Saturday, 6 August 2016

2- Canadian corrupt Doctors Seually Assaulted Patient Right Honourable Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi

Canadian Counter-Dictionary, and Human Rights' Violations in Canada
A   B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z


Three British Bastards Left No Dignity for Canadian 

VIVA FREE CANADA 


Author Note:
Murder, Torture and Sexual Assault by agents of the Whore Elizabeth II in Canada are common practice. The corrupt Police , Crown and Judges, are only may charge and convict "Immigrants" IF they sexually assault a White British Teenager.

IN other word, all immigrants and even color citizens have no protection under Canadian Law for Rape and Sexual Assault, PARTICULARLY MALE IMMIGRANTS!

Yes!, most of British Judges, Lawyers, Cops, Doctors and Government Staff are GAY; and their Daughters and wives are Whore! So they love to get sex with Immigrants.
They are very aggressive and without any shame touching Immigrants' sexual body parts in Streets, Malls, Government Offices, Court, Police Divisions, Schools etc. AND, clearly, asking " Give it to me , " Can I have blowjob!", "Im honey get $100 and fuck me!" " I love your Dick" etc.        

Since 1990, hundreds Canadian Male and Female are committing all kinds of unwanted Sexual Nature Torches and clear Sexual Assaults against me.
The Corrupt Toronto Police never charge them, and in my first report to 52 Division that a
woman torched my genital without my consent. The Cop receiving my complaint Laught and Several time asked me " A Woman touch you and you expect we charge her. What about us! If we touch you then who is going to charge us! Then fw cops in reception area all laughed.

These Bastard Cops, Lawyers and Judges under Leadership of Whore Queen NEVER had Dignity to understand that a Person Dignity is MUCH HIGHER than Sexual Need and when a person ask for a " Consent" to engage in sexual activity. The person self esteem and dignity will be maintain, it has nothing to do with age and sex of person, man or woman. Same as the corrupt the President of University of Toronto, that all its bastard Staffs, Instructors, and corrupt professors are daily sexually assaulting students and members like me; and when we complain, they are changing the story and saying " there is no Witness to support your complain, and it is better you dint go to that class, Gym, Library etc".  

However, the Canadian Doctors, are worst animals, as they abuse their Office Authority for Sexual Abuse. The Immigrants Patients and I, must perform a regular Check Up that allows they Perform Examination According to the Professional Code.
In Germany, in all medical exam, there is an assistant beside every Doctor to make sure that He/She does not abuse the Patients.

IN CANADA, there are Over One Hundred Thousands Files of Complaint as Against Male and FEMALES Doctors who have sexually assaulted their Patients and I.

I am not sure how many Male Immigrants have files Complaint against Canadian Doctors, Lawyers, Judges, Polices, Professors, Gym Instructors, Personal Trainers etc for Sexual Assault and Sexual Touches. However, I am proud to be the first Canadian, that from the first professional misconduct, I filed complaints against them.

The following Complaint for Sexual Assault is against a Bastard Doctor NGUYEN, who was the Judges & Cops AGENTS when I had many trials against them, banks and corporations.
So, the corrupt Doctor, who had confident that if commit crime against me, police will protect him. AND at the same time, he could see that I was occupied and stressed for all legal proceedings. So, he gradually commenced sexual touches and continued to move 
forward, without my notice. I was always the last Patient, spending a lot of time in chatting and many questions that sound like " cross-examination" and Judges and Lawyers were asked him to ask, and when he was noticing that I have lost my mental alert.
Then was using some kind of Spry in my Noise, alleging it would open my sinus, which indeed was casing dizzy and feeling sleepy, then would take me to exam room, helping me to be nude and .....

The Investigator of the College have obtained all Details and left in confidential way before the Board..... The Bastard Doctor NGUYEN, has closed his Office at 360 College Street in Toronto, and did never practice as Physician
IN the  following Table of Content, You will see a Large Number of Court Cases; I have brought that to prove my level of stress and mental anguish in which the corrupt Canadian Doctor Offender   
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                               File No. 8615


HEALTH PROFESSIONS APPEAL AND REVIEWBOARD


BETWEEN:

MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI
Complainant

-and-

DOCTOR KHOI BA NGUYEN, MD
Member Complaint Against



______________________________________________________________________


COMPLAINANT’S SUBMISSIONS RECORD

______________________________________________________________________


The Complainant, self counsel                                         Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi 
                                    456-608 College Street 
                                                                        Toronto, ON
                                                M6G 4A3

