{"id":"F2020L01035","name":"Health Insurance (Medicare Participation Review Committee) Guidelines 2020","slug":"health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":440573,"registerId":"F2020L01035-fast-fetch-1775956153672","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-12","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Health Insurance (Medicare Participation Review Committee) Guidelines 2020","content":"---\nmeta-content-style-type: text/css\nmeta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8\n---\n\n?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\" standalone=\"no\"?>\n\n![Commonwealth Coat of Arms of Australia](image.001.jpeg)\n\n \n\nHealth Insurance (Medicare Participation Review Committee) Guidelines 2020\n\nI, Greg Hunt, Minister for Health, make the following guidelines.\n\nDated  11 August 2020 \n\n\nThe Hon Greg Hunt MP\n\nMinister for Health\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nContents\n\n1 Name\n\n2 Commencement\n\n3 Authority\n\n4 Definitions\n\n5 Compliance with Guidelines..................................2\n\n6 Exercise of powers under the Act...............................2\n\n7 Making of determinations under subsection 124F(2)....................2\n\n8 Other relevant considerations.................................3\n\n9 Disqualification periods.....................................3\n\n10 Payment of medicare benefits.................................5\n\n11 Making of determinations under subsection 124G(2)....................5\n\n12 Exception to presumptions...................................7\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n1  Name\n\nThis instrument is the Health Insurance (Medicare Participation Review Committee) Guidelines 2020.\n\n2  Commencement\n\n (1) Each provision of this instrument specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms.\n\n \n\n- Commencement information\n- Column 1 Column 2 Column 3\n- Provisions Commencement Date/Details\n- 1. The whole of this instrument The day after this instrument is registered\n\n\nNote: This table relates only to the provisions of this instrument as originally made. It will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this instrument.\n\n (2) Any information in column 3 of the table is not part of this instrument. Information may be inserted in this column, or information in it may be edited, in any published version of this instrument.\n\n3  Authority\n\n  This instrument is made under subsection 124H(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.\n\n4  Definitions\n\nNote: The expression pecuniary penalty order where used in this instrument is defined in subsection 3(1) of the Act. \n\n  In this instrument:\n\nAct means the Health Insurance Act 1973.\n\nCommittee means a Medicare Participation Review Committee established under the Act.\n\nconvicted refers to a conviction for an offence as referred to in subsection 124B(2) of the Act.\n\noffence of strict liability means an offence of the type described in section 6.1 of the Criminal Code .\n\npractitioner has the meaning given in section 124B of the Act.\n\nprovider has the meaning given in subsection 23DZZID of the Act.\n\nrelevant civil contravention has the meaning given in section 124B of the Act.\n\nrelevant offence has the meaning given in section 124B of the Act.\n\n5  Compliance with Guidelines\n\nIn making determinations under subsection 124F(2) and subsection 124G(2) of the Act in relation to a relevant offence or a relevant civil contravention, being the subject of a notice under section 124D of the Act, a Committee is required to have regard to the matters set out in sections 7 to 12 of these Guidelines. \n\n6  Exercise of powers under the Act\n\n (1) Subject to paragraph 124F(3)(b) of the Act, nothing in these Guidelines shall be read as limiting the powers conferred on a Committee by the Act.\n\n (2) Nothing in these Guidelines shall be read as limiting the authority of a Committee to consider, when making a determination to which these Guidelines apply, matters the Committee considers relevant to the making of the determination, being matters not dealt with in these Guidelines.\n\n (3) Subject to these Guidelines, a Committee established in relation to a practitioner or provider may when:\n\n (a) making a determination under subsection 124F(2); or\n\n (b) considering making a determination under subsection 124G(2) that subsection 124G(1) does not apply;\n\n  inform itself on any matter in such manner as it considers appropriate.\n\n (4) The Committee shall bear in mind that its consideration under these Guidelines of any relevant offence or relevant civil contravention dealt with by a court may not extend to a review of the decision of the court regarding that offence or civil contravention.\n\n7  Making of determinations under subsection 124F(2)\n\n (1) In making a determination under subsection 124F(2) of the Act regarding either a conviction for a relevant offence or a pecuniary penalty order made in respect of a relevant civil contravention, a Committee shall have regard to the matters set out in subsections 7(2) and (3).\n\n (2) The nature and circumstances regarding the commission of the relevant offence or relevant civil contravention, including:\n\n (a) the number of offences or civil contraventions;\n\n (b) the date of commission of each offence or civil contravention;\n\n (c) the facts of each offence or civil contravention;\n\n (d) the penalty, if any, imposed by the court on the practitioner or provider for each offence or civil contravention; and\n\n (e) the reasons for the court’s decision and any other statements made by the court regarding its consideration of each offence or civil contravention.