Minister Wants Dr Jose Humphreys As Consultant


The Cabinet of Antigua and Barbuda has accepted a proposal made by Minister of Health Molwyn Joseph for Dr. Humphreys to act as a consultant for the ministry.

The Medical Council and the lawyers representing Dr. Humphreys went to the Cabinet on Wednesday.

The Council had an opportunity to explain fully to the Cabinet the rationale which led to the de-registration of Humphrey’s license to practice, and the reason for requiring Dr. Humphreys to take an exam. The lawyers explained the reasons why the matter had to go before the court.

The amendment to the Medical Practitioners Act did not allow another remedy, except the courts, it was explained. A proposal was made to amend the current law in order to allow new doctors, with minimal resources, to challenge decisions of the Council using inexpensive means. The Cabinet agreed to consider this amendment in the near future.

Meanwhile, Dr. Humphreys would not be able to earn a living practicing medicine unless he submits to an internship and takes an exam.

These two deficiencies were identified by the Court and the Council. The Minister made a proposal to bring Dr. Humphreys into the Ministry of Health as a Consultant during the period, while he pursues the remedies that would cause him to be registered as a doctor lawfully and entitled to practice medicine in Antigua and Barbuda.

The proposal was accepted by Cabinet and permission was granted to the Minister to work out the terms.

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]


  1. Bullshit. ANR you full a shit. Improve what clinical experience. Your Journalist need to understand how to write a balanced article. The man is a practicing doctor for nearly 10 years with postgraduate medical training at leading institutions wordwide, who has trained other doctors from as far as top UK universities. Give me a damn break. Something stinks here and it seems like your article of praise of James Knight is a regurgitation of some sort. You make some assertions that are so bias its plain to see your intentions. Stupz.

      • Hi CErmle
        I must apologize. It was not my intention to offend anyone and though it is not an excuse, I feel very emotional over what they are doing to this fine doctor.

  2. Are you kidding me. Grown folks cannot resolve such a simple matter and

    Want to teach or chastise children about conflict resolution and bullying.

    This is a perfect example of how children learn from adults.

  3. This only means that Dr. Jose Humphreys will receive even more blessings in copious measure from heaven’s storehouse. The harder the battle, the sweeter the VICTORY.

    Fret not thyself Dr. Humphreys. You already know who is in control. Your life is in His hands. In the meantime, please meditate on Jeremiah 29:11 and Romans 8:28

  4. It is absolute nonsense to ask Dr Humphreys to now do an internship. Truth be told is that when he was scheduled to do it at MSJMC, he was called and told not to present himself. No explanation was given. It was then that Dr Samuel took him at Belmont and mentored him. He continues to educate himself and recently did his Masters in Internal medicine at the University of Edinburg. He is now a Ph.D candidate. He has been mentoring young doctors, some of whom are engaged at MSJMC. His practice over the years has been unblemished and the many testimonies speak of such. No member on council has written the CMCE and even the current chairperson attests to the fact that Dr. Humphreys treated her ailing father for over a year without charging a cent. Injustice will have its day.

  5. Wait! let me see, someone doesn’t adhere to standards set and is then given a gov’t ghost job. . .?
    If the minister of health wants to help humpreys, why not arrange for him to do his intership under some type of bilateral country arrangement. We send him there for internship and the other country sends one of their doctors here for internship. Humphreys can lease his practice out til he returns.
    Anyway when we started sending all and sundry to get medical degrees, noone wanted to listen to those saying proper selection standards must be in place. Now look at mount st.john. . so many doctors & so much tax dollars being spent.

    • It has nothing to do with adhering to standards. He met the standard then. They are trying to implement a standard now for him and him only that none of them have satisfied. He is highly qualified. The appeal court itself said that there is no evidence that he is not. The Council itself under oath stated the same. I am sure he can make a worthwhile contribution to the Ministry of Health.

  6. Well take the job boss up and up

  7. This smells of underhanded and undermining of a professional for personal reasons. Many of those doctors on the council and positions in charge did not complete their internships in the US. Their professional and family connections got them to practice medicine in Antigua without having passed the board in the US. They are undermining a respected doctor based on their ineptitude. Please…

    • It is so true. It is who you know and your family status get you places in Antigua and Barbuda. Most Antiguans and Barbudans native born who want to contribute to the development and growth of their country will always suffered when a particular political party in government.

  8. Really unfortunate that one time you have your medical license and the next time you don’t. I do not know all the facts but it would seem clear that the body charged with approving such license is fundamentally flawed. If we don’t correct these shortcomings, then people will lose confidence in the system and how it works. This matter has been allowed to drag on for far too long.

    • The high court ruling on the matter can be easily found online. Why not first aquatint yourself with the facts?

      • The High Court ruling was based purely on a technicality of whether or not the letter of 25th September 2014 was a denial or not. There was no judgement from the High Court on qualifications or any other issue being debated right now.

        The other considerations were found within the Appeal court rulings, though interim…the facts are clear and not in dispute (same “not in dispute” languaged used in the high court ruling…see below: (The High Court Ruling is one thing but read the transcipts. That will enlighten you!)

        Court of Appeal March 3, 2017
        The appellant is a medical doctor. In 2011 he satisfied the
        requirements to be licensed as a medical doctor in Antigua and has
        since practiced as a doctor up to August 2014 when his license came up
        for renewal. The respondent to this application, the Medical Council,
        requested further documents from the appellant and deferred further
        consideration of his application to renew his license. The appellant
        brought proceedings against the Council to set aside their decision.
        The learned judge refused the application and the appellant appealed
        to this Court. Pending the hearing of his appeal, he has applied for a
        stay of the decision of the learned judge in the lower court and a
        mandatory junction. He did not pursue the application for the stay
        before this Court. In regard to the mandatory injunction, the Court
        was guided by the principles in National Commercial Bank Jamaica Ltd v
        Olint Corporation 63 Ltd. (Jamaica) [2009] UKPC 16 that was referred
        to by counsel for the appellant which in summary is that the court is
        concerned to prevent irremediable harm to either party by the grant or
        refusal of the injunction. Applying the principles therein to the case
        at bar, the Court was of the view that there is no evidence of
        irremediable harm to the respondent. The Court noted that it is
        significant that there is no evidence of any complaints against the
        appellant in his practice since he has been practicing in Antigua. The
        Court was of the opinion that on the other hand, the appellant will
        suffer harm to both his livelihood and his reputation that may be
        irremediable. In the circumstances, the Court found that the balance
        of convenience favours the grant of a mandatory injunction that will
        be an interim injunction.

Comments are closed.