      

TO:      The Registrar Abby Katz Starr,                                                                                         151 Bloor Street, West, 9th floor                                                                       
Toronto, ON
M5S 2T5



Served to the Registrar on September 29, 2006, at 3:45PM by Personal Service

CONFIDENTIAL


TABLE

NO.     DESCRIPTION                                                                                                         PAGE


1.         First page of Application Record under Extraordinary Remedies under               1
            the Criminal Code: Nourhaghighi v. R. SM31-06; sat for Nov 14/06

2.         Letter From: Nourhaghighi; To: HPARB; January 13, 2005                                    2 
            RE: College did not reply to Complaint…

3.         Letter From: HPARB; To: Nourhaghighi; January 14, 2005                                    3 
            RE: Board has no power…

4.         HPARB Chair Condos’ Decision & Reasons v. College; April 27, 2005                 4

5.         Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                                                                 6

6.         Home Inspector Heath Hazard Repot                                                                  10

7.         Endorsement Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo                                             11

8.         Order of Justice Pitt v. Condo & Caber                                                                13

9.         Order of Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo & Caber                                       14

10.       Federal Court Order of Justice LEMIEUX v. SIRC & CSIS                                   15
            Major Nourhaghighi v. SIRC & CSIS T-762-04

11.       My Letter to Owners of Condo Re: Toxic Mould                                                   16
            RE: Nguyen & College Public Interests Issue                


12.       Notes of Dr. Soboloff  MD to property manager                                                   17

13.       SUBMISSIONS                                                                                                    18


1.         Endorsement of Justice Coo                                                          June 16, 1995    1
Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Hospital et al
2.         Endorsement of Justice Boland                                                    March 27, 1996
            Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Condominium 935 v. Nourhaghighi

3.         Endorsement of Justice Boland                                                    March 27, 1996
            Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Condominium 935 v. Nourhaghighi

4.         Endorsement of Justice Day                                                          September 1997
Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Police et al

5.         Few pages of Justice Cadsby’s Judgment v. Toronto Police   November 1997        
Ontario Court of Justice: R. Toronto Police v. Nourhaghighi

7.         Endorsement of Justice Campbell of the                                     June 2, 1999
Federal Court of Canada: Canada v. Nourhaghighi

8.         Order of Justice Lemieux v. SIRC                                                January 2005
Federal Court of Canada: Nourhaghighi v. SIRC

9.         Endorsement of Justice Pitt,                                                          April 26, 2005
Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Nourhaghighi   v. Condominium 935

10.       Endorsement of the Ontario Court of Appeal                              January 2006
Nourhaghighi iv. Condominium 935-applicant

11.       Pending Application: Extraordinary Remedies v. the Crown    February 2006
            First page of Notice of Application                                                         

12.       Concise findings: Commission for Compliant against RCMP  ….. 2006
Nourhaghighi v. RCMP
            The Original Decision is classified ‘Secret’  

13.       Concise findings of Security Intelligent Review Committee May 12, 2006 
            Nourhaghighi v. Canadian Security and Intelligent Services (“CSIS”)
            The Original Decision is classified ‘Secret’  
15.       Authorities
            Judgment against justice of peace Balckmon  for sexcual …


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                       File No. 8615

HEALTH PROFESSIONS APPEAL AND REVIEW BOARD (“BOARD”)

BETWEEN:
KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI
Complainant
-and-

KHOI BA NGUYEN, MD
Member Complaint Against (“Nguyen”)


COMPLAINANT’S SUBMISSIONS


PART I
STATEMENT OF CASE

1.         I made a request that the Board, in accordance with law, reviews the unfair, and erroneous Decision 1 of the Committee concerning my complaint against Nguyen where the inadequacy of the investigation and biased 2,3,4,5 are few grounds for this appeal.    

2.         On September 27, 2006 I got two letters from Starr 6, 7 asking for the grounds of confidentiality, the fresh evidence, and submissions to be filed by 09/29/06; this short notice was unfair. Further, Goldblatt 8 and Pond 9 during telephone conference, consented that hearing be held in the confidential. The burden is upon Osborne 7 to explain why this fact was omitted from her Report; and why on same day of conference did not inform me of the deadline-09/29/06. Osborne refers to Rule 8, but did not send a copy of Rules that I learn all my rights; yet Rule 8 is in the Report; these submissions are satisfying its parameters and considering also the conditions of fresh evidence too. 