\n\n (3) The nature and circumstances regarding the commission of any previous relevant offence of which the practitioner or provider has been convicted, or any previous relevant civil contravention for which a pecuniary penalty order has been made against either the practitioner or provider, including:\n\n (a) the number of offences or civil contraventions;\n\n (b) the date of commission of each offence or civil contravention;\n\n (c) the facts of each offence or civil contravention;\n\n (d) the penalty, if any, imposed by the court on the practitioner or provider for each offence or civil contravention;\n\n (e) the reasons for the court’s decision and any other statements made by the court regarding its consideration of each offence or civil contravention;\n\n (f) any previous determination by a Committee regarding an offence or civil contravention by the practitioner or provider and the reasons given in a notice under subsection 124Q(1) for making the determination;\n\n (g) where any such determination imposed a period of disqualification on a practitioner, the length and date of termination of and the services covered by, the disqualification; and\n\n (h) where any such determination specified a period during which medicare benefits were not payable for specified services rendered by or on behalf of a provider, the length and date of termination of the period and the services specified in the determination.\n\n8  Other relevant considerations\n\n (1) In making a determination under subsection 124F(2) of the Act in relation to a practitioner or provider, a Committee shall have regard to the following matters:\n\n (a) the length of time the practitioner or provider has been in active professional practice as a practitioner or provider;\n\n (b) the effect which any particular determination, which the Committee may make, could have regarding the practitioner or provider;\n\n (c) the potential effect of a particular determination on the patients of the practitioner or provider and/or the community they serve, regarding provision and quality of medical services;\n\n (d) any period during which the practitioner or provider is not able, or was not able, to render professional services (which would otherwise attract medicare benefits) as a result of the conviction or the order to pay a civil penalty, whether due to imprisonment, not being registered or otherwise; and\n\n (e) any other matters which the Committee considers relevant.\n\n9  Disqualification periods\n\n (1) Where a Committee has dealt with a practitioner under subsection 124F(2) of the Act and is of the opinion that a determination of disqualification should be made against the practitioner, the Committee shall have regard to the presumptions set out in subsections 9(2) to (8).\n\n (2) Where the practitioner:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence which is an offence of strict liability; or\n\n (b) has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (c) has not previously been:\n\n (i) convicted of a relevant offence; or\n\n (ii) ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention;\n\nthen disqualification for a period not exceeding 6 months would be appropriate.\n\n (3) Where the practitioner:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence which is an offence of strict liability; or\n\n (b) has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (c) has previously been:\n\n (i) convicted of a relevant offence; or\n\n (ii) ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (d) has not previously been disqualified by a Committee;\n\nthen disqualification for a period of at least 3 months but not exceeding 2 years would be appropriate.\n\n (4) Where the practitioner:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence which is not an offence of strict liability; and\n\n (b) has not previously been convicted of a relevant offence;\n\nthen disqualification for a period of at least 6 months but not exceeding 3 years would be appropriate.\n\n (5) Where the practitioner:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence which is not an offence of strict liability;\n\n (b) has previously been convicted of a relevant offence; and\n\n (c) has not previously been disqualified by a Committee;\n\nthen disqualification for at least twelve months would be appropriate.\n\n (6) Where the practitioner:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence which is an offence of strict liability; or\n\n (b) has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (c) has on one or more occasions been disqualified by a Committee;\n\nthen disqualification for at least twelve months would be appropriate.\n\n (7) Where the practitioner:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence which is not an offence of strict liability; and\n\n (b) has on one or more occasions been disqualified by a Committee;\n\nthen disqualification for at least 2 years would be appropriate.\n\n (8) A practitioner is entitled to be heard on why any presumption as to the period of disqualification that would otherwise apply should not apply. \n\n10  Payment of medicare benefits\n\n (1) Where a Committee has dealt with a provider (who is not a practitioner) under subsection 124F(2) and is of the opinion that some action should be taken against the provider, the Committee shall have regard to the presumptions set out in subsections 11(2) to (8).