Court of Appeals decision on 2006 NLE

  1. Please read for the whole article:

    Significant related article from the same source:
    Last edit by lawrence01 on Oct 13, '06
  2. Visit lawrence01 profile page

    About lawrence01

    Joined: Aug '05; Posts: 4,785; Likes: 900


  3. by   nurse_plush
    so this means that we may now apply for CGFNS & CES?
  4. by   pinoy_guy
    Quote from nurse_plush
    so this means that we may now apply for CGFNS & CES?
    you may apply anytime for the CGFNS CP exam and the CES.

    with the CA ruling, the PRC will start validating licenses of the June 2006 batch.

    unless another court ruling comes out.

    the big question is whether CGFNS/ICHP will accept the June 2006 NLE passers.

    we won't know until people try.

    please keep us updated on the issue.
  5. by   lawrence01
    PRC will announce the names of all 1,687 who will re-take the NLE this Monday.

    Related article:
    Last edit by lawrence01 on Oct 14, '06
  6. by   pinoy_guy
    Quote from lawrence01
    prc will announce the names of all 1,687 who will re-take the nle this monday.
    plus the examinees (passers or flunkers) who were presumed to have had access to the leakage (meaning they attended the final coaching sessions at these 3 review centers--this list might come out much later):

    the court (of appeals) also ruled that examinees who actually benefited from the leakage should also be made to retake the tests but left it to the executive department to identify them and apply the appropriate sanctions.

    to implement the ca's decision, gonzalez said he has ordered the nbi to get the list of examinees who took review courses at three review centers that the authorities had earlier identified as the ones who received the leaked material -- r.a. gapuz review center, inress review center, and pentagon review specialist inc. -- and those who attended the final coaching sessions where the leaked materials were supposedly distributed.

    "that is what should be done now. we should already implement the ca decision,'' he said. "once we identify these examinees -- whether they passed or failed -- they should retake. they must retake, that is the order of the ca. if they reviewed there, they should retake because the presumption is they cheated.''

    according to him, the nbi will subpoena the list of those who took the final coaching sessions in the three review centers. he said there is a list because those who attended the final review paid for their attendance.

    as for baguio, he said there might be a retake for all of the examinees and those found to have distributed leaked materials will criminally charged.
    will the e. coli hit le ventilateur?

    thousands enrolled at these 3 review centers. i doubt they would accept "the presumption is they cheated" and retake the nle.

    i don't think they realize this yet.
  7. by   lawrence01
    The way things are materializing, I think the CA decision is just sort of a template wherein future and additional decisions will be made from.

    Notice that sniping done by the CA by saying that PRC has practiced grave abuse of discretion? This is implying that the proper authorities should take a look on those.

    Personally, I don't like the idea of publishing those 1,687 names on spreadsheets. They can just post it on the PRC premises like they usualy do.

    Just my two cents.
  8. by   lawrence01
    Possibility of non-closure of the issue:

    No closure

    "Brion said that if the case reached the Supreme Court, the latter may either issue a temporary restraining order to stop the oath-taking or allow it to proceed while deliberating on the petition.

    But those who took the oath may still be stripped of their licenses if the high court reversed the lower court’s ruling, he pointed out.

    According to Brion, the issue was still quite contentious and nowhere near closure: “May kaguluhan. Magulo. Magulo pa rin, kaya nga sabi ko, wala pang closure ito. Wherever we are right now, we have to move on.”

    He said the first step to addressing the problem would be the immediate reconstitution of the Board of Nursing (BON), considering the seven vacancies there, and another licensure examination scheduled on Dec. 2 and 3.

    He also said there was a need to monitor the prosecution of those to be charged before the Ombudsman, particularly the officers of R.A. Gapuz Review Center, Inress Review Center and Pentagon Review Specialist Inc., as well as the BON members.

    Brion said he had submitted a list of possible replacements to the BON.

    Malacaang’s search committee will draw up a short list from which the President will make her choices.

    Brion reiterated that the cheating scandal had tainted the image of Filipino nurses here and abroad.

    He said the president of the Philippine Nurses Association in the United Kingdom had informed him that other countries that also send nurses there—like India—were capitalizing on the Philippine scandal.

    Pls. refer to this link for the whole article:
  9. by   suzanne4
    It still makes no difference in the US as to what happens in the Philippine with the exam, and what is permitted and what is not. Since there were issues with the exam, there must be a retake of the entire exam, and not just parts...............the nurses from the Philippines need to meet the requirements of the US and CGFNS is not going to change their requirements. They are bound by law to follow the rules that are in place. And they have said as much.

    The other issue is even trying to find an employer............none of the mroe legitimate ones are willing to touch a nurse that took the June exam until a retake is done.

    Changes are announced almost on a daily basis and they keep changing to suit the needs of who ever is publishing the article.
  10. by   mtreyes
    THis will create a BAD "PRECEDENT" i just feel verosorry for the current state of nursing in my beloved country... i hope we can still redeem the lost respect Philippine nurses receive from all over the world..... let us do our share...
  11. by   lawrence01
    Palace orders PRC to suspend oath taking.

    Read the article posted at at 2:05pm
  12. by   Mike28770
    an updated version is here --

    Please note that Mr. Brion explained the 15 days can be plus plus --

    "I hear that there are motions for reconsiderations to be filed. As a general rule, we don't implement decisions that are not yet final and unless otherwise directed by the courts," Brion said, adding that proceeding with the oath-taking might "cause legal complications."
    Brion and Ermita said that court decisions normally take effect 15 days after they have been served to the parties.
    "But that 15-day period stops when a motion for reconsideration is filed," Brion explained.