1              Decision of October 2005 (“Decision”); the Complaints Committee Record (“M”)
2              The Defendant, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (“College”)
3              Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Hospital et al: 95-CU-84058
4              Nourhaghighi v. Ontario Judicial Council et al: 96-CU-104952
5              Nourhaghighi v. Bell Canada et al; 96-CU-113026
6              Registrar, Abby Katz STARR (“Starr”), mailed the Per-Conference Report of August 31, 2006 (“Report”) on Sept 8; and hearing date of October 26, 2006; on Sept 11; both by regular mails         
7              Report of the Chair of the Per-Review Conference, Ms. Katie OSBORNE (“Osborne”)
8              Mr. Jordan GOLDBLATT, the Counsel on the record for Dr. Nguyen (“Goldblatt”)
9              Ms. Jan POND for the College (“Pond”)

CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   2

PART II
STATEMENT OF FACTS

3.             I am Iranian Muslim single parent citizen. In 1980 Iranian arrested Americans’ spies10; since then there are enormous planed poisonous propaganda against us by   certain media in Canada that the Crown 11 has improper influence on them 12.  Further, the Crown’s policy is clearly against Muslim and Iranian that raised many protests and liability against the Crown inter alia I filed application under the Extraordinary Remedies of the Criminal Code and Charter against the Crown for obstructing my access to all courts’ services and arbitrary dismissing all my files. Justice Hamilton of Superior Court of Justice scheduled November 14, 2006 for per hearing. In my reply I must relay in this file as the Crown submitted Ducharme Order that was related to moulds in my Condo 13.

M1-M8 contains my complaints and few evidence against Nguyen;
M4-M7&M32-M35 are photos of moulds.
M29-third para: …several times I complained against toxic mould and having breathing problems. Nguyen asked me to find the name of mould and report to him…Nguyen said Stachybotrys do not grown in house and drywall, it grown on plastic.
M33:Expert report is contrary to Nguyen; photographs 1&2 Obvious visible mould on gypsum board ceiling. Nguyen criticized me for taking action…In last few years, I made constant complaints for having breathing problems, allergies, and headache...maliciously did not send me to any skin and respiratory specialists
M29-second para. He is suing his Condo corporation

On October 19, 2004 the Court made Order that the Condo must investigate the issue of heath hazard and sat February 23, 2005 for hearing that the Court made Order against the Condo for repair that again the Condo disobeyed Orders:
M25-Nov 29/04 Patient is agitated, shouted that the mold has been identified as very toxic…accused me of conspiracy with his Condo management by delay his treatment and referral. He calls me “ a criminal” and stated he will complain to the College.  

SUBMISSION RECORD    First page of Notice of Application SM31-06 13; p. 1


10             444 Days imprisonments of American’s spies, arrested at the US Embassy in Tehran; the end of
diplomatic relationship with US; American’s military attacks and shutting down the Iranian Airbus with missiles killing over 300 passengers; Supporting Iraq in war against Iran and encouraging
Iraq in explosions of several chemical bombs in Iran causing billions dollars damages to Iranian
11             The Crown defendants in my actions: The Federal, Ontario and Quebec Governments,
12             Defendant Toronto Star, Action 96-CU-104952; Defendant Globe &Mail, Action 96-CU-113026
13             Application Record of Respondent Her Majesty the Queen (“Ontario”) filed by the Contemnors Crown’s Lawyers W. LIGHTFOOT; H. MACKAY; file SM 31-06 
HPARB/ CONFIDENTIAL/ File # 5615                                                                             3
               
4.         I was the systematic inspector 14. I discovered ample corruptions of the Crown and the Courts 3, 4, 5, 13, 15and acted duly. Police 16 targeted me with malice, torture17, and felonies 18 causing serious injuries like fractures of bones 19 to me requiring services by the medical professions, obstructing my access to the hospitals 3, 4 and medications. However, the Committee did not uphold my complaints as the College’s investigations was dishonest and biased, the prosecutions was corrupt and made in my absentia 3, 4, 5. 
In April 2004 I filed a judicial review application against SIRC & CSIS 16 that a writ of mandamus be issued against SIRC to investigate my complaint against CSIS, in which SIRC without proper investigation closed my file. The Respondent, the Attorney General of Canada admitted to my submissions that I had rights to be present before SIRC that on January 31, 2005, Justice LEMIEUX made Order against SIRC. Therefore, I got five days hearing before SIRC Chair Gary FILMON who uphold my complaint, in part, and made Order that CSIS must apologize from me.     

