RA 6655 “Free Public Secondary Education Act” — A Comprehensive Legal Primer with a Focus on a Leading Case
I. Constitutional & Legislative Origins
Constitutional Mandate. Article XIV, §2 (2) of the 1987 Constitution directs the State to “establish and maintain a system of free public secondary education.” Although the Constitution itself is self-executory, Congress was expected to lay down a detailed statutory framework.
Birth of the Statute. In response, the 8th Congress enacted Republic Act 6655, signed on 26 May 1988 and effective 19 June 1988. R.A. 6655 is sometimes referred to in committee records as the “Flagship Kabisig measure on access to basic education,” because it fleshed out the constitutional guarantee only a year after the Charter took effect.
II. Salient Provisions of RA 6655
| Section | Core Command | Notes for Practitioners |
|---|---|---|
| §2 (Declaration of Policy) | Free** tuition and other school fees **in all public secondary schools. | “Other school fees” was worded broadly to capture any mandatory exaction, whether called “miscellaneous,” “ PTA fee,” or “voluntary contribution.” |
| §3 (Coverage) | Grades 7-10 (then First–Fourth Year High School). | In 2013 the K-12 Law (RA 10533) renamed levels but did not amend §3; DepEd aligned terminology through Orders. |
| §6 (Implementing Rules) | Empowers DECS/DepEd to issue orders consistent with the Act. | DECS Order 65-90, DepEd Order 19-2008, D.O. 41-2012, etc., all reiterate the “no collection during enrolment or class days” rule. |
| §7 (Private Schools) | Clarifies that private high schools remain tuition-charging but must adopt a socialized tuition scheme and coordinate with DECS on scholarship slots. |
Practical tip: The prohibition covers any fee that is a prerequisite to enrolment or clearance. Schools may still accept truly voluntary donations, but never as a condition for admission, transfer, or the release of credentials.
III. Implementing Infrastructure
Funding Sources
- Annual General Appropriations Act item for “School MOOE – Secondary.”
- Special Education Fund (SEF) under the Local Government Code; LGUs typically shoulder classrooms, minor repairs, utilities.
Governance Overlap
- RA 9155 (2001) — gave school governing councils fiscal autonomy, yet §10 expressly subordinates school fees to R.A. 6655.
- Joint Circulars with COA detail allowable disbursements.
IV. Sample Case Law: Department of Education, Culture & Sports (DECS) v. Enriquez et al.
| Citation | G.R. No. 95770, 4 August 1993 (En Banc) |
|---|---|
| Petitioners | DECS Secretary, DECS NCR Regional Director |
| Respondents | Parents-Teachers Association (PTA) officers & Manila RTC Br. 14 (Judge Enriquez) |
| Core Issue | Whether DECS Order 65-90, which allowed schools to require “voluntary contributions” (miscellaneous, PTA, ID, athletics fees), violated §2 of RA 6655. |
| Ruling | Yes. The Supreme Court struck down mandatory collections. The Order was partly void because it conflicted with the clear statutory command that secondary education in public schools be “free from tuition and other school fees.” |
| Ratio Decidendi | The term other school fees in RA 6655 is all-embracing; any payment made a pre-condition for enrolment defeats Congress’ intent. The Court distinguished between soliciting donations (allowed) and conditioning school services on payment (prohibited). |
| Dispositive Portion | Permanent injunction affirmed; DECS directed to cease and desist from enforcing compulsory fees and to refund collections exacted under the assailed order. |
| Subsequent Developments | DepEd issued Order 15-94 reiterating the ban, later consolidated into DepEd Order 19-2008 (“no collection” during enrolment; only after the First School Day may voluntary contributions be gently solicited, never enforced). |
Why the case matters:
- Clarified Scope. The phrase “free from tuition and other school fees” is absolute.
- Administrative Law Lesson. An agency cannot whittle down a legislative right through regulations.
- Remedial Path. Parents may seek an injunction in RTCs exercising special jurisdiction over education laws.
