Supreme Court's Decision regarding NLE

  1. hi to all june 2006 examinees...:wink2:

    just want to inform everyone that as of today 5pm. our supreme court has already announced its decision regarding the controversial june 2006 nursing licensure exam.

    its decision includes:
    1. nullity with statistical treatment done by P.R.C.
    they will use the original list of board passers without the used statistical treatment. (those who passed because of the statistical treatment will have a retake on of test 3 & 5 which is 1, 687 examinees), (1, 186 examinees who failed because of the statistical treatment may be given their slot back in the roster)
    2. those who belong to the original list of passer without the statistical treatment who will be proven to have attended review and final coaching of the 3 alleged review centers may not be issued licenses or revoked...

    that's what i have seen on channel 2... just browse on newspapers and news... later ... God bless!
    •  
  2. 36 Comments

  3. by   msdreamchaser
    just post your additional infos... thank u!
  4. by   msdreamchaser
    ei i forgot in addition, there will be pursuance of postponed oath taking, registration and release of licenses...
  5. by   flight027
    afaik, the court said those examinees who would be found to have gained from the leaked questions can still be removed from the roster of passed examinees.

    however, the NBI said they won't be pursuing any actions against the students at this time because, in their own words, it would be impossible to prove who actually gained from the leaked questions. mere possesion of the leaked questions, they said, does not prove culpability.



    Quote from ^same^
    hi to all june 2006 examinees...:wink2:


    2. those who belong to the original list of passer without the statistical treatment who will be proven to have attended review and final coaching of the 3 alleged review centers may not be issued licenses or revoked...

    that's what i have seen on channel 2... just browse on newspapers and news... later ... God bless!
  6. by   pinoy_guy
    just want to point out that it was the court of appeals ruling, not the supreme court's.

    if this case reaches the supreme court, it might take a year or more before the case can be decided with finality.

    i think everything rests on whether this batch will be accepted by foreign employers, if these foreign employers are satisfied with the way the government tied up the loose ends. (loose ends: the senate testimony of leakage of tests 1 & 2, the claims of bautista that a review center transmitted its review outside manila & baguio, specifically to cebu & davao.) reports about these loose ends are all over the philippine news websites on the internet.


    Quote from flight027
    the court said those examinees who would be found to have gained from the leaked questions can still be removed from the roster of passed examinees.
    the nbi report said it will be "difficult, if not impossible" to determine who benefitted from the leakage.


    Quote from inq7.net
    the court also noted that "only the examinees that may be identified by the national bureau of investigation to have attended the final coaching at gapuz, inress and pentagon, were to be penalized with a retaking of tests 3 and 5.

    the three review centers have been identified by the nbi as having been allegedly involved in the leakage.
    will these reviewers take this sitting down? "mere possession of the leaked questions, they said, does not prove culpability." what's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

    it's sad that these graduates spent a lot of money to review at these centers, and will be made to retake tests 3 & 5.


    Quote from flight027
    however, the nbi said they won't be pursuing any actions against the students at this time because, in their own words, it would be impossible to prove who actually gained from the leaked questions. mere possesion of the leaked questions, they said, does not prove culpability.
    ouch. "at this time" can mean anything--even revocation of license later when they decide that a graduate had access to the leakage.

    it will be easy to determine who got the leakage--the nbi had compared the names of the reviewees of the affected review centers with the list of passers. i wonder why they did not say anything about this with the release of their report on the leakage issue.
    Last edit by pinoy_guy on Oct 13, '06 : Reason: format error
  7. by   pinoy_guy
    executive secretary eduardo ermita said the decision to defer issuing the executive order came after the national bureau of investigation submitted a report identifying five review centers that leaked the questions.

    "the nbi is now trying to construct a listing to match those who enroled in these review centers to the list of exam passers of the professional regulatory commission," ermita said.

    . . .

    the bureau report said the five review centers were all in luzon.

    http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?...ws1_oct11_2006
    from 5 to 3.

    and what happened to the nbi list matching "those who enroled in these review centers to the list of exam passers of the professional regulatory commission?"
  8. by   pinoy_guy
    amazing how different news agencies report different aspects of the issue.

    the issue regarding retake was tackled by the court of appeals.


    it (the court of appeals), however, agreed with the nbi's findings that there were examinees who attended the "final coaching session" of gapuz, inress and pentagon before the nle who may have benefited from the leakage.

    but it stressed that only the examinees who may be identified later by the nbi or prc and bon to have attended the final coaching should be penalized with retaking tests iii and v.

    on the other hand, the ca said those who did not review and those who reviewed but did not attend the final coaching session of the said review centers should be allowed to take their oath and be given their licenses.

    http://www.mb.com.ph/main2006101476983.html
  9. by   nei_ph
    any of u guys got any ideas how will they come up with the 1,687 students that would retake test 3 and 5?

    i have a feeling that those who got a rating of FLAT 75% would be included.

    well, i really hope that won't be the case, or I'll sure be in a huge trouble...
  10. by   Mike28770
    Ohhhh Sorry I made mistake! And removed my comments. Bad logic day...Sorry
    Last edit by Mike28770 on Oct 14, '06
  11. by   pRinSesa
    hey..lists of passers came out TWICE?!? how come i ddnt know that? sHoot me!!!
  12. by   nurse_plush
    i didnt know there was 2 list, i only read the ist one released in inq7.net
  13. by   wholisticmom
    Im shock abt the news regarding the thousands of supposed to be new nurses who legaly passed the RN exam but unfortunately was deleted on the list. I wonder why the news focus more on the list of retakers and neglect the issue of those who passed but been deleted because of the said 1.1%( more or less) adjustment. I think if justice and integrity really the issue here they should be given the chance to oath. We hope to find balance in the big issue and hope for a sweet happy ending for everyone.
  14. by   lawrence01
    Quote from wholisticmom
    Im shock abt the news regarding the thousands of supposed to be new nurses who legaly passed the RN exam but unfortunately was deleted on the list. I wonder why the news focus more on the list of retakers and neglect the issue of those who passed but been deleted because of the said 1.1%( more or less) adjustment. I think if justice and integrity really the issue here they should be given the chance to oath. We hope to find balance in the big issue and hope for a sweet happy ending for everyone.
    They are already re-instated to one of the passers and will be allowed to take the oath.

close