Ontario College of Teachers v. Matar, 2022 ONOCT 59

Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Matar 2022 ONOCT 59

Date: 2022-06-16

DECISION AND REASONS FOR ADJOURNMENT MOTION

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

Edward William Matar, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

EDWARD WILLIAM MATAR (REGISTRATION #258768)

PANEL: Emile Ramlochan Yasser Leheta, OCT Emma Rhodes

HEARD: June 15, 2022

Linette King, for the Ontario College of Teachers

Edward William Matar, self-represented

Erica Richler, Independent Legal Counsel

PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) 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.

Decision

1On June 15, 2022, the parties appeared electronically before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”), in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee (the “Rules”), to hear the allegations against Edward William Matar (the “Member”) in a Notice of Hearing dated February 24, 2020.

2The Member was present but did not have legal representation. The Panel was advised at the outset that the parties had entered into an agreement and that the Member would plead no contest. When the Panel began to conduct the oral plea inquiry, the Member made statements to the Panel which raised concerns about the voluntariness of the plea and agreement between the parties. The Member was given an opportunity to speak with College Counsel and Independent Legal Counsel but maintained his position.

3The College requested a motion to adjourn on the basis that the Member now sought to change his plea and contest the allegations. The Member did not object to the College’s motion. As such, the Panel decided not to accept the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and granted the College’s request to adjourn so that this matter could be heard as a contested hearing by a newly-constituted panel.

4The Panel wishes to reassure the Member and the public that the hearing will be adjudicated by persons free of any real or perceived bias.