THE Health Professionals Council of SA (HPCSA) has said that its investigations into complaints about Dr Ntando Peaceman Duze, a cardiologist practising from the Life Healthcare Westville Hospital, “are at an advanced stage”.

The hospital also confirmed that its internal investigation into the doctor has not yet been completed.

The two organisations were responding to a media enquiry after a Carte Blanche segment broadcast allegations against the doctor on Sunday, July 27.

The council’s communications manager: corporate affairs, Priscilla Sekhonyana, said the HPCSA cannot comment at this stage as the investigations are ongoing.

Sunday’s broadcast came after the Pietermaritzburg High Court ruled in favour of Carte Blanche, effectively removing an interim interdict which had prevented the airing of the segment. The interdict had been obtained by the doctor.

Also read: Doctor at Westville hospital being investigated for malpractice

In court papers, the doctor sought to prevent the airing of the segment on the grounds that it is defamatory and its content is likely to cause irreparable harm to his reputation and dignity.

The doctor had alleged “professional jealousy” by two cardiologists, who were listed as respondents in the matter, and further alleged that they had “defamed him by lodging false and malicious complaints” with medical aid schemes, in which he is allegedly accused “of submitting fraudulent claims”.

The doctor made the case that these allegations were investigated with no evidence of wrongdoing found against him.

The doctor also asserts that “professional jealousy” resulted in the complaints against him being lodged with the HPCSA.

On its social media platform, Carte Blanche said its team has “received another letter from Dr Duze’s current lawyers”, in which the doctor maintains “that he can’t answer most of our questions because this would interfere with the HPCSA process and with the hospital’s peer review of his practice”.

In the court ruling, the judge said: “I do not believe that the broadcast would improperly influence the panel of medical professionals tasked with adjudicating the complaints against the applicant, particularly where those complaints are supported by scientific and clinical evidence. The panel is presumed to act independently and objectively, and there is no basis to suggest that public reporting would impair their ability to do so. Therefore, I conclude that there is no prejudice to the administration of justice, as alleged by the applicant.”

For more from the Highway Mail, follow us on Facebook , X and Instagram. You can also check out our videos on our YouTube channel or follow us on TikTok.

Click to subscribe to our newsletter here