Harmed patients call for Eljamel surgical scandal inquiry to have wider powers

The public inquiry into shamed surgeon Sam Eljamel is to invite evidence from the General Medical Council (GMC) and the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), following calls to do so from campaigners and The Sunday Post.

Although the inquiry is unable to make specific findings or recommendations relating to the GMC and the HSE, inquiry chairman Lord Weir insists this will not prevent him from gathering evidence.

He said: “We intend to seek evidence from the HSE in our investigations.

“As to what that evidence will contain, that is a matter which will require to wait until the evidence from the HSE and others starts to emerge, which will inform where our investigations proceed thereafter.”

But campaigners harmed by Eljamel while he operated at NHS Tayside’s Ninewells Hospital say despite Lord Weir’s assurances, they will continue to push for the HSE and GMC to be included in the inquiry’s legal terms of reference, which would compel them to co-operate.

Former Radio Tay presenter Pat Kelly, who claims he has been left as helpless as a toddler after undergoing surgery, said: “I’m concerned if there is no binding guarantee the inquiry will fully uncover the truth behind what is one of the most serious and far-reaching surgical scandals in Scottish medical history.

“This inquiry represents our only opportunity to expose what went wrong and ensure it can never happen again.

“We are not seeking confrontation, we are seeking accountability, transparency and justice. These values must be the foundation of this inquiry.

“Individuals and institutions must be held to account, and the focus must remain firmly on the truth – not on what the Scottish Government finds politically palatable.

“Our call to amend the terms of reference is not unreasonable. It is a necessary step to ensure that the inquiry is empowered to follow the evidence wherever it leads – across all relevant organisations, regardless of which government they report to.”

Jules Rose, from Kinross, who had a tear gland removed by Eljamel instead of a tumour, said: “While we note Lord Weir’s intention to interpret the current terms of reference flexibly, without formal amendment we are concerned there remains a serious risk that key evidence will be excluded or challenged due to jurisdictional ­ambiguity or lack of co-operation from Westminster-reserved bodies.”

Rose said: “How can the integrity of the process be trusted when a body, facing significant legal costs and potential reputational damage, is expected to give evidence and the chair has effectively provided an early escape route by deeming the matter ‘devolved’ to Scotland, thereby allowing them to limit their participation from the outset?

“Fully involving key bodies like the HSE is essential to deliver justice for the patients who were harmed, in some cases grievously. Past inquiries have shown that early and full inclusion of such organisations is not only more effective but also more cost-efficient.”

Patients say they will remain concerned until the terms of reference for the inquiry are changed officially by the Scottish Government.

© DC Thomson

However, Lord Weir said it “would be wrong to interpret the absence of reference to health and safety law or the HSE in the terms of reference meaning that the inquiry is somehow precluded from considering patient safety at all”.

He insisted patient safety “is and will be” at the “core of the systemic investigation which the inquiry is able and required to undertake”.

Pat Kelly is now urging the Scottish Government to amend the terms of reference or work with the UK Government to ensure the inquiry can engage fully with all relevant agencies.

He said: “Such an amendment would offer harmed patients a degree of legal assurance – a clear signal that truth, accountability and transparency are not just aspirations but binding principles at the core of this inquiry.”

A spokeswoman for the inquiry said: “The Eljamel Inquiry has powers to compel the production of evidence and the provision of witness statements using section 21 of the Inquiries Act to obtain any material which would enable the inquiry to discharge its terms of reference.

“Any change to the terms of reference would be a decision for Scottish Ministers.”