commission
Manila
Resolution No. 2004 ・179
Series of 2004
STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION FOR ALL PROFESSIONS
ARTICLE I
CPE OBJECTIVES, DEFINITION, NATURE, AND RATIONALE
Section 1. Objectives ・The CPE programs shall have these objectives: (1) To provide and ensure the continuous education of a registered professional with the latest trends in the profession brought about by modernization and scientific and technological advancement; (2) To raise and maintain the professional's capability
for delivering professional services; (3) To attain and maintain the highest standard and quality in the practice of his profession; (4)To make the professional globally competitive; and (5) To promote the general welfare of the public.
Section 2. Definition ・Continuing Professional Education (CPE) refers to the inculcation, assimilation and acquisition of knowledge, skills, proficiency and ethical and moral values, after the initial registration of a professional, that raise and enhance the professional's technical skills and competence.
Section 3. Nature ・The CPE programs consist of properly planned and structured activities, the implementation of which requires the participation a determinate group of professionals to meet the requirements of voluntary maintaining and improving the occupational standards and ethics of the professionals.
Section 4. Rationale ・Voluntary compliance with the CPE program is an effective and credible means of insuring competence, integrity and global competitiveness of professionals in order to allow him/her to continue the practice of his/her profession.
ARTICLE II
THE CPE COUNCILS: CREATION, COMPOSITION, TERMS OF OFFICE, FUNCTIONS, MEETINGS.
Section 5. CREATION ・Each of the concerned professional regulatory boards (PRBs), upon approval by the PRC, shall create a council within thirty days from the effectively of this resolution shall be known as the CPE council which shall assist its corresponding PRB in implementing its CPE programs.
Section 6. COMPOSITION ・Each CPE council shall be composed of a chairperson and two members. The chairperson of each CPE council shall be chosen from among the members of the PRB by the members themselves. The first member shall be the president or, in
his absence or incapacity, any officer chosen by the board of directors of the Accredited Professional Organization (APO). The second member shall be the president or, in his absence or incapacity, any officer of the organization of the deans or
department heads or schools, colleges or universities offering the course requiring licensure examination. In the absence of such organization, the second member shall be chosen and appointed by the PRC from at least three recommendees of the PRB concerned. Said recommendees shall be well known academicians.
Section 7. Terms of Office ・The term of office of the chairperson of each CPE council shall be co-terminus with his/her incumbency in the PRC. The first member shall have a term of office co-terminus with his/her incumbency as officer of the APO; the second member shall have a term of office co-terminus with his/her
incumbency as officer of the organization of deans or heads of the departments. In case of the academinician-member, upon the expiration of their respective terms of office in the PRB, APO or organization of deans of heads departments, the chairperson, first member and second member shall continue to function as such in the CPE Council until the appointment or election of their respective
successors in the PRB, APO or organization.
Section 8. Exercise of Powers and Functions ・Each CPE Council shall upon majority vote, exercise powers and functions which shall include but shall not be limited to the following:
1. Accept evaluate and approve applications for accreditation of CPE providers
2. Accept, evaluate and approve applications for accreditation of CPE programs, activities or sources as to their relevance to the profession and determine the number of CPE credit units to be earned on the basis of the contents of the program, activity or source submitted by the CPE providers.
3. Accept, evaluate and approve applications for exemptions from CPE requirements.
4. Monitor the implementation by the CPE providers of their programs, activities or sources.
5. Assess periodically and upgrade criteria for accreditation of CPE providers and CPE programs, activities or sources.
6. Perform such other related functions that may be incidental to the implementation of the CPE programs or policies.
ARTICLE III
CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION OF PROVIDERS, PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES OR SOURCES; EQUIVALENT CREDIT UNITS; CREDIT REQUIREMENTS; EXEMPTIONS AND OTHER MATTERS
Section 12. Criteria for Accreditation. In order to merit accreditation, the following criteria shall be complied with:
A. For CPE Provider
1. Must be a duly registered organization, firm, institution or agency, or a professional of good standing and has never been convicted of a crime.
2. Shall have an established mechanism for measuring the quality of the program being offered or administered;
3. Must have adequate, modern and updated instructional materials to carry out the CPE programs and activities;
4. Shall have instructors, lecturers and resource speakers with good moral character and technical competence and are, preferably, holders of current professional licenses.
B. For CPE programs, activities or sources
1. The scope shall be beyond the basic preparation for admission to the practice of the profession. The contents shall be relevant/related, but not limited to the practice of the profession.
2. The programs, activities or sources shall enhance the competence of the professional by upgrading and updating knowledge and skills for the practice of the profession as brought about by modernization and scientific and technical advancements in the profession.
MATRIX FOR CPE PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES OR SOURCES
PROGRAMS CREDIT UNITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
1. SEMINARS/CONVENTION
1.1 PARTICIPANT 1 CU PER HOUR CERTIFICATE OF ATTENDANCE WITH NUMBER OF HOURS, SEMINAR PROGRAMS CERTIFIED LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
1.2 RESOURCE SPEAKER 5 CU PER HOUR PHOTOCOPY OF PLAQUE
CERTIFICATION AND COPY OF PAPER, PROGRAM INVITATION
2.1 MASTER'S DEGREE 1 CU PER ACADEMIC UNIT
30 ADDITIONAL UPON COMLPETION OF DEGREE UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATION DIPLOMA AND TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS
Section 14. CPE Credit Units. The total CPE units for registered professionals with baccalaureate degree shall be sixty (60) credit units for three (3) years. Any excess credit units earned shall not be carried over to the next three-year period except credit units earned for doctoral and masteral degrees.
The total CPE credit units for registered professionals without baccalaureate degree shall not be carried over the next three-year period.
One credit hour of CPE program, activity or source shall be equivalent to one credit unit.
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE: FEBRARY 23, 2004
DATE OF EFFECTIVITY: MARCH 10, 2004
CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION (CPE) Council
CPE units can be earned through the mechanism which was mandated by Executive Order No. 266 issues on July 25, 1995. It institutionalized the CPE Programs of the various Professional Regulatory Boards (PRBs) under the supervision of PRC and was implemented for several years until its deferment in 2000. Last year, Resolution No. 2004-179 provided once again a standardized guidelines and procedures for the implementation of the continuing professional education for all profession.
CPE is defined as referring to the inculcation, assimilation and acquisition of knowledge, skills, proficiency and ethical and moral values, after the initial registration of a professional that raised and enhances the professional’s technical skills and professional competence. The CPE Program has the following objectives: 1) to provide and ensure the continuous education of a registered professional with the latest trends in the profession brought about by modernization and scientific and technological advancement; 2) to raise and maintain the professional’s capability
for delivering professional services; 3) to attain and maintain the highest standard and quality of the practice of his profession; 4) to make the professional globally competitive; and 5) to promote the general welfare of the public.
To implement the CPE Programs for registered professionals the law mandated the
creation of CPE Council for its respective profession which shall assist its corresponding PRB in implementing its CPE Program. It is composed of a chairman and two (2) members. The Chairman is chosen from among the members of PRB by the members themselves. The first member shall be the President or, in his absence or incapacity, any officer chosen by the Board of Directors of the Accredited Professional Organization (APO). The second member shall be the President or in his absence or incapactiy, any officer of the organization of deans or department
heads of schools, colleges or universities offering the course requiring licensure examination. In the absence of such organization, the second member shall be chosen and appointed by the PRC from at least three (3) recommendees of the PRB concerned; said recommendees should be wellknown academicians.
