Alternative medicine is very popular in Colombia. Precisely, on this subject, the Council of State suspended the requirement imposed by the Ministry of Health for alternative medicine was practiced exclusively by specialists. This implies that the expression “specialist” will provisionally cease to be in force, “as one of the conditions of external consultation provided for in the registration manual for health service providers, adopted by the portfolio in resolution 3100 of 2019”, points out the decision known by SEMANA.
The rule that indicated that only specialists might exercise this practice was sued explaining that in the case of Colombia, the law allows practicing alternative medicine who presented an academic certification issued by a higher education entity and expressly prohibited imposing additional requirements.
For this reason, in his opinion, the lawsuit stated, “the Government invaded the competence of the legislature, by imposing the postgraduate requirement on these health service providers. Additionally, it requested that the expression in which the requirement was established be suspended. with a specialist degree in the field of his discipline.
The Council of State partially granted the request and ordered the provisional suspension of the expression “of specialist”, which established that the exercise of alternative medicine was subject to those who had a postgraduate degree in the respective field of alternative medicine. For the corporation, “with this mandate, a requirement was imposed that was not contemplated in the law, given that it allows health professionals to exercise who can practice medicine and alternative treatmentswithout this implying that they must accredit a diploma or title of specialist not provided for by the legislator”.
The room clarified that Congress is the one that is responsible for resolving the issue, that the legislature is the competent body to regulate the conditions of personnel authorized to practice alternative medicine and complementary therapies. Hence, it considers that “the defendant aside constitutes an excess of the regulatory power of the Executive.” This decision implies that, while the lawsuit is resolved, the questioned section remains suspended, as long as there are no new circumstances that warrant lifting the measure adopted.