In June 2004 my kitchen’s ceiling collapsed due to toxic moulds and until June 2005 my Condo refused to repair due to the Crown and Police interference as they want make me busy with ‘moulds’ that I could NOT focus on my research and presentation before
LEMIEUX & FILMON.

In August 2004 I filed application against Condo for disobeying Orders to repair water damages that ended to growth of toxic moulds. Justice Ducharme made Order for cross- examinations of affidavits be commenced of December 1, 2004.  

In November 29, 2004 Nguyen had another misconduct with me to increase my stress and frustration during the most important step of my legal proceedings. M25-Nov 29/04


5.         On December 13, 2004 I served my complaint against Nguyen to the College.
I called several times got no proper answer. I objected to intake Officers for not sending reply to me. It was very unusual. I served that the College did not deny the receipt. There is nothing in the record that indicates the initial correspondence send to me.   

14             In the Iranian Air Force, as a second job to my main profession senior fighter & transport pilot
15             The Courts: The Federal Court, the Ontario Courts, the Quebec Courts; Federal Court of Appeal, Court of Appeal for Ontario, Court of Appeal for Quebec and the Supreme Court of Canada 
16             POLICE: Federal Police: the Canadian Royal Mounted Police (“RCMP”); the Canadian Security Intelligent Service (“CSIS”); Provincial Police: the Ontario Provincial Police (“OPP”); the Quebec Provincial Police (“QPP”) Municipal Police: Montreal Police, Ottawa Police, Quebec City Police, Toronto Police et al (“POLICE”)
17             Ontario [Toronto Police Offenders] v. Nourhaghighi; Judgment of Justice Cadsby
18             Forgery & Fraud in Motor Vehicle Accident (“MVA”) Report by Toronto Police; RE Justice Bigelow
19             Fracture of my Rib # 8 is admitted by St. Michael Hospital; after denial of Toronto Hospital and Mount Sinai Hospital, when Police agents lost me in their interception due my advance tactics
CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   4

6.         On January 13, 2005 I wrote to the Board that the College did not reply to my complaint. Starr replied: Board has no power to require the College to acknowledge or reply to you regarding your complaint -these letters are not in the record. Few weeks after, I got a letter from Fewer asking me to call him-M9. While I was stressed in my prosecution against Condo, yet several times I called and left messages. I did not get any reply. I complained to the Board against the College-M12. 
SUBMISSIONS RECORD My letter Jan 13/05, p.2; HPARB letter Jan 14/05, p,3

7.         On April 14, 2005 the Deputy Registrar, James TERRY sent a copy of my letter to the College and asked five following questions-M10-11.
1) What is history of investigation?
2) Specifically, what investigatory steps, if any, remain to be either commenced or completed?
3) What, if any, required information or documentation remains outstanding?
    Specifically, what steps will the College be talking to secure the outstanding required information?
4) What is the matter likely to be considered by the Complaints Committee?
5) What is the Complaints Committee’s explanation for delay in the disposition of this matter?           

There is no evidence that the College comply with the Deputy Registrar’s instructions. However, on April 25, 2005, the College-Truster fraudulently alleged that it was unclear whether the complainant wished to proceed-M54. The Board could ask that: Whether Inspector Fewer took any step, by mean of follow up letter, to make unclear issue clear?   
I intentionally did not provide a telephone number that due to the confidentiality of the issue to get chance to talk face to face with the inspector, as its is procedure. Further, Fewer did not send copy of Nguyen’s reply to me-M15-17 for my reply to it; nor informed me that whether got my medical record, or whether medical record is complete and without my notice, forwarded its incomplete investigation to the Committee.
I had rights to a complete presentation before the Committee, as I have same rights before the Board. The Committee erred in fact that the investigation before it was complete, did not examine with honestly and impartiality the investigator’s letters on the record-M52-56 inter alia did not asked for the investigator’s notes for letter January 25, 2005, did not demand answer for letter April 21, 2005 that why I should be obligated to send consent within 10 days, did not examine  letter April 25, 2005  to determine that the actions of the investigator and the Committee Support Manager were constructive.
HPARB/ CONFIDENTIAL/ File # 5615                                                                             5

