DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE
OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
Ontario College of Teachers v Okoro 2020 ONOCT 199
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Chinedu Kinsman Okoro, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
CHINEDU KINSMAN OKORO (REGISTRATION #645094)
PANEL: Diane Ballantyne, OCT, Chair
John Cammarata
Marlène Marwah
HEARD: July 29, 2020
Jason Bennett, for the Ontario College of Teachers
No one appearing for Chinedu Kinsman Okoro
Erica Richler, Independent Legal Counsel
PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsections 32.1(3) and 32.1(4) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing or the person who was allegedly sexually abused or the subject of the sexual misconduct or a prohibited act involving child pornography.
By order of Justice Bacchus of the Ontario Court of Justice, there is also a publication ban on any information that could identify the victim or a witness in this matter, pursuant to subsection 486.4 of the Criminal Code.
1This matter was heard before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) on July 29, 2020 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”). In accordance with section 3 of the Hearings in Tribunal Proceedings (Temporary Measures) Act, 2020, S.O. 2020, c. 5, Sched 3, this matter proceeded by way of an electronic hearing.
2Chinedu Kinsman Okoro (the “Member”) did not attend the hearing and did not have legal representation. The Panel was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.
3Counsel for the College submitted the Affidavit of Service of Tatiana Tkatch (Exhibit 2) sworn on June 25, 2020 and a Letter Confirming Hearing Date (Exhibit 3) dated July 9, 2020, to show that the Member had been served with the appropriate documents and informed of the allegations against him, the time and date of the hearing, as well as the penalty being sought by the College. College Counsel also confirmed that he was advised by the Member that the Member did not intend to attend the hearing.
4Based on Exhibits 2 and 3 the Panel was satisfied that the Member had been properly served with the Notice of Hearing and all disclosure documents and that he was aware of the time and date of the hearing and the penalty being sought by the College. The Member did not appear and the Panel heard this matter in his absence.
A. PUBLICATION ban
5The Panel ordered a publication ban pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), which makes such an order mandatory. Accordingly, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of, any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing.
6Additionally, a publication ban was ordered pursuant to subsection 32.1(4) of the Act at the request of College Counsel on behalf of Student 1, Student 2, Student 3, and Person 4 who were allegedly sexually abused, or the subject of sexual misconduct or a prohibited act involving child pornography. Accordingly, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of Student 1, Student 2, Student 3, and Person 4.
7Additionally, the Panel received a certified copy of the transcript of the Reasons for Judgment from the Member’s criminal proceeding before Justice Bacchus dated June 23, 2017 (Exhibit 4 at Tab C). In these proceedings before the Ontario Court of Justice, an order restricting publication was made pursuant to section 486.4 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The Panel is required to uphold this publication ban. Accordingly, any information that could identify the victim or a witness involved in this matter shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way.
B. THE ALLEGATIONS
8The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated February 13, 2020 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Chinedu Kinsman Okoro is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in the Act in that he:
(a) failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) abused a student or students sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3), and/or engaged in sexual abuse of a student or students as defined in section 1 of the Act;
(c) failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(d) contravened a law, the contravention of which is relevant to the member’s suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(16);
(e) contravened a law, the contravention of which has caused or may cause a student who is under the member’s professional supervision to be put at or to remain at risk, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(17);
(f) committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18);
(g) engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19);
C. STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS
9College Counsel presented the Panel with the parties’ Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 4), which provides the following:
At all material times, Chinedu Kinsman Okoro was a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “A” is a copy of the Member’s Registered Member Information with the College.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) as an occasional teacher at [XXX] Institute (the “School”) and at the Board’s [XXX] Learning Centre both located in Toronto, Ontario.
The Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration was issued on July 29, 2013. The Member has no previous disciplinary history with the College.
The Member commenced his employment with the Board in March 2014.
In July 2015, Student 1 was a [XXX]-year-old female student in the Member’s [XXX] school [XXX] class at the School.
Between October 2014 and January 2015, Student 2 was a [XXX]-year-old female student in the Member’s [XXX] school [XXX] class at the School. Student 2 also accompanied Student 1 to the Member’s [XXX]school [XXX] class in July 2015, but Student 2 was not a student in that class.
Between April 2015 and June 2015, Student 3 was a [XXX]-year-old female student in the Member’s [XXX] school [XXX] class at [XXX].