The term of office of the Chairman of the CPE Council shall be co-terminus with his / her incumbency in the PRB. The first member shall have the term of office co-terminus with his / her incumbency as officer of the APO. The second member shall have a term of office co-terminus with his / her incumbency as officer of the organization of deans or heads of departments. In the case of academicians chosen and appointed by the PRC, his/her term of office shall be for two (2) years with one reappointment The CPE Council holds regular meetings once a month on a date and place set by the said Council. Its power and functions include but is not limited to the following : 1) accept, evaluate and approve applications of CPE providers; 2) accept, evaluate and approve applications for the accreditation of CPE programs, activities or sources as their relevance to the profession and determine the number of CPE credit units to be earned on the basis of the contents of the program., activity or source as submitted by the CPE providers; 3) accept, evaluate and approve
applications for exemptions from CPE requirements.
The CPE programs and activities as well as the CPE Providers to conduct these programs must secure prior accreditation from the CPE council. CPE provider is either a duly registered organization, firm, institution or agency or even a person or professional of good standing. The provider shall be required to present an established mechanism for measuring the quality of the program being offered or administered; must have adequate, modern and updated instructional materials to carry out the CPE program and activities; shall have instructors, lecturers and
resource speakers with good moral character and technical competence and are, preferably,holders of current professional licenses.
Any provider may submit to the CPE Council programs, activities or sources to be
approved and accredited for CPE units. The scope of CPE programs, activities or sources shall be beyond the basic preparation to the practice of the profession. The contents shall be relevant, but not limited, to the practice of profession. The programs, activities or sources shall enhance the competence of the professional by upgrading and updating knowledge and skills for the practice of the profession as brought about by modernization and scientific and technical advancements in
the profession.
Following is the Matrix for CPE Programs, activities or sources with their corresponding credit units and supporting documents required.
MATRIX FOR CPE PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES OR SOURCES
PROGRAMS - CREDIT UNITS - SUPPORTING DOCUMENT
1. SEMINARS/CONVENTION
1.1 PARTICIPANT - 1 CU PER HOUR - CERTIFICATE OF ATTENDANCE WITH NUMBER OF HOURS, SEMINAR PROGRAM, CERTIFIED LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
1.2 RESOURCE SPEAKER - 5 CU PER HOUR - PHOTOCOPY OF PLAQUE CERTIFICATION AND COPY OF PAPER, PROGRAM INVITATION
1.3 PANELIST/REACTOR - 3 CU PER HOUR - CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING ORGANIZATION AND COPY OF PROGRAM
1.4 FACILITATOR/MODERATOR - 2 CU PER HOUR - CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING ORGANIZATION AND COPY OF PROGRAM
2. ACADEMIC PREPARATION
(Residential and Distance Mode)
2.1 MASTER’S DEGREE - 1 CU PER ACADEMIC UNIT / 30 CU ADDITIONAL UPON COMPLETION OF DEGREE - UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATION, DIPLOMA AND TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS
2.2 DOCTORAL DEGREE - 2 CU PER ACADEMIC UNIT / 45 CU ADDITIONAL UPON COMPLETION OF DEGREE - UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATION, DIPLOMA AND TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS
2.3 RESIDENCY/EXTERNSHIP - 10 CU PER YEAR - HOSPITAL CERTIFICATION, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
2.4 FELLOWSHIP - 15 CU PER YEAR - CERTIFICATION FROM THE GRANTING INSTITUTION,
CERTIFICATE OF FELLOWSHIP
3. SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING PACKAGE
3.1 MODULE - 10 CU PER COMPLETE SET OF MODULE - COPY OF DULY-ACCOMPLISHED MODULE AND EVALUATION
3.2 TECHNICAL PAPER/ PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL ARTICLE - 1 CU / PROFESSIONAL / TECHNICAL ARTICLE - COPY OF DULY-ACCOMPLISHED MODULE AND EVALUATION,
4. AUTHORSHIP
4.1 RESEARCH / INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS / CREATIVE PROJECTS - 10 CREDIT UNITS - DULY CERTIFIED / PUBLISHED TECHNICAL REPORT / PAPER -
4.2 BOOK / MONOGRAPH - [25-50 PP] [51-100 Pp] [101 OR MORE Pp..] - PUBLISHED BOOK WITH PROOFOF COPYRIGHT
SINGLE AUTHOR [25-50 PP]20 CU ; [51-100 Pp]30 CU ; [101 OR MORE Pp..]40 CU
2 AUTHORS [25-50 PP]10 CU ; [51-100 Pp]20 CU ; [101 OR MORE Pp..]30 CU
3 OR MORE [25-50 PP] 5 CU ;[51-100 Pp]10 CU ; [101 OR MORE Pp..]20 CU
4.3 EDITOR - ½ OF THE CU AUTHORSHIP CATEGORY - PUBLISHED BOOK WITH PROOF OF AUTHORSHIP
4.4 ARTICLE [1-3Pp] [4-6 Pp] [7 OR MORE Pp.] PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ARTICLE
SINGLE AUTHOR [1-3Pp]4 CU ; [4-6 Pp] 6 CU ; [7 OR MORE Pp.]8 CU
2 AUTHOR [1-3Pp]3 CU ; [4-6 Pp]4 CU; [7 OR MORE Pp.] 6 CU
3 OR MORE [1-3Pp]2 CU ; [4-6 Pp]3 CU ; [7 OR MORE Pp.]4 CU
4.5 PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL EDITOR - 5 CU PER ISSUE COPY OF PUBLISHED JOURNAL
4.6 PEER REVIEWER 2 CU / ARTICLE DULY CERTIFIED COPY OF PUBLISHED ARTICLE / BOOK
5. INVENTIONS 10-30 CREDIT UNITS PER INVENTIONS - CERTIFIED COPY OF PATENT CERTIFICATE
6. POST GRADUATE / IN-SERVICE TRAINING - 0.25 CU PER HOUR (MAXIMUM OF 40 CU/TRAINING)- CERTIFICATE OF TRAINING & TRAINING DESCRIPTION
7. STUDY / OBSERVATION - 2 CU / DAY (MAXIMUM OF 30 CU / TOUR) - CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING INSTITUTION
8. PROFESSORIAL CHAIR - 10 CU / CHAIR / YEAR - CERTIFICATION OF GRANT OR APPOINTMENT
PAPER
SUCH OTHER ACTIVITIES / PROGRAMS / SOURCES TO BE RECOMMENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION
CPE is defined as referring to the inculcation, assimilation and acquisition of knowledge, skills, proficiency and ethical and moral values, after the initial registration of a professional that raised and enhances the professional’s technical skills and professional competence. The CPE Program has the following objectives: 1) to provide and ensure the continuous education of a registered professional with the latest trends in the profession brought about by modernization and scientific and technological advancement; 2) to raise and maintain the professional’s capability
for delivering professional services; 3) to attain and maintain the highest standard and quality of the practice of his profession; 4) to make the professional globally competitive; and 5) to promote the general welfare of the public.
