DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE

COLLEGE OF TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE PRACTITIONERS AND ACUPUNCTURISTS OF ONTARIO

IN THE MATTER OF

the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 18, and the Traditional Chinese Medicine Act, S.O. 2006, c.27

Date: March 4, 2024

Indexed as: Ontario (College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners & Acupuncturists of Ontario) v Chanpheng Anousaya, 2024 ONCTCMPAO 25

Panel:

Kevin Ho

Chair, Public Member

Iftikhar Choudhry

Public Member

Justin Lee

Professional Member

BETWEEN:

THE COLLEGE OF TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE PRACTITIONERS AND ACUPUNCTURISTS OF ONTARIO

-and-

CHANPHENG ANOUSAYA

Anastasia-Maria Hountalas for the College

Self-represented Andrea Gonsalves

Independent Legal Counsel

Date of Hearing: February 5, 2024

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION

This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists (the “College”), on February 5, 2024, via videoconference. The Panel announced its decision on the misconduct allegations and its order as to penalty and costs orally at the hearing. These are the Panel’s reasons for the decision.

The member, Chanpheng Anousaya (the “Member”), was present. He was not represented by legal counsel but was assisted at the hearing by a friend. In addition, a Lao-English interpreter participated in the hearing to assist the Member.

Publication Ban

The College sought an order banning the publication of the names of the patients (both identified as the “Patient” in the Notices of Hearings) referred to during the hearing or in documents filed at the hearing commencing, or any information that would disclose the identity of the patients. The College’s request was made pursuant to s 45(3) of the Health Professions Procedural Code (the “Code”) being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991, c 18. The request was based on the grounds that personal or other matters, including the patients’ personal health information, may be disclosed at the hearing of such a nature that the harm created by disclosing the identity of the patients would outweigh the desirability of adhering to the principle that hearings be open to the public. The Member consented to the request.

The Panel was satisfied that the order sought was appropriate. There is a strong public interest in the openness of College discipline proceedings but the individual patients involved also have a strong privacy interest, particularly in cases involving sexual abuse allegations. The order sought is limited in scope—the hearing