DRUGSTORES ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES VS.

NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY (G.R. NO. 194561)

FACTS: RA 7277 mandates a 20% on purchase of medicines in

favor of persons with disabilities.

ISSUE: Is this an instance of eminent domain?

HELD: No, this is not an exercise of eminent domain. This is an

exercise of police power to promote the welfare of the people,
especially those who have less in life. Consequently, there is no
need for just compensation. The law leaves reasonable and viable
economic usefulness; hence, there is no “taking.”

ISSUE: Does the law violate the reasonable means test (due
process), considering it only requires an ID?

HELD: No, it does not violate due process. The implementation is

reasonable because, before a person is issued a PWD ID, he must
first show a medical certificate of his disability if it is not apparent
by the naked eye.

ISSUE: Does the law violate equal protection because it only

targets retailers and not all players in the drug industry?

HELD: No, it does not violate equal protection because the

distinction between retailers and manufacturers, etc. is real and
substantial. Equal protection is not an iron-clad rule.