To implement the CPE Programs for registered professionals the law mandated the
creation of CPE Council for its respective profession which shall assist its corresponding PRB in implementing its CPE Program. It is composed of a chairman and two (2) members. The Chairman is chosen from among the members of PRB by the members themselves. The first member shall be the President or, in his absence or incapacity, any officer chosen by the Board of Directors of the Accredited Professional Organization (APO). The second member shall be the President or in his absence or incapactiy, any officer of the organization of deans or department
heads of schools, colleges or universities offering the course requiring licensure examination. In the absence of such organization, the second member shall be chosen and appointed by the PRC from at least three (3) recommendees of the PRB concerned; said recommendees should be wellknown academicians.
The term of office of the Chairman of the CPE Council shall be co-terminus with his / her incumbency in the PRB. The first member shall have the term of office co-terminus with his / her incumbency as officer of the APO. The second member shall have a term of office co-terminus with his / her incumbency as officer of the organization of deans or heads of departments. In the case of academicians chosen and appointed by the PRC, his/her term of office shall be for two (2) years with one reappointment The CPE Council holds regular meetings once a month on a date and place set by the said Council. Its power and functions include but is not limited to the following : 1) accept, evaluate and approve applications of CPE providers; 2) accept, evaluate and approve applications for the accreditation of CPE programs, activities or sources as their relevance to the profession and determine the number of CPE credit units to be earned on the basis of the contents of the program., activity or source as submitted by the CPE providers; 3) accept, evaluate and approve
applications for exemptions from CPE requirements.
The CPE programs and activities as well as the CPE Providers to conduct these programs must secure prior accreditation from the CPE council. CPE provider is either a duly registered organization, firm, institution or agency or even a person or professional of good standing. The provider shall be required to present an established mechanism for measuring the quality of the program being offered or administered; must have adequate, modern and updated instructional materials to carry out the CPE program and activities; shall have instructors, lecturers and
resource speakers with good moral character and technical competence and are, preferably,holders of current professional licenses.
Any provider may submit to the CPE Council programs, activities or sources to be
approved and accredited for CPE units. The scope of CPE programs, activities or sources shall be beyond the basic preparation to the practice of the profession. The contents shall be relevant, but not limited, to the practice of profession. The programs, activities or sources shall enhance the competence of the professional by upgrading and updating knowledge and skills for the practice of the profession as brought about by modernization and scientific and technical advancements in
the profession.
Following is the Matrix for CPE Programs, activities or sources with their corresponding credit units and supporting documents required.
MATRIX FOR CPE PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES OR SOURCES
PROGRAMS - CREDIT UNITS - SUPPORTING DOCUMENT
1. SEMINARS/CONVENTION
1.1 PARTICIPANT - 1 CU PER HOUR - CERTIFICATE OF ATTENDANCE WITH NUMBER OF HOURS, SEMINAR PROGRAM, CERTIFIED LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
1.2 RESOURCE SPEAKER - 5 CU PER HOUR - PHOTOCOPY OF PLAQUE CERTIFICATION AND COPY OF PAPER, PROGRAM INVITATION
1.3 PANELIST/REACTOR - 3 CU PER HOUR - CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING ORGANIZATION AND COPY OF PROGRAM
1.4 FACILITATOR/MODERATOR - 2 CU PER HOUR - CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING ORGANIZATION AND COPY OF PROGRAM
2. ACADEMIC PREPARATION
(Residential and Distance Mode)
2.1 MASTER’S DEGREE - 1 CU PER ACADEMIC UNIT / 30 CU ADDITIONAL UPON COMPLETION OF DEGREE - UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATION, DIPLOMA AND TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS
2.2 DOCTORAL DEGREE - 2 CU PER ACADEMIC UNIT / 45 CU ADDITIONAL UPON COMPLETION OF DEGREE - UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATION, DIPLOMA AND TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS
2.3 RESIDENCY/EXTERNSHIP - 10 CU PER YEAR - HOSPITAL CERTIFICATION, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
2.4 FELLOWSHIP - 15 CU PER YEAR - CERTIFICATION FROM THE GRANTING INSTITUTION,
CERTIFICATE OF FELLOWSHIP
3. SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING PACKAGE
3.1 MODULE - 10 CU PER COMPLETE SET OF MODULE - COPY OF DULY-ACCOMPLISHED MODULE AND EVALUATION
3.2 TECHNICAL PAPER/ PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL ARTICLE - 1 CU / PROFESSIONAL / TECHNICAL ARTICLE - COPY OF DULY-ACCOMPLISHED MODULE AND EVALUATION,
4. AUTHORSHIP
4.1 RESEARCH / INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS / CREATIVE PROJECTS - 10 CREDIT UNITS - DULY CERTIFIED / PUBLISHED TECHNICAL REPORT / PAPER -
4.2 BOOK / MONOGRAPH - [25-50 PP] [51-100 Pp] [101 OR MORE Pp..] - PUBLISHED BOOK WITH PROOFOF COPYRIGHT
SINGLE AUTHOR [25-50 PP]20 CU ; [51-100 Pp]30 CU ; [101 OR MORE Pp..]40 CU
2 AUTHORS [25-50 PP]10 CU ; [51-100 Pp]20 CU ; [101 OR MORE Pp..]30 CU
3 OR MORE [25-50 PP] 5 CU ;[51-100 Pp]10 CU ; [101 OR MORE Pp..]20 CU
4.3 EDITOR - ½ OF THE CU AUTHORSHIP CATEGORY - PUBLISHED BOOK WITH PROOF OF AUTHORSHIP
4.4 ARTICLE [1-3Pp] [4-6 Pp] [7 OR MORE Pp.] PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ARTICLE
SINGLE AUTHOR [1-3Pp]4 CU ; [4-6 Pp] 6 CU ; [7 OR MORE Pp.]8 CU
2 AUTHOR [1-3Pp]3 CU ; [4-6 Pp]4 CU; [7 OR MORE Pp.] 6 CU
3 OR MORE [1-3Pp]2 CU ; [4-6 Pp]3 CU ; [7 OR MORE Pp.]4 CU
4.5 PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL EDITOR - 5 CU PER ISSUE COPY OF PUBLISHED JOURNAL
4.6 PEER REVIEWER 2 CU / ARTICLE DULY CERTIFIED COPY OF PUBLISHED ARTICLE / BOOK
5. INVENTIONS 10-30 CREDIT UNITS PER INVENTIONS - CERTIFIED COPY OF PATENT CERTIFICATE
6. POST GRADUATE / IN-SERVICE TRAINING - 0.25 CU PER HOUR (MAXIMUM OF 40 CU/TRAINING)- CERTIFICATE OF TRAINING & TRAINING DESCRIPTION
7. STUDY / OBSERVATION - 2 CU / DAY (MAXIMUM OF 30 CU / TOUR) - CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING INSTITUTION
8. PROFESSORIAL CHAIR - 10 CU / CHAIR / YEAR - CERTIFICATION OF GRANT OR APPOINTMENT
PAPER
SUCH OTHER ACTIVITIES / PROGRAMS / SOURCES TO BE RECOMMENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION
PRC Resolution on the CPE
Republic of the Philippines
Professional Regulation Commission
Manila
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-466
Series of 2008
REPEALING RESOLUTION 2004-179, SERIES OF 2004, THE “STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONTINIUNG PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION/DEVELOPMENT (CPE/ CPD) SYSTEM FOR ALL PROFESSIONS” AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REVISED STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION FO THE CPE/ CPD SYSTEM FOR ALL REGISTERED AND LICENSED PROFESSIONALS
WHEREAS, Section 14, Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution partly provides that “the sustained development of a reservoir of national talents x x x professionals x x x shall be promoted by the State;”
WHEREAS, the Professional Regulation Commission (the “Commission”), under Section 7 (a), (n), and (y) of Republic Act (RA) No. 8981 otherwise known as the “PRC Modernization Act of 2000, “ has these specific powers:
“(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;”
“(n) 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;”
“(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 issuances;”
WHEREAS, Section 9 (b) of R.A. No. 8981 provides that one of the Powers, Functions and Responsibilities of the Various Professional Regulatory Boards (PRBs) is “[T]o 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, x x x;”
WHEREAS, the formulation of the policy on CPE is in consonance with the objective to enhance and maintain high professional and occupational, ethical and technical standards in the practice of the professions;
WHEREAS, the President of the Republic of the Philippines issued on June 23, 2003, Executive Order (E.O.) No. 220, “[Directing the Adoption of the Code of Good Governance for the Professions in the Philippines”;
WHERERAS, the said Code was adopted by the Commission and the forty-four (44) PRBs, embodying principles of professional conduct, specifically, integrity and objectivity, professional competence, and global competitiveness;
WHEREAS, all the forty-three (43) PRBs and the forty-three (43) accredited professional organizations (APOs) are in favor of implementing a CPE in the practice of their respective professions;
WHEREAS, the Commission , as the instrument of the Filipino people in securing for the nation a reliable, trustworthy and progressive system of developing professionals whose competencies are globally competitive, has decided to prescribe guidelines and procedures to carry out the CPE for the registered and licensed professionals;
WHEREFORE, the Commission hereby RESOLVED, as it now RESOLVES, to prescribe, issue and promulgate the Revised Standardized Guidelines and Procedures for the Implementation of the Continuing Professional Education/Development (CPE/ CPD) system for All Registered and Licensed Professionals, which is made an integral part hereof as Annex “A”.
