Victory for osteopath maligned by Health Department

Wednesday 05 December 2018

A local osteopath was treated in an “unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory” manner by the Health Department after unproven claims from a senior doctor that he was “unscrupulous” nearly left his 42-year career in tatters, the Complaints Board has ruled.

Badrul Huda’s complaint against the Health Department has been upheld after the way they reacted to unfounded allegations made against him by a patient tarnished his reputation as a medical practitioner.

The States Complaints Board – an independent panel tasked with investigating unresolved grievances with States departments – heard Mr Huda’s case earlier this year where he stated that he had been disrespected and unfairly discredited by the way the Health Department treated him and has now upheld his complaint.

Pictured: The Health Department have been embroiled in a dispute after Mr Huda mounted a complaint against them.

Overall, the Complaints Board has ruled in favour of the osteopath and concluded that Mr Huda was treated in an “unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory” manner which was “contrary to the generally accepted principles of natural justice.

At the heart of Mr Huda’s complaint was the fact that allegations made about him by a former patient were referred to his professional body, the General Osteopathic Council (GOC) without informing him of the accusations or asking for his side of the story. When the patient’s allegations were referred to the GOC, the case was dismissed due to a lack of evidence, but Mr Huda maintains that his reputation has been damaged by the way the department handled the process.

Further to this, he also took issue with how Jersey Medical Officer for Health Dr Susan Turnbull referred to him in email correspondence.

Pictured: Central to Mr Huda's complaint was how Jersey's Medical Officer for Health referred to him within email correspondence, without investigating the patient's allegations.

As well as not affording him his title by simply referring to him as “Huda” rather than “Mr Huda”, Dr Turnbull also expressed strongly-worded concerns about Mr Huda’s practice, despite not having investigated the patient’s allegations.

Mr Huda’s complaints against the Health Department have now been endorsed by the Complaints Board. 

Mr Huda argued that malicious intent and even racism motivated the way the Health Department processed his claim, but the Board found that whilst he was disrespected and treated unfairly, they “did not determine that there had been any malicious, or racist intent towards Mr Huda”. 

Pictured: The States Complaints Board agree with Mr Huda's claim that he was unfairly treated after he gave evidence during a hearing earlier this year.

Within one email central to Mr Huda’s dispute with the department, Dr Turnbull wrote: “I am very concerned that Huda, left unchecked, is quite likely to be risking the health of other vulnerable (gullible) islanders, possibly believing that he has medical credentials.” 

In a subsequent email, the senior Health official also dubbed Mr Huda and “unscrupulous practitioner who is bringing the GOC and its register of osteopaths into disrepute…”

Summing up the findings, Chairman of the Complaints Board Geoffrey Crill said that they were disappointed “that the Department failed to deal effectively with the complaint made against Mr. Huda and conducted a one sided review of the case without giving him the right of reply.”

Pictured: The Health Department have since sent Mr Huda a letter of apology regarding the failures in the way his case was handled.

Mr Crill said that “the references made in emails where he was not accorded the dignity of a title… were both disrespectful and discourteous. 

During Mr Huda’s hearing, the Director of Community Care and Health Chris Dunne acknowledged that this was insulting and apologised to Mr Huda on behalf of the Department. Mr Huda has also been sent a letter of apology for the way in which his case was handled by the Department.

Continuing his summary, Mr Crill added: “the Board concludes that the Department departed from agreed policy when dealing with this particular case, which it finds to be of great concern. There is no real point in having set procedures if they are not going to be followed.”

After hearing Mr Huda’s case, the Board has made a number of recommendations to the Health Minister Deputy Richard Renouf regarding the way complaints are handled. Within these recommendations, the Board emphasise the importance of clearly documenting each step of the process and also proposed that each step of the complaint handling procedure should be signed off by an independent scrutineer, who had not been part of the original decision making process.