\n\n (2) Where the provider:\n\n (a) has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (b) has not previously been:\n\n (i) convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act; or\n\n (ii) ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention;\n\nit would be appropriate for the Committee to determine that medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in the determination rendered by or on behalf of the provider for a period not exceeding 6 months.\n\n (3) Where the provider:\n\n (a) has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (b) has previously been:\n\n (i) convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act; or\n\n (ii) ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (c) has not previously been subject to a determination by a Committee which specifies a period during which medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in the determination rendered by or on behalf of the provider;\n\nit would be appropriate for the Committee to determine that medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in a determination rendered by or on behalf of the provider for a period of at least 6 months but not exceeding 2 years.\n\n (4) Where the provider:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act; and\n\n (b) has not previously been convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act;\n\nit would be appropriate for the Committee to determine that medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in the determination, rendered by or on behalf of the provider, for a period of at least 6 months but not exceeding 3 years.\n\n (5) Where the provider:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act; and\n\n (b) has previously been:\n\n (i) convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act; or\n\n (ii) ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (c) has not previously been subject to a determination by a Committee which specifies a period during which medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in a determination rendered by or on behalf of the provider;\n\nit would be appropriate for the Committee to determine that medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in the determination, rendered by or on behalf of the provider, for a period of at least 12 months.\n\n (6) Where the provider:\n\n (a) has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a pecuniary penalty order for a relevant civil contravention; and\n\n (b) has on one or more occasions previously been subject to a determination by a Committee which specifies a period during which medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in a determination, rendered by or on behalf of the provider;\n\nit would be appropriate for the Committee to determine that medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in the determination, rendered by or on behalf of the provider, for a period of at least 12 months.\n\n (7) Where the provider:\n\n (a) has been convicted of a relevant offence, being an offence against Division 3 of Part IIBA of the Act; and\n\n (b) has on one or more occasions previously been subject to a determination by a Committee which specifies a period during which medicare benefits are not payable for kinds of services specified in a determination, rendered by or on behalf of the provider;\n\nthen disqualification for at least two years would be appropriate.\n\n (8) A provider is entitled to be heard on why any presumption as to period of non‑payment of medicare benefits that otherwise would apply should not apply.\n\n11  Making of determinations under subsection 124G(2)\n\n (1) The Committee is required to consider the following matters in making a determination under subsection 124G(2) regarding a person:\n\n (a) any submission made to the Committee by the person in accordance with subsection 124G(3);\n\n (b) the nature and seriousness of and the circumstances concerning the commission of each relevant offence for which the person has been convicted, or each relevant civil contravention where a pecuniary penalty order has been made regarding the person;\n\n (c) whether the person has previously been convicted of a relevant offence or has previously been the subject of a relevant civil contravention for which a pecuniary penalty order has been made;\n\n (d) whether the person has at any time been subject to a determination made under paragraphs 124F(2)(d), (e), (f) or (g) or a determination made under subsection 124G(2) of the Act;\n\n (e) whether or not the practitioner or provider fits the criteria for an exception to a presumption set out in section 12; and\n\n (f) any other matters the Committee considers relevant.\n\n (2) The Committee shall not make a determination under subsection 124G(2) unless the Committee is satisfied that:\n\n (a) were a hearing to be conducted, there would be little or no reasonable prospect that further evidence or material would become available to the Committee, which might, in the Committee's opinion, result in the making of a determination by the Committee under paragraphs 124F(2)(b), (c), (d), (e), (f) or (g) of the Act; or\n\n (b) the exception in section 12 should be applied. \n\n12  Exception to presumptions\n\n (1) If a Committee has dealt with a practitioner under subsection 124F(2) and the Committee is satisfied that:\n\n (a) as a result of the conviction or order to pay a civil penalty, the practitioner is (or was) unable to render professional services (which would otherwise attract medicare benefits), whether due to imprisonment, not being registered or otherwise;\n\n (b) the inability to render professional services (which would otherwise attract medicare