This Resolution shall take effect after fifteen days following its complete and full publication, in the Official Gazette or any newspaper of general circulation.
Done in the City of Manila, this 1st day of August , 2008.
LEONOR TRIPON-ROSERO
Secretary
RUTH RAÑA-PADILLA
Commissioner
NILO L. ROSAS
Commissioner
Professional Regulation Commission
Manila
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-466
Series of 2008
REPEALING RESOLUTION 2004-179, SERIES OF 2004, THE “STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONTINIUNG PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION/DEVELOPMENT (CPE/ CPD) SYSTEM FOR ALL PROFESSIONS” AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REVISED STANDARDIZED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION FO THE CPE/ CPD SYSTEM FOR ALL REGISTERED AND LICENSED PROFESSIONALS
WHEREAS, Section 14, Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution partly provides that “the sustained development of a reservoir of national talents x x x professionals x x x shall be promoted by the State;”
WHEREAS, the Professional Regulation Commission (the “Commission”), under Section 7 (a), (n), and (y) of Republic Act (RA) No. 8981 otherwise known as the “PRC Modernization Act of 2000, “ has these specific powers:
“(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;”
“(n) 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;”
“(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 issuances;”
WHEREAS, Section 9 (b) of R.A. No. 8981 provides that one of the Powers, Functions and Responsibilities of the Various Professional Regulatory Boards (PRBs) is “[T]o 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, x x x;”
WHEREAS, the formulation of the policy on CPE is in consonance with the objective to enhance and maintain high professional and occupational, ethical and technical standards in the practice of the professions;
WHEREAS, the President of the Republic of the Philippines issued on June 23, 2003, Executive Order (E.O.) No. 220, “[Directing the Adoption of the Code of Good Governance for the Professions in the Philippines”;
WHERERAS, the said Code was adopted by the Commission and the forty-four (44) PRBs, embodying principles of professional conduct, specifically, integrity and objectivity, professional competence, and global competitiveness;
WHEREAS, all the forty-three (43) PRBs and the forty-three (43) accredited professional organizations (APOs) are in favor of implementing a CPE in the practice of their respective professions;
WHEREAS, the Commission , as the instrument of the Filipino people in securing for the nation a reliable, trustworthy and progressive system of developing professionals whose competencies are globally competitive, has decided to prescribe guidelines and procedures to carry out the CPE for the registered and licensed professionals;
WHEREFORE, the Commission hereby RESOLVED, as it now RESOLVES, to prescribe, issue and promulgate the Revised Standardized Guidelines and Procedures for the Implementation of the Continuing Professional Education/Development (CPE/ CPD) system for All Registered and Licensed Professionals, which is made an integral part hereof as Annex “A”.
This Resolution shall take effect after fifteen days following its complete and full publication, in the Official Gazette or any newspaper of general circulation.
Done in the City of Manila, this 1st day of August , 2008.
LEONOR TRIPON-ROSERO
Secretary
RUTH RAÑA-PADILLA
Commissioner
NILO L. ROSAS
Commissioner
Related Supreme Court Decision on the CPE
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 87134 January 20, 2000
PHILIPPINE REGISTERED ELECTRICAL PRACTITIONERS, INC. (PREPI), represented by BEN ROSETE, HERMINIO S. RAMIREZ, CASIANO PAULINO, NONATO VILLANUEVA, JR., RENATO AME, MARIO BLAS, SAMUEL BRAVO, AMOR CRUZ, FRANCISCO DULLER, BENITO ESPAÑOL, PABLO FERNANDEZ, WILFREDO GORRICHO, GRACIANO LAPID, LUISITO MAGANA, FERNANDO MALABANAN, MARTIN MARTINEZ, EDGARDO MERIDA, ARNEL PALILIO, GAUDIOSO SEURA, ZENON TUBIO, MARIANO YAPE, AND NILO MONTALBAN, petitioner,
vs.
JULIO FRANCIA, JR., in his capacity as COMMISSIONER OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION, MEDERICO T. CORTEZ, in his capacity as CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, and HONORABLE REBECCA SALVADOR, JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MANILA, BRANCH 1, respondents.
R E S O L U T I O N
QUISUMBING, J.:
For review on certiorari is the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Manila, Branch 1, which dismissed PREPI's petition for declaratory relief and/or prohibition, for lack of merit.
Petitioner is an organization composed of professional electrical engineers, associate electrical engineers, assistant electrical engineers, and master electricians. It is represented in this case by several of its officers and members.
On July 6, 1988, petitioner filed before the RTC an action for declaratory relief and/or prohibition, assailing the constitutional validity of Resolution No. 1, Series of 1986, issued by the Board of Electrical Engineering, then headed by respondent Mederico T. Cortez. The Professional Regulation Commission, then headed by respondent Julio Francia, Jr., approved said resolution on February 10, 1986.
In said resolution, the Board adopted guidelines for the implementation of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Program for electrical engineers. Included therein is a requirement that beginning January 1, 1988, every electrical engineer must earn credit units of CPE before his license could be renewed. To earn credit units, he must first apply for accreditation with the Institute of Integrated Electrical Engineers of the Philippines (IIEE).
Petitioner assailed before the trial court the resolution as violate of the Constitution's equal protection and due process clauses, prohibition against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws, and mandate for the protection of the rights of workers.
Following are the relevant portions of the resolution:
III. Possible Exemption to the CPE Guidelines
A. An electrical engineering practitioner who has reached the age at 60.
B. A top government official of at least Vice-President or Bureau Director level, or equivalent ranking position in private sector.
