Is it permissible for a veterinarian and a pharmacist to agree that the pharmacist's license be used for importing veterinary medicines in exchange for a sum of money, without the pharmacist undertaking any actual work, especially since the law requires the employment of a human pharmacist for import, and the pharmacist is unable to work elsewhere?

The default ruling for falsifying facts is prohibition. Therefore, it is impermissible to register someone in an institution as one of its workers when they do not actually work there, in exchange for using their certificate. This is a lie and falsification, and it falls under the disputed category of "the price of prestige."

He is of the view that what is permissible in this situation is to assign the certificate holder some work, even if light, to justify the wage.

If that is not possible, and the pharmacy owner is compelled to this situation due to the law, and no harm results from it, then it is permissible for the owner to do so, but not for the certificate holder; this is based on the Almighty’s saying: "And He has already explained to you what He has forbidden to you, except for that to which you are compelled," because the certificate holder can avoid harm by performing the work.