Скачать или смотреть NMC Investigating Committee Procedural Irregularities & Irrational Conclusions from Statistical Data

This is all about test time , and the burden of proof rely on NMC.

The concern in the case relates to the NMC’s investigation which with general assumption that there was widespread fraud at the NMC-approved test centre where candidates obtained their computer-based test (hereafter CBT) test result.

‪@NMCvideos‬ using quick finish time as a threshold that a proxy tester was likely to have been present at the centre. The regulator was of the view that it was unlikely that the Appellant could complete it in a time faster than any other candidate in the global benchmark. NMC gave minimal weight to the evidence in regard to training materials such as past questions used by the candidates, they equally failed to value character and competency reference letters provided.

NMC IC panel was of the view that it was highly unlikely that the Nigerian Nurses could have achieved such times without the use of a proficient proxy test taker.

Where is the accountability of NMC, when their witness 1 and 2 are on the register? NMC considered fraudulently entering the register breaching a fundamental tenant of the profession. The panel were considering how the Appellant got on the register in the first place. The panel, nor the appeal, should be concerned with what the Appellant has done since entering the register, the question to be considered was how witness 1 and 2 got on the register. If someone has committed fraud to obtain entry to the NMC register then they cannot be considered good character to remain on the register, regardless of what they have done since then.

Reference - facts- the NMC investigations to date have not established any wrongdoing.

cases involving dishonesty (The Queen on the application of Darren Williams v Police Appeals Tribunal Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2016] EWHC 2708 (Admin)).

According to NMC, it states " If a registered professional is found to have committed fraud to enter the Respondent’s register, then the AR, and the panel can deny entry onto the register. Whilst this will have an effect on the registered professional, it is not a disproportionate outcome. "

Bolton v The Law Society [1994] WLR 512 held (at [16]):

‘If that proves, or appears likely to be, so the consequence for the individual and his family may be deeply unfortunate and unintended. But it does not make suspension the wrong order if it is otherwise right. The reputation of the profession is more important than the fortunes of any individual member. Membership of a profession brings many benefits, but that is a part of the price.

As Bolton reiterates consequences for the individual may be unfortunate and unintended, however that does not make the order wrong. The reputation of the profession is more important than the fortunes of any individual member. Upholding the integrity of testing is more important than the effect of causing reputational harm to the Appellant.