C. A practitioner undergoing post-doctoral studies during his current registration period.
D. Those recommended by the PRC or by [the] Board of Electrical Engineering.
IV. Method of Evaluation and Credit Units
A. Basic Requirements
1. PRC requires that a registered Master Electrician or Electrical Engineer [of] any grade shall renew his license once every three (3) years.
2. As a condition Precedent to the above, he shall first secure from IIEE's Continuing Professional Education Committee a certificate that he has complied with PRC's requirements for Continuing Professional Education.
3. A duly registered electrical engineering practitioner should have the following credit units for a period of three (3) years:
Registered Master Electrician 100 credit units
Registered Electrical Engineer 200 credit units (All grades).1
After hearing, the trial court dismissed petitioner's action, on the ground that petitioner failed to establish a clear and unequivocal violation of the Constitution or statute. It pointed out that all reasonable doubts should be resolved in favor of the validity of a statute.
According to the trial court, the questioned resolution is a valid implementation of Section 3, Republic Act No. 184,2 and Section 6, Presidential Decree No. 223.3
The dispositive portion of the RTC decision reads:
WHEREFORE, the petition for declaratory relief and/or prohibition with prayer for injunction is hereby dismissed, for lack of merit and the temporary restraining order issued by this Court on July 13, 1988, is lifted and set aside. No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.4
In this direct appeal to the Supreme Court on pure questions of law, petitioner now raises the following assignment of errors:
I. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN DECLARING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 1 SERIES OF 1986, CONSTITUTIONAL.
II. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE RESPONDENTS PRC AND BEE ARE VESTED WITH POWERS TO ADOPT AND PROMULGATE RULES SUCH AS THE RESOLUTION IN QUESTION.
III. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN FINDING THAT BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 1 SERIES OF 1986, IS VALID, LEGAL AND NOT TAINTED WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION.
IV. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE PETITIONERS' FEAR AND APPREHENSION THAT THE CPE PROGRAM WOULD BE BURDENSOME AND A SOURCE OF RED TAPE IS ONLY IMAGINARY THAN REAL.5
Essentially, petitioner raises the following issues in this petition for review: (1) whether or not the Board of Electrical Engineering had authority to issue the resolution in question; and, if it did, (2) whether or not the resolution issued pursuant to that authority is constitutionally valid.
Petitioner argues that the PRC and the Board did not have the requisite authority to issue said resolution. Citing Section 6(a) of P.D. No. 223, petitioner claims that the Board only has visitation powers, "to see [to it] that groper compliments of professionals are employed and given proper responsibilities and remuneration." In other words, petitioner contends that the Board may only conduct inspections of sites where electrical engineering jobs are conducted, primarily to safeguard the welfare of electrical engineers.
Petitioner contends further that implementation of the resolution would amount to deprivation of property without due process of law, particularly because an electrical engineer's or electrician's license will not be renewed if he failed to obtain any or enough units under the CPE program. Petitioner points out that under Section 32 of R.A. No. 184, the Board has the power to suspend licenses only upon proper notice and hearing.
Petitioner argues that the license to practice a profession is not a mere privilege but a property right. If it were, indeed, only a privilege, it could not be taken away by the simple expedient of passing a board resolution. Petitioner asserts that such license may only be revoked after the license holder is found guilty of the offenses specified in R.A. No. 184 or P.D. No. 223. Since failure to earn units under the CPE program is not among those enumerated, if cannot be made a ground for the revocation of an electrical engineer's or electrician's license.
Petitioner also argues that the classification of persons who may be exempt from the CPE program requirement appears to be arbitrary. Petitioner points out that
. . . electrical engineers and master electricians who are in the responsible practice of designing and constructing electrical installations are excluded in the said exemptions and are not given any credit or merit.6
Petitioner further contends that the questioned board resolution does not provide any criteria for the PRC or Board to follow in recommending exemptions to the CPE requirement.
Petitioner also assails the resolution as violative of the equal protection clause since only electrical engineers are subject to the requirements mentioned therein. Members of other professions are not similarly required.
For the respondents, the Solicitor General submits that, contrary to petitioner's assertion, the Board had the authority to promulgate the questioned resolution pursuant to Section 3, R.A. No. 184 and Section 6, P.D. No. 223. The latter law is not limited to the power of inspection and visitation as petitioner contends. It includes the power to formulate policies and programs as may be necessary to improve the practice of a profession.
The Solicitor General further contends that Resolution No. 1, Series of 1986 is not violative of the Constitution. He dismisses as unfounded petitioner's fears regarding the automatic revocation of license for non-compliance with the CPE requirement. Nothing in the questioned resolution provides for such automatic revocation, according to him; there is, thus, no violation of the due process clause.
Neither does the resolution violate the equal protection clause since not all electrical engineers are similarly situated, he further argues. He claims that there are those who, by reason of age and expertise, may reasonably be exempted from the CPE requirement. Equal protection, he concludes, does not require universal application of laws but only equality among equals.
The Solicitor General likewise contends that the resolution is not a bill of attainder since it does not seek to punish but only to regulate the practice of a profession. Neither is it an ex post facto law, he says, since the ex post facto principle only applies to penal statutes and not to regulations involving civil rights such as the practice of a profession.
In his view also, there is no violation of Article VI, Section 28 of the Constitution, which states, in its second paragraph as follows:
(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national development program of the government.
The Solicitor General opines that this provision is simply not pertinent nor applicable in this case. For the fees that may be charged electrical engineers in complying with the CPE program, he argues, are not the duties or imposts referred to in the preceding constitutional provision.
The issue before this Court boils down to (a) whether the Board of Electrical Engineers in the light of the provisions of R.A. No. 184, had the authority to issue the questioned resolution; and (b) whether the resolution itself violates certain provisions of the present Constitution.
We begin by noting that the Board issued the resolution as a means purportedly to upgrade the knowledge and skills of electrical engineers. Specifically, the resolution has the following objectives:
1. To upgrade and update technical knowledge and skills of Electrical Engineering Practitioners;
2. To effect transfer of technology from experts and specialists to Electrical Engineering Practitioners;
3. To stimulate self-improvement, and thus enhance practitioner's competence and self-confidence; and
4. To broaden practitioner's horizon to include awareness of his social responsibility.7
Effectivity of the resolution has been expressly made subject to the approval of the PRC and its publication in the Official Gazette, as may be seen from its effectivity clause.
VI. Effectivity
These Rules shall take effect upon approval hereof by the Commission and after fifteen (15) days following the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette.8
We further note that Section 3, of R.A. No. 184, mandates the Board to recommend to the PRC the adoption of
measures as may be deemed proper for the maintenance of good ethics and standards in the practice of electrical engineering in the Philippines. . . (Emphasis supplied.)
Moreover, Section 6(a) of P.D. No. 223 gives the various professional boards the power
[t]o look from time to time into 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. . . (Emphasis supplied.)
For said purposes,
the members of a Board may personally or through subordinate employees of the Commission conduct ocular inspection or visit industrial, mechanical, electrical or chemical plants or works, hospitals, clinics and other engineering works. . .
On this point, petitioner now insists that the authority of the Board is limited to the conduct of ocular inspections. But nothing in said provision in any way imposes such an interpretation. The Board in fact may even do away with ocular inspections, as can be gleaned from the use of the word "may", implying that the conduct of ocular inspections is merely directory and not mandatory. For sure, conducting ocular inspections is only one way of ensuring compliance with laws and rules relative to the professional practice of electrical engineering. But it certainly is not the only way.