On October 19, 2015, the Member was charged with 10 counts of sexual assault, contrary to section 271 of the Criminal Code (Canada) and four counts of sexual exploitation of a young person, contrary to section 153(1)(a) of the Criminal Code (Canada) in respect of Student 1, Student 2 and Student 3. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “B” is a certified copy of the Information of Peace Officer Sivadasan sworn October 19, 2015.
On June 23, 2017, Justice Sandra Bacchus of the Ontario Court of Justice found the Member guilty of (a) four counts of sexual exploitation of Student 1; (b) four counts of sexual assault of Student 1, which convictions were stayed; and (c) four counts of sexual assault of Student 3. With respect to Student 2, the Crown withdrew one count of sexual assault and the Member was found not guilty of a second count of sexual assault. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “C” is a certified copy of the Reasons for Judgment before the Honourable Justice Bacchus, delivered on June 23, 2017, at Toronto, Ontario.
On April 12, 2018, Justice Bacchus sentenced the Member to 90 days in custody for the sexual exploitation convictions and an additional 28 days in custody for the sexual assault convictions, to be followed by two years of probation. Justice Bacchus also imposed conditions that restrict the Member’s ability to teach and made a number of ancillary orders. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “D” is a certified copy of the Reasons for Judgment and Reasons for Sentence before the Honourable Justice Bacchus, delivered on April 12, 2018 at Toronto, Ontario.
On September 30, 2018, the Member signed an Agreement and Undertaking with the College not to seek or engage in any employment for which a Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required until the College disposes of the complaint made against him.
The Member appealed his convictions and sentence and, on February 5, 2019, Justice Molloy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed his appeal.
The Member appealed Justice Molloy’s decision and, in or about October 2019, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the Member’s application for leave to appeal.
The Member acknowledges that his conduct fell below the standards of the teaching profession. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “E” is a copy of the College’s Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession and the Standards of Practice for the Teaching Profession.
PLEA OF NO CONTEST
By this document, the Member pleads no contest, for the purposes of this proceeding only, to the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1 to 14 above (the “Uncontested Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that paragraphs 8-10 and 14 of the Uncontested Facts constitute conduct that is professional misconduct and pleads no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct made against him in the Notice of Hearing, being more particularly that he engaged in sexual abuse of a student or students as defined in section 1 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) and breached the following subsections of Ontario Regulation 437/97 (Professional Misconduct), made under the Act:
(a) the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) the Member abused a student or students sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3);
(c) the Member failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(d) the Member contravened a law, the contravention of which is relevant to his suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(16);
(e) the Member contravened a law, the contravention of which has caused or may cause a student who is under his professional supervision to be put at or to remain at risk, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(17);
(f) the Member committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18);
(g) the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
- By this document the Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations against him;
(b) he understands that by signing this document he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Uncontested Facts (including the Appendices) being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading no contest to the allegations, he is waiving the right to require the College to otherwise prove the case against him and the right to have a hearing;
(d) he understands that the Discipline Committee can accept the Uncontested Facts as correct, and can accept that those facts constitute professional misconduct;
(e) he understands that the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons shall be published on the College’s website, and that a summary of the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons, including his name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;
(f) he understands that any agreement between him, or his legal counsel, and the College with respect to the penalty does not bind the Discipline Committee; and
(g) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this document voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel or the opportunity to have obtained legal advice.
The Member provides this plea of no contest pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and Fitness to Practise Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter E. 23, for the purposes of this proceeding under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, chapter 12, and for no other purpose. The Member’s plea of no contest does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.
In light of the Uncontested Facts and circumstances and the plea of no contest, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
D. DECISION
10Having considered the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest, including all exhibits and the submissions of College Counsel, the Panel rendered an oral decision on July 29, 2020 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7.3), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19). The Member also engaged in sexual abuse of a student of a nature defined in section 1 of the Act.
E. REASONS FOR DECISION
11The Member did not contest the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 14 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and pleaded no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Panel accepts that the Uncontested Facts constitute professional misconduct under the headings of misconduct set out above. The Uncontested Facts demonstrate that the Member was convicted of four counts of sexual exploitation of Student 1 and four counts of sexual assault of Student 3.