V. Other Jurisprudential Footprints
| Case | Relevance to RA 6655 |
|---|---|
| People v. Dacoycoy, G.R. 116106, 17 Nov 1999 | Cited §4 for the government’s liability to protect minors’ right to free secondary education; used to aggravate kidnapping of a public-school student. |
| COA v. DepEd Region VII, G.R. 153701, 31 Mar 2004 | COA disallowed use of Maintenance & Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) to subsidize local school fees because RA 6655 already provides for fee-free status; spending public funds to “pay” prohibited fees was deemed irregular. |
| Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) v. DepEd, O.P. Case No. 07-C-012 (Pres. Office, 2009) | Affirmed that teachers cannot be assigned as “collection officers” for fees barred by RA 6655. |
(None of these later cases overturned the 1993 Enriquez doctrine; they merely applied it in varied contexts.)
VI. Interaction with Later Statutes & Policies
- RA 10533 (K-12, 2013). • Expanded basic education cycle but did not repeal RA 6655. Grades 11-12 remain tuition-free in public senior high schools via DepEd-SHS.
- RA 10931 (Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act, 2017). • Mirrors RA 6655’s structure for the college level, showing Congress’ reliance on the Enriquez precedent when banning fees.
- COVID-19 Directives (2020-22). • DepEd Orders reaffirmed that online or modular printing fees may not be charged to parents; costs must be absorbed by MOOE or Bayanihan funds.
VII. Persistent Implementation Issues
| Issue | Reality on the Ground | Legal Remedies |
|---|---|---|
| “Entrance examination fees” | Some high schools still charge ₱150–₱300 for “diagnostic tests.” | Prohibited. Report to Schools Division Superintendent; seek administrative sanctions per DepEd Order 41-12. |
| PTA “Building Projects” | Parents are sometimes told building projects are mandatory to secure a clearance card. | Violates Enriquez; any PTA resolution must expressly state voluntary nature. |
| Resource Constraints | Classroom-pupil ratio (1:60 in urban centers). | Policy—not legal—issue; addressed through increased GAA and SEF allocations, not by lifting the fee ban. |
VIII. Policy Critique & Future Directions
- Fiscal Adequacy. The original funding formula—automatic annual appropriations equal to the incremental cost of each incoming cohort—was not written into RA 6655, which instead relies on the GAA. Advocacy groups push for an amendatory act embedding a “minimum percentage of GDP” rule (akin to Thailand’s 20% education-budget floor).
- Senior High Level. Because Grades 11-12 were added by RA 10533, a technical reading of RA 6655 covers only Grades 7-10. Congress may consider updating the text to avoid interpretive gaps, though DepEd treats Grades 11-12 as covered by analogy and by virtue of separate appropriations.
- Private-Public Complementarity. The statutory mandate for socialized tuition in private schools remains under-enforced. CHED has a UniFAST-TES voucher scheme, but a dedicated “Private High School Access Fund” under RA 6655’s §7 was never fully operationalized.
IX. Checklist for School Heads & Stakeholders
- Before Enrolment: ☐ Publish a zero-collection policy; no form or ID fees.
- After First School Day: ☐ PTA may solicit contributions with a signed waiver clearly stating non-compulsion. ☐ Maximum suggested amounts must appear in minutes of PTA general assembly.
- Audit Compliance: ☐ Post collections & expenditures on the school transparency board within 30 days. ☐ Subject all funds to COA post-audit; unauthorized fees are subject to refund with interest.
X. Conclusion
Republic Act 6655 is a landmark fulfillment of the 1987 Constitution’s promise of inclusive basic education. The Supreme Court’s DECS v. Enriquez line of cases makes clear that “free” means absolutely free of any mandatory pecuniary burden on learners or their families. While implementation hurdles persist—chiefly fiscal capacity and lingering “creative” fees—the legal doctrine is settled: every Filipino child is entitled to enroll in any public junior (and now senior) high school without paying a single centavo. Vigilant parents, empowered PTAs, and proactive local governments remain the front-line defenders of this statutory right.
(This article is for academic information only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific situations, consult legal counsel or the Department of Education’s Legal Service.)