We are, therefore, constrained to concede to the Board the existence of the power to issue the assailed resolution, in pursuance of its mandates under R.A. 184 and P.D. 223. What now remains is a determination of whether or not said resolution suffers from constitutional infirmities.
Supervening events, however, have rendered moot this constitutional inquiry. On July 25, 1995, President Fidel V. Ramos issued Executive Order No. 266, entitled "Institutionalization of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Programs of the Various Professional Regulatory Boards (PRBs) under the Supervision of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC)." E.O. No. 266 found it imperative to impose upon registered professionals the completion of the CPE as a pre-requisite for the renewal of their licenses. Avowedly, CPE would enable the professionals
not only to upgrade or improve their technical knowledge and skills but also to keep them abreast with modern trends and technology in their respective professions, thereby assuring the rendition of highly qualitative professional service/s that will be globally competitive under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and at the same time securing the safety and protection of the public.9
In fact, E.O. No. 266 provides that:
Sec. 1. The completion by professional licensees of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) programs adopted by all Boards is hereby imposed as a mandatory requirement for the renewal of professional licenses. (Emphasis supplied.)
For its part, the PRC issued Resolution No. 507, Series of 1997, 10 entitled "Standardized Guidelines and Procedures for the Implementation of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Programs for all Professions." This resolution expressly repealed
other Resolutions, circulars or other issuances promulgated by the PRC and Professional Regulatory Boards providing for, or having any bearing on the implementation of the CPE programs, activities or sources. . . 11
Thus, the assailed BEE Resolution No. 1, Series of 1986, providing for guidelines on CPE for electrical engineers, is no longer in effect now.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED for being moot and academic.1âwphi1.nêt
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo, Mendoza, Buena and De Leon, Jr., JJ., concur.
Footnotes
1 Rollo, pp. 34-35.
2 An Act to Regulate the Practice of Electrical Engineering in the Philippines, to Provide for the Licensing and Registration of Electrical Engineers and Electricians and for Other Purposes. Section 3, paragraph 3 provides: "The Board shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by this Act, shall from time to time, look into conditions affecting the practice of electrical engineering in the Philippines and, whenever necessary, recommend to the Secretary of Public Works and Communications (now Professional Regulation Commission) the adoption of such measures as may be deemed proper for the maintenance of good ethics and standards in the practice of electrical engineering in the Philippines and thus safeguard public welfare, life, health and property."
3 Creating the Professional Regulation Commission and Prescribing its Powers and Functions. Section 6 reads: "The various Boards shall retain the following powers, functions and responsibilities: a) To look from time to time into 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. . ."
4 Rollo, p. 41.
5 Id. at 18.
6 Id. at 20-21.
7 Rollo, p. 63.
8 Id. at 64.
9 E.O. No. 266, WHEREAS Clauses.
10 Published August 4, 1997 in the Official Gazette.
11 PRC Res. No. 507, S. 1997, Sec. 20.
SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 87134 January 20, 2000
PHILIPPINE REGISTERED ELECTRICAL PRACTITIONERS, INC. (PREPI), represented by BEN ROSETE, HERMINIO S. RAMIREZ, CASIANO PAULINO, NONATO VILLANUEVA, JR., RENATO AME, MARIO BLAS, SAMUEL BRAVO, AMOR CRUZ, FRANCISCO DULLER, BENITO ESPAÑOL, PABLO FERNANDEZ, WILFREDO GORRICHO, GRACIANO LAPID, LUISITO MAGANA, FERNANDO MALABANAN, MARTIN MARTINEZ, EDGARDO MERIDA, ARNEL PALILIO, GAUDIOSO SEURA, ZENON TUBIO, MARIANO YAPE, AND NILO MONTALBAN, petitioner,
vs.
JULIO FRANCIA, JR., in his capacity as COMMISSIONER OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION, MEDERICO T. CORTEZ, in his capacity as CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, and HONORABLE REBECCA SALVADOR, JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MANILA, BRANCH 1, respondents.
R E S O L U T I O N
QUISUMBING, J.:
For review on certiorari is the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Manila, Branch 1, which dismissed PREPI's petition for declaratory relief and/or prohibition, for lack of merit.
Petitioner is an organization composed of professional electrical engineers, associate electrical engineers, assistant electrical engineers, and master electricians. It is represented in this case by several of its officers and members.
On July 6, 1988, petitioner filed before the RTC an action for declaratory relief and/or prohibition, assailing the constitutional validity of Resolution No. 1, Series of 1986, issued by the Board of Electrical Engineering, then headed by respondent Mederico T. Cortez. The Professional Regulation Commission, then headed by respondent Julio Francia, Jr., approved said resolution on February 10, 1986.
In said resolution, the Board adopted guidelines for the implementation of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Program for electrical engineers. Included therein is a requirement that beginning January 1, 1988, every electrical engineer must earn credit units of CPE before his license could be renewed. To earn credit units, he must first apply for accreditation with the Institute of Integrated Electrical Engineers of the Philippines (IIEE).
Petitioner assailed before the trial court the resolution as violate of the Constitution's equal protection and due process clauses, prohibition against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws, and mandate for the protection of the rights of workers.
Following are the relevant portions of the resolution:
III. Possible Exemption to the CPE Guidelines
A. An electrical engineering practitioner who has reached the age at 60.
B. A top government official of at least Vice-President or Bureau Director level, or equivalent ranking position in private sector.
C. A practitioner undergoing post-doctoral studies during his current registration period.
D. Those recommended by the PRC or by [the] Board of Electrical Engineering.
IV. Method of Evaluation and Credit Units
A. Basic Requirements
1. PRC requires that a registered Master Electrician or Electrical Engineer [of] any grade shall renew his license once every three (3) years.
2. As a condition Precedent to the above, he shall first secure from IIEE's Continuing Professional Education Committee a certificate that he has complied with PRC's requirements for Continuing Professional Education.
3. A duly registered electrical engineering practitioner should have the following credit units for a period of three (3) years:
Registered Master Electrician 100 credit units
Registered Electrical Engineer 200 credit units (All grades).1
After hearing, the trial court dismissed petitioner's action, on the ground that petitioner failed to establish a clear and unequivocal violation of the Constitution or statute. It pointed out that all reasonable doubts should be resolved in favor of the validity of a statute.
According to the trial court, the questioned resolution is a valid implementation of Section 3, Republic Act No. 184,2 and Section 6, Presidential Decree No. 223.3
The dispositive portion of the RTC decision reads:
WHEREFORE, the petition for declaratory relief and/or prohibition with prayer for injunction is hereby dismissed, for lack of merit and the temporary restraining order issued by this Court on July 13, 1988, is lifted and set aside. No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.4
In this direct appeal to the Supreme Court on pure questions of law, petitioner now raises the following assignment of errors:
I. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN DECLARING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 1 SERIES OF 1986, CONSTITUTIONAL.
II. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE RESPONDENTS PRC AND BEE ARE VESTED WITH POWERS TO ADOPT AND PROMULGATE RULES SUCH AS THE RESOLUTION IN QUESTION.
III. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN FINDING THAT BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 1 SERIES OF 1986, IS VALID, LEGAL AND NOT TAINTED WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION.
