Corruption, nepotism and lack of accountability are some of the allegations that have been levelled against the Allied Health Professions Council (AHPC).

The statutory council was set up by government to regulate natural health therapies such as homeopathy, reflexology, acupuncture and Chinese medicine.

But some therapists claim that corrupt officials are ‘€œselling’€ registration certificates, while others claim that the council is blocking them from registering or charging them large amounts of money to do so.

Chinese national Gao Yu says in an affidavit that he was offered registration as a Chinese doctor and a work permit for R20 000 by Dr Kun Yu in April 2004. Kun Yu is on the Council’s Professional Board for Ayurveda, Chinese Medicine and Acupuncture.

However, Kun Yu denied knowing Gao Yu or making any such offer to him or anyone else.

But Chinese doctors based in Johannesburg and Cape Town who asked not to be named, said it was well known in their community that registration could be obtained via Kun Yu. One said he knew “quite a few people” who had “bought” their registration, and that Kun Yu was probably not working alone.

More than a year after Gao Yu’s affidavit was sent to the health department’s representative on the council, Advocate Letty Molopa, the matter has not been investigated by the Council.

Council Registrar Leonie MacDonald said she was not aware of the affidavit or the allegations against Kun Yu. But she added that he was not in a position to influence the outcome of council registration exams, which were “an absolute requirement for registration”.

Other modalities are also struggling with the Council. Last year, the National Reflexology Association passed a motion of “no confidence” in the Council.

Some reflexologists and aromatherapists say they have been waiting for over four years to be registered by the council and cannot practice as a result.

Other practitioners say they have been paying registration fees for years but have never been given practice numbers, so their patients cannot claim from medical aids for treatment.

MacDonald denied these allegations and said the council had not been given the names of anyone who had waited for over four years for registration.

The Traditional Chinese Healers Association received no response to its letter to the council complaining about “the lack of transparency, lack of consultation and apparent lack of accountability of AHPC towards its stakeholders”.

An organisation representing trainers, the Forum of Allied Health Higher Education Providers, last year appealed to the Department of Health for “a full formal investigation” into the council.

According to minutes of a meeting between forum members and the health department’s Dr Percy Mahlati last April, Mahlati supported such an investigation.

But the Department of Health said this week that while it is aware of the allegations against the council, it is “concentrating on sorting out the legislative challenges relating to the very structuring of the AHPCSA”.

“Some of the allegations made against the council had to do with the way the council is structured and the serious challenges relating to its inability to raise funds from fees,” said health spokesperson Solly Mabotha. “There will be no need to set up an investigation to determine what needs to be done to correct such structural issues.”

He failed to comment on what the department was doing to address non-structural issues such as corruption and nepotism.

Numerous emails, letters and telephone calls raising problems have been ignored by the Council, according to various professional organisations.

One of the key complaints is that the council “operates like a club, favouring its buddies” who do training, while trying to close down the schools of others not part of its “clique”.

Some training institutions that are accredited by the Department of Education and the SA Qualifications Authority (SAQA) have been unable to get council approval, while others that have met neither education department nor SAQA requirements have been registered by the council.

“Council members and certain professional board members have illegal schools and yet have their students registered because they are supporting illegal behaviour on behalf of each other,” notes the forum in a letter to the department of health.

The forum has a letter from the education department confirming that a school run by a council member is illegal. However, its graduates are being registered by the council.

One practitioner, phytologist (herbalist) Dr Anthony Rees, has had a five-year battle over registration with the council which he says tried to close down his practice.

Eventually, he reported the matter to the Public Protector but found it could not investigate because the council is considered a private body as it runs on members’ fees not government grants.

Rees says he has since decided not to pursue council registration as it would be “ethically compromising”.

Complaints have also been made that the council “controls” who is appointed to represent the different modalities, that two council members are sisters and that the council employs the registrar’s half-sister,

The council’s registration exams, introduced for all the different modalities except homeopathy and chiropractic, have also upset many practitioners.

The forum described the exams as “irrelevant and irregular” because no providers were involved in setting the professional standards for them.

Unqualified people are also allegedly examiners. For example, practitioners claim that acupuncture examiners, one of whom is a council member, are not qualified to test the competency of people who have been practising acupuncture for decades.

The exams are also expensive. Chinese practitioners were told to pay R3 500 for a four-day herbal course as part of the registration requirements to be recognised as a Chinese doctor.

When practitioners asked for their problems to be put on council’s agenda last year, they were informed that the Council did not have any money to hold meetings.

Registrar MacDonald notified council members last August that “cash flow problems” meant there would be no further council or professional board meetings last year.

The main reason for cash shortage was “over 900 voluntary de-registrations” of members, said MacDonald.

However, this week MacDonald denied that the council was bankrupt, adding that “council completed the 2005 financial year without requiring an overdraft”.

In response to the various allegations of nepotism, MacDonald responded that “your source should submit the allegation in the form of an affidavit, disclosing his/her identity, to council for investigation”.

She said the council would never be involved in anything illegal, that “all applicants for registration are treated equally” and the registration exams were necessary because “council has not yet completed the process of approving all training providers”.

She also denied that there was any breakdown in communication between council and practitioners. – Health-e News Service.