discipline summaries
DR. Tariq Iqbal
Practice Location: No Practice Address; Formerly
Brockville
Practice Area: Rheumatology
Hearing Information: Allegations Denied,
Contested Hearing (11 days), Decision Appealed
On September 24, 2015, the Discipline Committee
found that Dr. Iqbal committed acts of professional
misconduct in that, in respect of four patients, he has
What does this mean?
used in the discipline process
Admission
The physician admits that the facts
alleged amount to professional mis-
engaged in sexual abuse, he has engaged in an act or
omission relevant to the practice of medicine that,
having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, and he has failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession.
Ms A
The Committee found that Dr. Iqbal sexually abused
Ms A during an office visit in May 2011, by repeatedly and forcefully moving his finger(s) in and out of
her rectum in a sexual manner and without changing gloves, moving directly to insert his fingers in her
vagina and again moving them in and out in a sexual
We provide definitions for the legal terminology
penalty unless it would be contrary to
the public interest and bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
conduct and/or incompetence.
Plea of No Contest
The physician does not contest the
facts. The College files a statement of
facts as an exhibit at the hearing. The
Discipline Committee can accept the
facts as correct and make a finding
of professional misconduct and/or
incompetence. The physician does
not admit to the facts or findings for
the purpose of any other proceeding.
Agreed Statement of Facts
A statement of facts that are negotiated and agreed to by the College and
the physician. It is filed as an exhibit
at the hearing.
Joint Submission on Penalty
A penalty that is proposed to the
Committee as an appropriate penalty
by both the College and the physician. In law, the Discipline Committee
must accept a joint submission on
42
Dialogue Issue 3, 2016
Contested Hearing
The physician denies the allegations.
The College must prove the allegations on a balance of probabilities
(the civil standard of proof) by calling
evidence such as witnesses. If one
or more of the allegations is proved,
a penalty hearing is scheduled. The
College and the physician may agree
and jointly propose a penalty to the
Committee or they may disagree and
a contested penalty hearing takes
place.
Aggravating, Mitigating
Circumstances
Aggravating and mitigating circumstances may be considered by the
Discipline Committee in determining
an appropriate penalty. Mitigating
and aggravating circumstances are
considered by the Committee, so that
the penalty imposed is proportionate
to the gravity of the physician’s con-
duct, and the degree of responsibility
of the physician. Mitigating circumstances tend to reduce penalties,
whereas aggravating circumstances
tend to increase penalties.
Aggravating circumstances could
include: a high degree of vulnerability
of the person(s) affected by the physician’s conduct; a prior disciplinary
history with the College; a lack of insight by the physician into his or her
own misconduct; a lack of remorse
about the effects of the misconduct
on others.
Mitigating circumstances could include: a clean disciplinary record; an
admission to the facts underlying the
allegations in advance of a hearing;
cooperating with the investigation; a
demonstration of remorse or regret
about the effects of the misconduct
on others; taking remedial steps on
the physician’s own initiative prior to
a finding or an order by the College.