IV. THE LOWER COURT GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE PETITIONERS' FEAR AND APPREHENSION THAT THE CPE PROGRAM WOULD BE BURDENSOME AND A SOURCE OF RED TAPE IS ONLY IMAGINARY THAN REAL.5
Essentially, petitioner raises the following issues in this petition for review: (1) whether or not the Board of Electrical Engineering had authority to issue the resolution in question; and, if it did, (2) whether or not the resolution issued pursuant to that authority is constitutionally valid.
Petitioner argues that the PRC and the Board did not have the requisite authority to issue said resolution. Citing Section 6(a) of P.D. No. 223, petitioner claims that the Board only has visitation powers, "to see [to it] that groper compliments of professionals are employed and given proper responsibilities and remuneration." In other words, petitioner contends that the Board may only conduct inspections of sites where electrical engineering jobs are conducted, primarily to safeguard the welfare of electrical engineers.
Petitioner contends further that implementation of the resolution would amount to deprivation of property without due process of law, particularly because an electrical engineer's or electrician's license will not be renewed if he failed to obtain any or enough units under the CPE program. Petitioner points out that under Section 32 of R.A. No. 184, the Board has the power to suspend licenses only upon proper notice and hearing.
Petitioner argues that the license to practice a profession is not a mere privilege but a property right. If it were, indeed, only a privilege, it could not be taken away by the simple expedient of passing a board resolution. Petitioner asserts that such license may only be revoked after the license holder is found guilty of the offenses specified in R.A. No. 184 or P.D. No. 223. Since failure to earn units under the CPE program is not among those enumerated, if cannot be made a ground for the revocation of an electrical engineer's or electrician's license.
Petitioner also argues that the classification of persons who may be exempt from the CPE program requirement appears to be arbitrary. Petitioner points out that
. . . electrical engineers and master electricians who are in the responsible practice of designing and constructing electrical installations are excluded in the said exemptions and are not given any credit or merit.6
Petitioner further contends that the questioned board resolution does not provide any criteria for the PRC or Board to follow in recommending exemptions to the CPE requirement.
Petitioner also assails the resolution as violative of the equal protection clause since only electrical engineers are subject to the requirements mentioned therein. Members of other professions are not similarly required.
For the respondents, the Solicitor General submits that, contrary to petitioner's assertion, the Board had the authority to promulgate the questioned resolution pursuant to Section 3, R.A. No. 184 and Section 6, P.D. No. 223. The latter law is not limited to the power of inspection and visitation as petitioner contends. It includes the power to formulate policies and programs as may be necessary to improve the practice of a profession.
The Solicitor General further contends that Resolution No. 1, Series of 1986 is not violative of the Constitution. He dismisses as unfounded petitioner's fears regarding the automatic revocation of license for non-compliance with the CPE requirement. Nothing in the questioned resolution provides for such automatic revocation, according to him; there is, thus, no violation of the due process clause.
Neither does the resolution violate the equal protection clause since not all electrical engineers are similarly situated, he further argues. He claims that there are those who, by reason of age and expertise, may reasonably be exempted from the CPE requirement. Equal protection, he concludes, does not require universal application of laws but only equality among equals.
The Solicitor General likewise contends that the resolution is not a bill of attainder since it does not seek to punish but only to regulate the practice of a profession. Neither is it an ex post facto law, he says, since the ex post facto principle only applies to penal statutes and not to regulations involving civil rights such as the practice of a profession.
In his view also, there is no violation of Article VI, Section 28 of the Constitution, which states, in its second paragraph as follows:
(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national development program of the government.
The Solicitor General opines that this provision is simply not pertinent nor applicable in this case. For the fees that may be charged electrical engineers in complying with the CPE program, he argues, are not the duties or imposts referred to in the preceding constitutional provision.
The issue before this Court boils down to (a) whether the Board of Electrical Engineers in the light of the provisions of R.A. No. 184, had the authority to issue the questioned resolution; and (b) whether the resolution itself violates certain provisions of the present Constitution.
We begin by noting that the Board issued the resolution as a means purportedly to upgrade the knowledge and skills of electrical engineers. Specifically, the resolution has the following objectives:
1. To upgrade and update technical knowledge and skills of Electrical Engineering Practitioners;
2. To effect transfer of technology from experts and specialists to Electrical Engineering Practitioners;
3. To stimulate self-improvement, and thus enhance practitioner's competence and self-confidence; and
4. To broaden practitioner's horizon to include awareness of his social responsibility.7
Effectivity of the resolution has been expressly made subject to the approval of the PRC and its publication in the Official Gazette, as may be seen from its effectivity clause.
VI. Effectivity
These Rules shall take effect upon approval hereof by the Commission and after fifteen (15) days following the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette.8
We further note that Section 3, of R.A. No. 184, mandates the Board to recommend to the PRC the adoption of
measures as may be deemed proper for the maintenance of good ethics and standards in the practice of electrical engineering in the Philippines. . . (Emphasis supplied.)
Moreover, Section 6(a) of P.D. No. 223 gives the various professional boards the power
[t]o look from time to time into 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. . . (Emphasis supplied.)
For said purposes,
the members of a Board may personally or through subordinate employees of the Commission conduct ocular inspection or visit industrial, mechanical, electrical or chemical plants or works, hospitals, clinics and other engineering works. . .
On this point, petitioner now insists that the authority of the Board is limited to the conduct of ocular inspections. But nothing in said provision in any way imposes such an interpretation. The Board in fact may even do away with ocular inspections, as can be gleaned from the use of the word "may", implying that the conduct of ocular inspections is merely directory and not mandatory. For sure, conducting ocular inspections is only one way of ensuring compliance with laws and rules relative to the professional practice of electrical engineering. But it certainly is not the only way.
We are, therefore, constrained to concede to the Board the existence of the power to issue the assailed resolution, in pursuance of its mandates under R.A. 184 and P.D. 223. What now remains is a determination of whether or not said resolution suffers from constitutional infirmities.
Supervening events, however, have rendered moot this constitutional inquiry. On July 25, 1995, President Fidel V. Ramos issued Executive Order No. 266, entitled "Institutionalization of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Programs of the Various Professional Regulatory Boards (PRBs) under the Supervision of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC)." E.O. No. 266 found it imperative to impose upon registered professionals the completion of the CPE as a pre-requisite for the renewal of their licenses. Avowedly, CPE would enable the professionals
not only to upgrade or improve their technical knowledge and skills but also to keep them abreast with modern trends and technology in their respective professions, thereby assuring the rendition of highly qualitative professional service/s that will be globally competitive under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and at the same time securing the safety and protection of the public.9
In fact, E.O. No. 266 provides that:
Sec. 1. The completion by professional licensees of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) programs adopted by all Boards is hereby imposed as a mandatory requirement for the renewal of professional licenses. (Emphasis supplied.)
For its part, the PRC issued Resolution No. 507, Series of 1997, 10 entitled "Standardized Guidelines and Procedures for the Implementation of the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Programs for all Professions." This resolution expressly repealed
other Resolutions, circulars or other issuances promulgated by the PRC and Professional Regulatory Boards providing for, or having any bearing on the implementation of the CPE programs, activities or sources. . . 11
Thus, the assailed BEE Resolution No. 1, Series of 1986, providing for guidelines on CPE for electrical engineers, is no longer in effect now.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED for being moot and academic.1âwphi1.nêt
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo, Mendoza, Buena and De Leon, Jr., JJ., concur.