benefits) has (or had) a similar practical effect to a determination by a Committee that the practitioner is disqualified; and\n\n (c) the period during which the practitioner is (or was) unable to render professional services (which would otherwise attract medicare benefits) is appropriate;\n\nthen, despite the presumptions in section 9, a Committee may determine that:\n\n (i) a hearing not be held in accordance with subsection 124G(3) of the Act; and\n\n (ii) no further action be taken against the practitioner in accordance with subsection 124F(2) of the Act. \n\n \n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"These guidelines do not expand the statutory powers of Committees; they operationalise how Committees should exercise existing powers under the Health Insurance Act (see s6(1)). They set presumptive sanction ranges and identify factors committees must consider, but they explicitly preserve Committee discretion and do not create new sanctioning powers or new categories of offence. Thus the instrument narrows uncertainty in application but does not change the substantive scope of the underlying legislation."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple cross-references to the Health Insurance Act 1973 (subsections 124B, 124D, 124F, 124G, 124H) and to the Criminal Code (strict liability definition), requiring read-across to primary legislation.","Eight presumptive rules for practitioner disqualification with nested conditions and variable ranges of months/years (section 9).","Eight parallel presumptive rules for non-payment of Medicare benefits for providers with similar nested conditional logic (section 10).","Separate decision standard for skipping a hearing (section 11(2)) and a distinct exception allowing no further action where inability to practise already produced equivalent effect (section 12).","Multiple discretionary phrases ('have regard to', 'appropriate', 'any other matters') that create branching outcomes depending on Committee judgment (sections 6, 7, 8, 11).","Requirement to consider prior Committee determinations and court reasons, which increases evidentiary and procedural complexity (s7(3)(f)–(h), s7(2)(e)).","Mixed remedial universe (disqualification of practitioners, non‑payment of Medicare benefits for providers, and procedural decisions about hearings) requiring different evidentiary considerations and consequences.","Entitlement to be heard on presumptions adds procedural steps and potential for case-by-case departures from presumptive ranges (s9(8), s10(8))."],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument is and who it affects**\n\n- These are administrative guidelines for Medicare Participation Review Committees (\"Committees\") about how to deal with health practitioners and other Medicare service providers who have been convicted of certain offences or who have had civil penalties imposed under the Health Insurance Act 1973 (the Act). (See Authority: s3; who is covered: definitions in s4.)\n\n**What the guidelines do, mechanically**\n\n- Require Committees to consider a specified list of matters when making decisions under two parts of the Act: subsection 124F(2) (decisions following a conviction or a pecuniary penalty) and subsection 124G(2) (decisions about whether to hold a hearing or take action). (s5, s7, s11.)\n- List the concrete factors the Committee must \"have regard to\", including the facts and timing of the offence(s), court penalties and reasons, past convictions or penalties, past Committee decisions, how long the practitioner/provider has practised, and likely effects on patients and services. (s7(2)–(3), s8, s11(1).)\n- Set out presumptive ranges for how long a practitioner may be disqualified from Medicare or how long Medicare benefits may be withheld from a provider, depending on the type of offence (strict liability v. others), whether the person has prior convictions/penalties, and whether they have previously been disqualified or had Medicare benefits withheld. These ranges are expressed in months or years (for example: up to 6 months; at least 6 months up to 3 years; at least 12 months; at least 2 years). (s9 and s10.)\n- Preserve Committee discretion: the guidelines do not remove any powers given to Committees by the Act and explicitly allow Committees to consider other relevant matters and to inform themselves as they see fit. (s6(1)–(3).)\n- Preserve procedural fairness: people are entitled to be heard on why a presumptive period should not apply. (s9(8), s10(8).)\n- Provide a narrow, defined exception where a Committee may decide not to hold a hearing or take further action if the Committee is satisfied that the conviction/penalty already prevented the practitioner from providing Medicare-eligible services for an appropriate period (so that the practical effect is equivalent to disqualification). (s12.)\n\n**Why these rules matter (official purpose and practical effect)**\n\n- The stated purpose (implicit in the instrument) is to provide consistent, transparent guidance so Committees apply the Act’s sanctions (disqualification and non-payment of Medicare benefits) in a structured way. The instrument operationalises how severity and repetition of misconduct translate into presumptive sanction lengths. (See s7–s12.)\n\n- Who pays: affected practitioners and providers bear the financial and professional costs when a Committee applies a disqualification or a period during which Medicare benefits are not payable (s9, s10). Those costs fall directly on the person or entity whose Medicare billing rights are restricted.