Surgeon Cleared of Antisemitism Slams UK Regulator's Appeal

Surgeon Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sittah, who was cleared by a tribunal of alleged antisemitism and support for terrorism, has accused his regulator of seeking a "politically acceptable" outcome after it announced it would appeal against the decision to the high court.

Abu-Sittah, who has given testimony to the international criminal court on Israel's assault on Gaza and is the rector of the University of Glasgow, was cleared of misconduct by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) in January.

{{IMAGE_PLACEHOLDER}}

However, the General Medical Council (GMC), the UK's medical regulator, has now said it will challenge the tribunal's decision in the high court, a move that Abu-Sittah has criticized as an attempt to achieve a more "politically acceptable" outcome.

The case stems from allegations made against Abu-Sittah in 2020, which accused him of antisemitism and support for terrorism. The MPTS tribunal ultimately dismissed the allegations, ruling that they were not supported by the evidence.

{{IMAGE_PLACEHOLDER}}

In a statement, Abu-Sittah expressed his disappointment with the GMC's decision to appeal, saying that it "appears to be an attempt to secure a politically acceptable outcome" rather than a fair and impartial review of the evidence.

The surgeon has been a vocal advocate for Palestinian rights and has been critical of Israel's policies in the occupied territories. He believes that the allegations against him were politically motivated and that the GMC's appeal is an effort to silence his voice.

{{IMAGE_PLACEHOLDER}}

The GMC's decision to appeal the tribunal's ruling has been met with criticism from human rights organizations and academic institutions, who have expressed concern about the potential chilling effect on academic freedom and the ability of medical professionals to speak out on important political and social issues.

As the case moves forward, the outcome will be closely watched for its implications on the right of doctors to express their political views without fear of repercussions from their regulatory bodies.