Eljamel surgery victim says NHS board has spent millions to defend the indefensible

Health officials have been reported to public services regulator Audit Scotland for aggressively defending claims made against the neurosurgeon accused of harming hundreds of victims.

Campaigner Pat Kelly, who says he has been left “as helpless as a toddler” after being treated by Professor Sam Eljamel, said millions of pounds of public money have been spent “defending the indefensible”.

The 63-year-old former Radio Tay presenter said: “Instead of prioritising transparency, accountability and the well-being of patients harmed by Eljamel, NHS Tayside has spent huge sums of public money aggressively defending cases despite knowing for years that he was hurting people.

“Reports by the Royal College of Surgeons and NHS Tayside’s own Due Diligence Review show that the health board was fully aware of the significant risks and failings in Eljamel’s clinical practice while he was still operating on patients.

“Despite this, NHS Tayside continued to defend multiple legal claims made by patients harmed under his care. They argued about time-barring cases and forced individuals to go through lengthy and expensive Court of Session proceedings rather than admitting terrible mistakes had been made and settle cases.

“NHS Tayside have instead used public money to protect their own reputation, using precious public funds for defence rather than redress. It’s shameful.”

Campaigners say many patients suffered further trauma as a result of being forced into long drawn-out legal cases when the health board had already acknowledged that ­failings had occurred.

Kelly said: “We believe this is a misuse of public funds and a deliberate effort by NHS Tayside to minimise reputational damage regardless of the cost to either taxpayers or affected patients. The ­public deserves clarity over how much was spent defending these cases, and whether these actions constituted a failure of governance and financial stewardship within a public body.

“We believe internal documents show NHS Tayside were well aware of the harm Eljamel was causing, so why defend the indefensible?

“This case is not simply about clinical error. It is about the ­systemic mishandling of known failures and the apparent use of public funds to defend their own reputations. A full audit and public reporting of findings would be in the public interest, and we would like Audit Scotland to look at how we can prevent similar situations in the future – what safeguards need to be established for the ethical use of legal defence in public healthcare.”

We revealed that neurosurgeon Eljamel worked at Liverpool’s Walton Centre from September 1987 until August 1991, during which time he published a large number of medical research papers.

He then worked briefly in Dublin before joining Ninewells Hospital in Dundee in 1995, ­rising to lead the department.

But as patients came forward with claims of botched ­surgeries, horror stories began to emerge questioning Eljamel’s skill.

Despite a 2013 review which found patients had been harmed, NHS Tayside failed to suspend Eljamel and allowed him to continue operating on patients “under supervision” until the following year.

In 2014, Eljamel resigned and moved to Libya, where he continues to treat patients.

After years of criticism, the Scottish Government agreed to a judge-led inquiry, but victims are still likely to wait two years or more to know whether any charges will be brought by police, who are also investigating NHS Tayside over the case.

Campaigners have been demanding the government expand the terms of reference of the inquiry so that it can legally compel regulatory bodies the General Medical Council and the Health and Safety Executive to establish whether their failure to act allowed patients in Scotland to be harmed.

Audit Scotland said: “Whilst an independent public inquiry is ongoing, we are unable to act on the concerns raised. The auditors will monitor the findings of the inquiry and consider whether any audit action is appropriate.”

But Scottish Conservative MSP Stephen Kerr said: “Audit Scotland have a clear duty, here and now, to investigate whether public funds have been misused – and there is a compelling case that this is exactly what has happened.

“Instead of doing the decent and honourable thing, NHS Tayside have chosen to fritter away public money on reputation management and concealing the truth, rather than on compensating patients whose lives were turned upside down.

“What we need in Scotland is a proper compensation scheme, so taxpayers’ money is not endlessly spent defending the indefensible.

NHS Tayside said, “When a person lodges a claim, there is a full investigation to determine if there is a legal basis for compensation. If this is the case, a settlement payment will be agreed and paid to the claimant.”