8.         On April 27, 2005, Chair Condos rendered Decision & Reasons against the College that was omitted by the investigator Fewer in records before the Committee, and is not disclosed to disclosure too. Condos did not give a chance of reply to me and arbitrary, as usual, relied on the College reply; yet, confirming my facts in last paragraph that: While the College might well have been more proactive in ascertaining Major Nourhaghighi’s intentions…in which these reasons shall be weighted to the professional negligence against the Investigator Fewer, and the College.          
SUBMISSIONS RECORD Condos’ Decision & Reasons; p. 4

9.         On April 28, 2005, the Court made Order against my Condo’s property manger to clean the mould, contrary to Nguyen’s will and action in obstruction of justice that I b able to have proper medical record indicating injuries that I suffered due to toxic moulds. 
The Crown and Police interference with normal business of citizens and my Condo has ended to over $500.000 legal expenses my Condo and me, where large numbers of owners are very low income like me, and protesting against the board of directors calling them names, thieves, cheaters etc. The Crown and Police encouraged the Condo to appeal against the Costs Order of Justice Pitt and claim more than $100.000.00 from me. I represent myself in the Ontario Court of Appeal, and again, I got judgments against the dishonest, biased board of directors. This was additional success        
In obtaining Orders against the Crown’s parties inter alia I got Judgments by representing myself at trials against defence lawyers of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, the Bank of Nova Scotia, and several small corporations of accused of ‘wrongful dismissal’ due to improper influence of the Crown.  
SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                          p.6
Home Inspector Heath Hazard Repot                              p.10
Endorsement Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo      p.11   
                                                Order of Justice Pitt v. Condo & Caber                            p.13
Order of Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo & Caber p.14
Order of Federal Court Order v. SIRC & CSIS               p.15               Major Nourhaghighi v. SIRC & CSIS T-762-04
                                                RE: Paragraph 4 of these submissions              
                                                My Letter to Owners of Condo Re: Toxic Mould            p.16
                                                RE: Nguyen & College Violated Public Interests Issue            
HPARB/ CONFIDENTIAL/ Nguyen File # 5615                                                              5

10.       Since I was child, I had periodical medical examinations. I became pilot, and senior pilot that continue my periodical medical examinations in Iran, Pakistan, German and Canada. I had relatives who were physicians. Therefore I have personal knowledge and experiences of the physicians’ professional conduct, and the physicians’ standards of practice. I used the said parameters in filing my complaint against Nguyen’s sexual assault during prostate test.-M2:last para. This was an important issue that I had rights to sit and discuss with the investigator face to face to provide the particulars.               

11.       The Committee in page 2, at subparagraph title superscript “1”, line 9 is referring to my letter dated May 9 and the fact that I wrote: the “College’s Investigator Fraud” adding: “Mr. Nourhaghighi had written to HPARB…asserting that the College was not acting with honestly and good faith” I was unable to find the said letter-May 9, in the College’s record, in the Board’s disclosure and in my own personal record.  This letter must be served and filed by the College, at least three weeks before the hearing.

12.       While Nguyen for years denying issuing a referral to specialists. However, in December 2004 I changed my family doctor, and have got ample referrals. This fact is not contradictory to the facts that the Crown and Police did not interfered with my medical care and Nguyen. My complaint against Nguyen, Orders against SIRC and Condo and angers of owners in my Condo were ‘Red Lights’ to the Crown and Police to cease their crimes against me, for a while. All learn judges and lawyers in Canada are fully aware that no one in Canada has more knowledge and master evidence of the crimes of the Crown. My new family physician, in addition to ample referrals even wrote a notice to my Condo’s property manager to provide me with accommodations before clearing the mould. Soon, for the first time I discovered that I have very serious heath problems and must consider many factors in my life that Nguyen never has given chance to a specialist to discover it.      
SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notes of Dr. Soboloff MD to property manager  p.16

CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   7

13.       The College did not sent Nguyen’s reply to me. After reviewing disclosure, I discovered more evidence against Nguyen that the Crown has used to mislead CSIS & SIRC. I testified before SIRC that the ’Attorney General of Ontario’ by forgery drafted false materials against me and asked CSIS to signed and mislead the Minister of Citizenship then as a ‘federal information against me. All documents in this issue are marked SECRET. At this time I am unable to disclose more facts in this issue.    



