Here's a startling fact: even with pending approval for their 2026 Annual Practising Certificate (APC), private medical practitioners are still permitted to purchase medications. But here's where it gets controversial—many might assume that without a valid practising certificate, doctors would be completely barred from buying medicines. However, recent developments challenge that assumption and shed light on how regulations can sometimes be more flexible than they appear.
According to the Pharmaceutical Association of Malaysia (Phama), doctors who have submitted applications for their 2026 APC are still allowed to order medicines, provided they can furnish proof of their application submission. This decision comes after intervention from the Malaysian Health Ministry, which clarified the situation. Phama, representing 41 multinational pharmaceutical companies, explained to The Star that the Ministry has explicitly told them that proof of submission and timely payment for license renewal would suffice for medicines to be supplied.
Phama further expressed hope that the ministry would take the necessary actions to prevent future delays in the issuance of APCs, which have caused significant distress among medical professionals. This clarification is important because, previously, many drug companies refused to sell medicines to practitioners without a valid APC, citing regulations and legal concerns.
Adding context, on Saturday, January 3rd, Health Minister Datuk Seri Dr. Dzulkefly Ahmad confirmed that this year's APC would be in effect starting January 1, 2026, for all doctors who submitted complete applications on or before December 31 of the previous year. He acknowledged the ongoing anxieties within the medical community over APC delays but assured that the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC) was aware and actively working to resolve these issues.
It’s worth noting that the MMC acknowledged a backlog and the delays in processing applications, which left thousands of doctors without valid practising licences temporarily—an issue with serious legal and professional implications. The council issued an apology, attributing the delays to a surge in applications towards the end of last year, which overwhelmed their system.
And this is the part most people might miss: while the delays in APC issuance are a real concern, the actual ability for doctors to continue practicing and obtaining necessary medications is more flexible than many believe. The recent statements and interventions demonstrate that with proper proof of application, practitioners can still access essential medicines without waiting for official certification.
So, do you think this leniency should be maintained, or should stricter rules be enforced to prevent abuse? Are these temporary measures a sign of a more understanding and adaptive system—or do they risk undermining the regulatory process? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below, and join the conversation about how best to balance regulatory oversight with healthcare access.