\n\n- Who decides: a Medicare Participation Review Committee makes the determination, guided but not strictly bound by the presumptions and factors listed (s6, s7, s11).\n\n**Testing the claimed purpose against trade-offs and implementation issues**\n\n- Predictability vs discretion: the guidelines provide predictable ranges for sanction lengths (s9, s10), which can reduce uncertainty for practitioners and providers. At the same time, they use open-ended phrases such as \"appropriate,\" \"have regard to,\" and \"any other matters the Committee considers relevant\" (s8, s11), preserving significant discretion and creating scope for variable outcomes between Committees or cases.\n\n- Administrative burden and evidence needs: Committees must consider court reasons, prior Committee determinations, dates of offences, and whether the practitioner/provider was already unable to render services (s7(2)–(3), s8, s12). That requires assembling court records, registration and employment histories, and prior Committee notices — an evidential and administrative task for both Committees and respondents.\n\n- Incentives for private behaviour and market responses: the sanctions target Medicare billing rights. Affected providers may respond by altering billing practices, changing service delivery outside Medicare, or exiting Medicare billing entirely. Those are predictable substitution effects because the sanction is narrowly tied to Medicare benefit entitlements (s10).\n\n- Concentration of costs and benefits: costs are concentrated on the practitioner/provider being sanctioned; benefits (if any) of enforcement—such as protecting Medicare from abusive billing practices—are diffuse, accruing to taxpayers and other providers. The guidelines leave discretion over sanction severity (s6, s7), which concentrates decision-making power in Committees.\n\n- Risk of inconsistency and appeal pathways: because the guidelines are prescriptive about factors and presumptions but not strictly binding, different Committees could reach different outcomes for similar conduct. The guidelines do not themselves create appeal rights; they operate within the Act’s decision and review framework.\n\n**Practical points for those affected**\n\n- If you are a practitioner or provider who has been convicted or penalised under the Act, expect a Committee to: examine the offence facts and court findings (s7), look at past offending and past Committee actions (s7(3)(f)–(h)), weigh professional history and patient impact (s8), and then apply a presumptive sanction range (s9 or s10) unless a justified exception applies (s12). You have a right to be heard on why a presumption should not apply (s9(8), s10(8)).\n\n- Committees retain flexibility to consider matters not listed in the guidelines and to inform themselves as they choose (s6). The guidelines standardise approach but do not remove discretion.\n\n**Key sections to consult directly**\n\n- Definitions and scope: s4–s5.  \n- Matters Committees must consider: s7–s8, s11.  \n- Presumptive sanction ranges (practitioners): s9.  \n- Presumptive sanction ranges (providers/Medicare payments): s10.  \n- Exception where prior inability to practice substitutes for a Committee disqualification: s12."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The Guidelines appear consistent with their original purpose under section 124H(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973, which authorises the Minister to make guidelines for Medicare Participation Review Committees. The instrument operationalises the Committee's powers without apparent expansion beyond the statutory framework established by the Act."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple nested conditional structures in sections 9 and 10, with up to 4 cumulative conditions per presumption (e.g., subsection 9(3) requires satisfaction of (a) OR (b), plus (c), plus NOT (d))","Cross-referencing between the Guidelines and the Health Insurance Act 1973, including specific subsections (124F, 124G, 124B, 124D, 124Q) that are not reproduced in the instrument","Distinction between 'practitioner' and 'provider' with different penalty frameworks in sections 9 and 10, requiring careful parsing of which rules apply to whom","Defined terms rely on external statutory definitions (section 124B of the Act, subsection 23DZZID) rather than self-contained definitions","Exception to presumptions in section 12 creates a three-part test that operates as an override to the structured penalty framework in section 9","Interaction between criminal convictions and civil pecuniary penalty orders treated differently depending on whether the offence is 'strict liability' (no intent required) or not"],"plain_english_summary":"These Guidelines tell Medicare Participation Review Committees how to respond when practitioners or providers commit Medicare-related crimes or serious civil breaches, by setting a structured range of sanctions (temporary disqualification or stopping Medicare payments) while allowing case-by-case flexibility. \n\nThey affect doctors, other billing practitioners, provider organisations, and patients whose access to bulk-billing or Medicare rebates may be impacted, and include rules to avoid duplicative punishment when someone is already imprisoned or deregistered."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020","history":"/api/acts/health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020/history","analysis":"/api/acts/health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/health-insurance-medicare-participation-review-committee-guidelines-2020/documents"}}