PART III
POINTS IN ISSUE

14.       The issue is:
A.        Whether there were complete Records before the Committee?
and if the answer is the affirmative; then,

B.        Whether there is a complete ‘Respecting Disclosure of Records’ before the Board that satisfies s.31 of the Regulated Heath Processions Act, 1991 (“RHPA”)? 
and if the answer is the affirmative; then,

C.        Whether two days short notice for presentation of submissions before the Board  for a self counsel complainant constitute a fair and reasonable notice?
and if the answer is the affirmative; then,

D.        Whether there is evidence to proof that the investigation was complete, there was no bias on the part of the College and Investigator, in particular where sexual assault and public interest issue-Moulds were parts of complaints and the Committee made a fair and reasonable decision in my absentia?  

CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   8
PART IV
LAW & ARGUMENTS

15.       It is respectfully submitted that the answers A, B, & C to the per-review hearing are the negatives; and October 26, 2006 is a pre mature for fair reviewing of this case.
I admit to the fact that I erred in telephone conference by submitting that the records are complete; as it has never happened in all my reviews that the College files a defective disclosure. Further, the telephone conference was a new process for me that I have never witnesses in HPARB.

16.       In any event that the Board provides the affirmatives answers to questions A, B, & C, I will present my argument of law orally, as it is scheduled; and in summarily I would submit that it is instructed by the Health Professions Procedural Code, 51. (1)
A panel shall find that a member has committed an act of professional misconduct if, …
(b.1) the member has sexually abused a patient; 
(c) the member has committed an act of professional misconduct as defined on the regulations. 1991, c.18, Sched. 2, s. 51(1); 1993, c.37, s..14(1).

17.       Further, the sexual abuse of a patient is defined as:
(a) sexual intercourse or other forms of physical sexual relations between the member and the patient,
(b) touching, of a sexual nature, of the patient by the member, or
(c ) behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member towards the patient. 1993, c. 37, s.4.     

18.       It is submitted that bias is a major factor for review of the Committee’s decisions on its merits, and to accomplish it the Board must be lead with all ‘information and records’ that the College and investigator had, but did not forwarded to the Committee in first instant before the Committee making its decision. And f the Committee have seen all my documents disclosed with my letter dated May 9, 2005, then I have right
CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   9

that the Board those documents too. In sexual assault the faith of prosecutor is playing a main role. In case of “Discipline September/October 1993; Dr, Roger Edward Morgan; Sudbury” it is been clearly instructed that the College has duty to prosecute properly. We all know by experience that when the prosecutor has interests, or is biased, or his/her investigation is not complete, never a fair judgment would be rendered.        

19.       Furthermore, I would rely in the Heath professions Act, the Quality of Care Information Protection Act, 2004, the Regulated Heath Professional Act, 1991
The Personal Heath Information Act, 2004; at section 72-1 instructed that A person is guilty of an offence if the person, willfully collects uses or discloses personal heath information in contravention of this Act or its regulations. 


PART V
ORDER REQUESTED

20.       I request that the hearing of this file sat for October 26, 2006 be adjourned until  
a complete disclosure served to me and file duly. 
In alternative, I request if these submissions have sufficient weight to satisfy the Board that the Committee has made its decision upon inadequate investigations forwarded by the investigator Fewer, return my complaint to the Committee and makes order that, in accordance with law, the Committee commence new investigation in such I get chance of ‘personal appearance’ before the Committee and testify under the Oath against Nguyen.  In this case, taxpayers are saving a day of hearing.    
In further alternative, the Board reviews the Committee decisions in accordance with law.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

Dated in Toronto, this September 29, 2006        MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI


Cases: Committee Decision found that Dr. Lam Van Nguyen had committed an act of of professional misconduct, guilty of sexual assault; suspension for six month.

