LABOR Sec.

16, RA 10022; Prohibition on Referral Decking System

STANDARDS
Title: AMCOW v. GCC GR No. 207132
Date: December 6, 2016
Ponente: Brion, J.
ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAL CLINICS FOR GCC APPROVED MEDICAL CENTERS
OVERSEAS WORKERS, INC., (AMCOW), ASSOCIATION, INC. AND CHRISTIAN
REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS PRESIDENT, CANGCO, respondents
DR. ROLANDO VILLOTE, petitioner

NATURE OF THE CASE: Civil Case

FACTS
DOH issued Administrative Order No. 5-01 directing the decking or equal distribution of migrant workers
among the several clinics who are member of the GAMCA. Such was issued to comply with the Gulf
Cooperative Countries (GCC) States' requirement that only GCC-accredited medical clinics/hospitals'
examination results will be honored by the GCC States' respective embassies. The A.O. was later held in
abeyance, suspended and repealed by A.O. No. 106, A.O. No. 159 and A.O. No. 167, respectively.

There was continued implementation of the referral decking system despite the DOH's prior suspension
directives. The DOH issued Department Memorandum No. 2008-0210 stating "OFW clinics, duly
accredited/licensed by the DOH and/or by the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PHILHEALTH)
belonging to and identified with GAMCA xxx to forthwith stop, terminate, withdraw or otherwise end the
xxx 'referral decking system.'" GAMCA questioned Memorandum before the Office of the President (OP).
In a decision. the OP nullified the Memorandum.

RA No. 10022 later lapsed into law, which includes the amendment Sec. 23 of RA 8042 adding the
prohibition on decking practices. DOH, through a letter-order, directed GAMCA to cease and desist.
GAMCA assailed the constitutionality of paragraphs c.3 and c.4, Sec. 16 of RA 10022, as well as Sec. 1
(c) and (d), Rule XI of its IRR. AMCOW filed an urgent motion for leave to intervene and to file an
opposition-in-intervention, attaching its opposition-in-intervention to its motion.
ISSUE/S
WON the DOH CDO letters prohibiting GAMCA from implementing the referral decking system embodied
under Section 16 of Republic Act No. 10022 violates Section 3, Article II of the 1987 Constitution for being
an undue taking of property – No.
RULING
The letter-order implementing the prohibition against the referral decking system is quasi-judicial in
nature. This characteristic requires that procedural due process be observed - that is, that the clinics
concerned be given the opportunity to be heard
before the standard found in the law can be applied to them.

Factual circumstances unique to the present case, however, lead the court to conclude that while it was an
error of law for the DOH to issue a CDO without complying with the requirements of procedural due
process, its action did not amount to a grave abuse of discretion

The regulation applies to Philippine hospitals and clinics, as well as to employers of OFWs. It does not
apply to the GCCs and their visa processes. That the regulation could affect the OFWs' compliance with the
visa requirements imposed by GCCs does not place it outside the regulatory powers of the Philippine
government.

The court noted that RA No. 10022 expressly reflects the declared State policies to "uphold the dignity of its
citizens whether in the country or overseas, in general, and Filipino migrant workers," and to "afford full
protection to labor, local and overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote full employment and
equality of employment opportunities for all. Towards this end, the State shall provide adequate and timely
social, economic and legal services to Filipino migrant workers." The prohibition against the referral
decking system in Section 16 of RA No. 10022 is an expression and implementation of these state
policies.