12In addition to the Uncontested Facts, pursuant to Rules 13.03 and 13.04 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee, the Panel accepts the certified copy of the Court information (Exhibit 4 at Tab B) and the findings of fact involving the Member contained in the Reasons for Judgment and Reasons for Sentence of Justice Bacchus of the Ontario Court of Justice (Exhibit 4 at Tab C). The Panel accepts the findings of fact of Justice Bacchus and relies on them for our decision.
13The findings of fact by Justice Bacchus contained in the appendices to the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest demonstrate that the Member sexually exploited Student 1 by rubbing his penis across the back of her shoulder, stroking her thigh, and touching her vagina. This occurred on several occasions when the Member attended at Student 1’s desk to help with her classwork. Additionally, the Member sexually assaulted Student 3 by caressing her back with his hand, rubbing his penis against her shoulder, touching her cleavage, and touching her thigh when he assisted her with work at her desk.
14By sexually assaulting these students, the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession contrary to subsection 1(5) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The sexual abuse of students is conduct that is so notorious that evidence of the standard is not required. Nevertheless, College Counsel presented the Panel with a copy of the Standards of Practice. The Standards of Practice require that, among other things, Members be dedicated in their care and commitment to students. The Panel finds that the Member failed to exhibit care and commitment to his students by sexually touching them repeatedly without their consent.
15The Member’s conduct constitutes sexual abuse of a student contrary to subsection 1(7.3) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member made inappropriate physical and sexual contact with Student 1 and Student 3. The definition of sexual abuse at section 1 of the Act includes touching and behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by a member towards a student. The Member’s conduct in this case – rubbing his penis on students’ shoulders, touching students’ thighs, and touching a student’s cleavage – clearly meets this definition. This factual finding is further supported by the Member’s resulting convictions for sexual assault and sexual exploitation.
16The Member contravened subsection 1(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 by failing to comply with section 264(1) of the Education Act, which sets out the duties of a teacher. Members hold a unique position of trust and authority. They are expected to encourage their students in the pursuit of learning, serve as positive role models and to demonstrate the highest regard for a number of virtues set out at section 264(1)(c) of the Education Act. The Member’s sexual abuse of his students was contrary to his obligations to encourage students in the pursuit of learning and, in fact, led to his students being afraid to report the Member for his abuse for fear of failing the class. The Member’s conduct was entirely at odds with his obligations under the Education Act as a member of the profession.
17The Member’s criminal convictions for sexual exploitation and sexual assault demonstrate that he contravened a law relevant to his suitability to hold a Certificate of Qualification and Registration contrary to subsection 1(16) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member’s sexual assault of his students is clearly relevant to whether he is permitted to have the privilege of teaching in a publicly funded school in Ontario.
18Similarly, the Member’s convictions for sexual exploitation of Student 1 and for sexual assault of Student 3 have, in fact, caused students under the Member’s supervision to be put at risk contrary to subsection 1(17) of Ontario Regulation 437/97.
19The Member’s misconduct is disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional contrary to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. Members are expected to create a safe learning environment for students, and not to exploit their position to sexually abuse their students. The Member failed to meet these expectations by his disgraceful and dishonourable conduct of sexually abusing two students in the classroom on several occasions.
20The Member’s conduct is also unbecoming a member contrary to subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulations 437/97. The public’s trust in the teaching profession is grossly eroded when members abuse their position of trust and authority to sexually abuse their students.
F. PENALTY Decision
21The parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 5), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on July 29, 2020, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:
The Member is directed to receive a reprimand, which will be delivered in writing, pursuant to section 30.2(1)(a) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996; and
The Registrar of the Ontario College of Teachers is directed to immediately revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member, pursuant to section 30.2(1)(c) of the Act.
G. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
22The Member’s professional misconduct consisted of or included the sexual abuse of a student, as described in subsection 30.2(2) of the Act. Given this finding, section 30.2(1) of the Act provides that the Panel must make an order: (1) requiring that the Member be reprimanded by the Panel; and (2) directing the Registrar to revoke the Member’s certificate of qualification and registration. The Panel makes both of these orders and notes that it has no discretion in this regard. The Panel recognizes that it may also order costs or a fine in accordance with subsection 30(5) of the Act but accepts College Counsel’s submissions that it is not necessary to make these additional orders in light of the Member’s plea of no contest and joint submission on penalty.
23The Panel denounces the Member’s misconduct in the strongest terms.
Date: August 7, 2020
Diane Ballantyne, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
John Cammarata
Member, Discipline Panel
Marlène Marwah
Member, Discipline Panel