Famous dermatologist jailed over forged papers

Dubai: A famous dermatologist has been jailed and fined Dh200,000 for practising medicine using forged medical degree and American Board of Medical Specialities certification that she provided to Dubai’s health authorities.

The Canadian doctor, who is famous for having provided cosmetic treatment to celebrities and actors in India, created a profile online with Dubai Health Authority (DHA) to apply for a permit to practise dermatology in May 2016.

The DHA received the e-application of the dermatologist who uploaded her papers as per the required procedures.

She uploaded her personal identification papers and a medical degree from an American college, a certification from the American Board of Medical Specialities (ABMS), a permit that she had practised medicine in India, a medical experience letter and a certificate of good professional conduct.

Once DHA authorities discovered that she was unlisted with ABMS, her application was rejected before she reapplied and provided a new ABMS certification that, she claimed, had been renewed.

The dermatologist was permitted to practise dermatology in a Dubai-based private clinic pending further verifications that had to be done by a government-approved body.

In November 2016, the body reported to DHA that the doctor’s medical degree and ABMS certification were forged before the permit was revoked.

On Sunday, the Dubai Court of First Instance jailed the defendant for six months.

“The accused will pay a Dh200,000 fine. The forged papers will be confiscated and she will be deported following the completion of her punishment,” said presiding judge Mohammad Jamal.

He also referred the dermatologist to the Dubai Misdemeanours Court where she will he tried for sending the government-approved body an email, in which she threatened them to face negative consequences if they [the body] did not provide DHA with a positive feedback about her medical expertise.

The accused pleaded not guilty when she appeared before the court.

“That did not happen. No!” she told the court.

Her lawyer said in the court that the defendant practises dermatology and has her own clinic in India. “The papers that she submitted do not change the true fact that she is a dermatologist. Prosecutors failed to produce any document that were submitted by my client … she did not even participate in the process of lodging the online application to DHA,” argued the lawyer.

The private clinic [where the dermatologist was hired to work] and the centre [that operate DHA’s online licensing system], said the lawyer, were the one who submitted the online application and not the defendant.

“The clinic collected the temporary licence that allowed my client to practise her profession … but she did not start working as she was waiting for the procedures to be finalised. Investigation reports did not mention or prove that my client commenced work at the clinic or treat any patient. The case file also lacked any medical form or check-up form that carries my client’s signature,” argued the lawyer

The primary ruling remains subject to appeal within 15 days.