Footnotes
1 Rollo, pp. 34-35.
2 An Act to Regulate the Practice of Electrical Engineering in the Philippines, to Provide for the Licensing and Registration of Electrical Engineers and Electricians and for Other Purposes. Section 3, paragraph 3 provides: "The Board shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by this Act, shall from time to time, look into conditions affecting the practice of electrical engineering in the Philippines and, whenever necessary, recommend to the Secretary of Public Works and Communications (now Professional Regulation Commission) the adoption of such measures as may be deemed proper for the maintenance of good ethics and standards in the practice of electrical engineering in the Philippines and thus safeguard public welfare, life, health and property."
3 Creating the Professional Regulation Commission and Prescribing its Powers and Functions. Section 6 reads: "The various Boards shall retain the following powers, functions and responsibilities: a) To look from time to time into 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. . ."
4 Rollo, p. 41.
5 Id. at 18.
6 Id. at 20-21.
7 Rollo, p. 63.
8 Id. at 64.
9 E.O. No. 266, WHEREAS Clauses.
10 Published August 4, 1997 in the Official Gazette.
11 PRC Res. No. 507, S. 1997, Sec. 20.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Is CPE mandatory or voluntary?
“(RA 9266) SECTION 28. Continuing Professional Development (CPD). - To promote public interest and to safeguard life, health and property, all practicing architects shall maintain a program of continuing professional development. The integrated and accredited professional organization shall have the responsibility of developing a continuing professional development program for architects. Other entities or organizations may become CPD providers upon accreditation by the Board.” What is the meaning of SHALL? Here are important notes gathered from the book “STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION" Sixth Edition 2009 by Atty. Ruben E. Agpalo: “As a general rule, the use of the word “shall” in a statute implies that the statute is mandatory. It means “ought to,” “must” and when used in a statute or regulation, expresses what is mandatory. In common parlance and in its ordinary signification, the term ‘shall’ is a word of command, and one which has or which must be given a compulsory meaning, and it is generally imperative or mandatory. It has invariable significance to impose a duty which may be enforced, particularly if the public is in favor of this meaning or when addressed to public officials, or where public interest is involved, or where the public or persons have rights which ought to be exercised or enforced unless a contrary intent appears. The presumption is that the word “shall” in a statute is used in an imperative, and not in a directory sense. If a different interpretation is sought, it must rest upon something in the character of the legislation or in the context which will justify a different meaning.” (Diokno v. Rehabilitation Finance Corp., 91 Phil. 608 (1952), citing Words and Phrases Per. Ed., 90, 93; Boranda v. Gustilo, 165 SCRA 757 (1988); Gonzales v. Chavez, 205 SCRA 816 (1992).
Referring to the provisions of the 2010 PRC Continuing Professional Education/Development Guidelines, to wit: Page 8 and 9 G. Specific Responsibilities of the PRB/APO in CPE/CPD: 3. Mandatory CPE/CPD for all Professionals. The PRB / APO should require their respective disciplines to develop and maintain competence relevant and appropriate to their work and professional responsibilities. The responsibility for developing and maintaining competence rests primarily among professionals. Page 24 Section VIII SANCTIONS A. Sanctions for the Violation of Section 19 of PRC Resolution No. 2008-466, series of 2008 1. Accredited CPE Provider Accreditation shall be withdrawn from the CPE/CPD Provider who a. is found not complying with the prescribed rules and regulations for the CPE/CPD, or b. has committed substantial deviation from the approved program, or c. has submitted false reports, or d. has committed such other acts that the Council finds to be in violation of the interest of the program 2. Commission Employees. Any employee of the Commission who causes, abets, or helps in the renewal of the ID Card/License of a registered licensed professional (RLP) without complying with mandatory CPE/CPE provisions of the professional regulatory law (PRL) shall be considered to have violated office and/or civil service rule and regulation and shall be proceeded against administratively and if found guilty shall be meted out the penalties provided for by the said laws and rules and regulations. xxx B. Resolution of Questions, Issues, Concerns and/or Other CPE/CPD Matters Questions, issues, concerns, and/or other CPE/CPD matters are resolved by the CPE/CPD Council of the respective Professional Regulatory Boards. Decisions of the CPE/CPD Council may be appealed to the Professional Regulatory Board concerned and thereafer to the Professional Regulation Commission.
300-year old Paoay Church to get facelift
Please help stop the desecration of a World Heritage structure. One of the few remaining treasures that we have.
Let us do something about this:.....
MANILA, March 15, 2011— The provincial government of Ilocos Norte announced a plan to restore an ancient church, considered one of the region's major attractions.
The renovation of the St. Augustine Church or Paoay Church, also include the towns of San Nicolas and Currimao and the cities of Laoag and Batac for tourism purposes.
Ilocos Norte Governor Imee Marcos said the project aims that the province becomes the country's "northern gateway."
"We have a lot of potential tourist attraction to be developed, enriched and appreciated, and to be enjoyed," the PIA-1 quoted Marcos as saying in an article March 9.
She said known architect Felino Palafox was tapped to design a tourism plan that would consolidate Paoay's existing infrastructures surrounding Paoay Church like the plaza, the ruins of the Catholic convent and the frontage of a state-run university.
"Tourism is the largest industry in the world, bigger than oil," Palafox had said when he agreed to come up with a tourism design for Ilocos Norte.
A commercial arcade, which would feature the town's unique products, along a stretch of the road lining the Paoay Church will also rise to generate more tourist activities.
Construction of Paoay Church was started by the Augustinian friars in 1694. Led by Fr. Antonio Estavillo, it was completed in 1894 and was re-dedicated in the same year.
During the revolution in 1898, its coral stone bell tower was used by the Katipuneros as an observation post.
Paoay Church is part of the UNESCO World Heritage List. It is currently a property of the Diocese of Laoag, Ilocos Norte. [CBCPNews]
Let us do something about this:.....
MANILA, March 15, 2011— The provincial government of Ilocos Norte announced a plan to restore an ancient church, considered one of the region's major attractions.
The renovation of the St. Augustine Church or Paoay Church, also include the towns of San Nicolas and Currimao and the cities of Laoag and Batac for tourism purposes.
Ilocos Norte Governor Imee Marcos said the project aims that the province becomes the country's "northern gateway."
"We have a lot of potential tourist attraction to be developed, enriched and appreciated, and to be enjoyed," the PIA-1 quoted Marcos as saying in an article March 9.
She said known architect Felino Palafox was tapped to design a tourism plan that would consolidate Paoay's existing infrastructures surrounding Paoay Church like the plaza, the ruins of the Catholic convent and the frontage of a state-run university.
"Tourism is the largest industry in the world, bigger than oil," Palafox had said when he agreed to come up with a tourism design for Ilocos Norte.
A commercial arcade, which would feature the town's unique products, along a stretch of the road lining the Paoay Church will also rise to generate more tourist activities.
Construction of Paoay Church was started by the Augustinian friars in 1694. Led by Fr. Antonio Estavillo, it was completed in 1894 and was re-dedicated in the same year.
During the revolution in 1898, its coral stone bell tower was used by the Katipuneros as an observation post.
Paoay Church is part of the UNESCO World Heritage List. It is currently a property of the Diocese of Laoag, Ilocos Norte. [CBCPNews]