Exact case of mine

Discipline September/October 1993
Dr, Roger Edward Morgan; Sudbury: This case reported to the professional as case #18 in March 1991 Report of the Discipline Committee Proceedings. Dr. Bayang had been found guilty by the Committee of charge of professional misconduct and of the allegation of incompetence       

Canada exercised independence strategy with Iran and Muslim. As the result, the numbers of Iranian from few hundreds increased to over two hundred thousand, and the numbers of Muslim increased to over one million. We are having confidence that the Constitution Act, 1982 is fully protecting all of us. Nguyen’s actions and the College’s Decision are outrageously dishonest and breaching ss. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15 and 24 of the Charter
having all rights under the law and the Charter to be served professionally. The service providers are obligated to consider the law, the ethical code, and dignity of all citizens as the fundamentals of the professional conduct, and the professional services.   
All parties have as solved in the telephone conference by all parties. Ms.  and the counsel for



September 29, 2006                                                                        SERVED

Abby Katz Starr, Registrar                                                             Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi 
Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“Board”)                           456-608 College Street 
151 Bloor Street, West, 9th floor                                                             Toronto, ON, M6G 4A3
 Toronto, ON, M5S 2T5

File # 8615, Nourhaghighi v. Nguyen

Enclosed herewith is my “Submissions Record” in reply to your letters dated September 5 &11, 2006 sent by regular mail that I received on September 27.

Your letter of September 5th mailed on September 8th and had enclosure of Pre-Review Conference Report signed by Ms. Katie Osborne who sat today as the last day for me to serving you with my “Submissions Record” that addressing three main issues rose by Ms. Osborne:
a.         Grounds for confidentiality of the hearing;
b.         Fresh Evidence, and
c.         My Submissions       

I had only two days to complete my “Submissions Record”. You are well aware that this is not the first time that you, the Board and the Crown are prejudicing my rights 

Your letter of September 11th informed me that the Board is going to review my complaint on October 26, 2006, which is acceptable for me, and I will attend in person.
All my hope is that the members of Board on October 26 not be selected from those who harmed me by their scandalous decisions in past.


MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI

I shall mention that a judge on October 2004 sat February 23, 2005 for hearing of my application for contempt proceeding against the board of my condominium (“Condo”), when the disobedience of the Orders by the Condo caused the growth of toxic moulds in the ceiling of my kitchen.  

For example for in Iran, Pakistan and Germany for genital and prostate examinations, I saw always a medical assistant beside physician who was performing the tests. I did not witness this safeguard in Canada. However, I was told that some hospitals exercise this safeguard only for women’s particular examinations. Canadian giving too much weight for sexual complaints made by women; and do not give any weight to men’s similar complaints





11.                                         


SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                          p.6

1.         In 1995 and 1996 I filed three actions against the College for not prosecuting the physicians who had disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional conduct, professional misconduct, failing to maintain the standard of practice and contravening the Acts2, 3, 4.  
As the result, the Crown and Police defendants in my actions, encouraged to continue improper influence over my medical services.
It is the Crown’s unlawful customary practice to attack to the parties acting against it that they fail to concentrate on their very limited time of presentations before judges. 


SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                          p.6

19             Major Nourhaghighi v. the Security Intelligent Review Committee (“SIRC”), CSIS and the Attorney General of Canada et al; T-762-04; see Lemieux Order
while ample ‘trial judges’ after careful examinations have made good judgments for me

The College1 is defendant in my three pending actions 2, 3, 4 for not prosecuting my complaints and other wrongdoings to cover up the crimes of the Crown
 was satisfied that the College, willfully, denied replying to me, and was rude to me in telephone conversations, to cause me mental anguish in critical time of February 2005.   
The Committee at M-9 indicates  

  
5.         On September 11, 2001 the US Government alleged that Muslim attacked them. The Crown8, the Courts 9, the federal 10, provincial 11, and municipal police 12 (“they”) used this opportunity and harshly attacked me and other Muslims inter alia Arar1, Ahani1, Soursh1. They used Nguyen as agent who abused his office and forwarded ample questions for discovery of my skill, experience, believe, expression, religion, and information. Nguyen searched my thought by entering into long political argument with me relating to 9/11. Then, they forwarded ample outrageously dishonest fabricated information against me to CSIS, RCMP and the Minister of Citizenship1 who suspended my landed status; forwarded the fabricated information to judges and dismissed all my legal proceedings and complaints; intercepted everywhere in Canada and US forcing me to return to Toronto; suspended my immigration landed status, and planned to deport me from Canada as the threat to the security of Canada under s.19 of the Citizenship Act & the Immigration Act. 
2              Arar v. Canada, Ahani v. Canada, Soursh v. Canada
1              Nourhaghighi v. Minister of Citizenship T-768-03
2              S




Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)