2013 January 7
Public meeting in Northallerton attended by hundreds of Derek’s patients, colleagues and the community asking for his re-instatement as their GP. A petition was started***see April 2013 below.
View the relevant news article on the patients petition:
2013 January 17
Exhausted, shocked and depressed Derek reluctantly decides that after nearly 10 years he cannot face further court appearances, and cannot put his family through any more stress, so decides against an appeal. The appeal process would require significant funding which was not now available to him through his indemnity provider. He no longer had an income. There was no new evidence to consider. The MPTS panel had not believed Derek's spoken evidence - unchanged over the past 9 years, but had accepted written evidence from an Iraqi witness as the truth.
View: Statement from Derek Keilloh (including legal synopsis from the legal team)
And view Points to Consider 8
Press coverage now changed from showing Baha Mousa’s bruised face next to Derek’s to, in some cases, support for a wronged man:
‘Struck-off Dr Derek Keilloh decides against appeal. A North Yorkshire GP struck off over the death of a detainee in Iraq has decided not to launch an appeal despite a campaign by his patients.’
The Facebook page had reached 892 by 13/1/13, signed by patients and colleagues.
View some of the comments: Comments from Facebook
Many letters from well-wishers and those who believed strongly that the outcome was a severe miscarriage of justice sent to the MPTS, William Hague, Jeremy Hunt etc. etc. the reply was: ‘The MPTS is an independent body and should remain so’.
Selected pertinent points from a few of the letters. View: Letters
2013 January 24
‘38 degrees campaigns by you’ launched.
By January 30 there were 500 signatures.
2013 January 26
Article in The Sun newspaper accuses Public Interest Lawyer, Phil Shiner, of ‘Tank Chasing’
(quote Tom Newton Dunn, political editor Sun: ‘anti-war lawyers earn £2m..victims get £6k’)
2013 February 14
Having forwarded to the MPTS copies of the many letters he had received from his constituents, William Hague received a reply from MPTS stressing its independence.
It states again that ‘the role of the MPTS is to protect patients and public confidence in the profession’
(none of which we believe to have been compromised). In spite of ‘stating that his clinical practice since the events in Iraq in 2003 was not in question’
they found that ‘his fitness to practice was impaired’ and that ‘the most serious sanction was necessary’.
This became a standard reply to many of the letters that were sent. View: Letters 11-13
2013 March 12
A reply from the information access officer at the GMC refusing to disclose that Phil Shiner was the person responsible for reporting Derek to the GMC for fitness to practise. What did they have to hide? It was common knowledge. View: Letters 15
Mohammed Kassim Al-Byati was suspended for one year by GMC.
"Complicit in acts of torture": ‘Saddam doctor suspended but will be back working in NHS in a year. The panel heard evidence the doctor knew that some prisoners he treated had been tortured, and it was likely that they would be tortured again’:
Compare these two cases: Derek Keilloh is struck off while Al-Byati is merely suspended for one year.
What happened to equity and consistency?
*** Northallerton local hand signed petition taken to Parliament by Rt Hon William Hague.
We discovered that the MPTS/GMC organisation had been undergoing a period of consultation during Dr Keilloh’s FTP hearing: View: Point to Consider 7
Why had we not been told? Who did know? Was it public knowlege? Why were our criticisms and questions not properly answered?
For more details on this view: Future of adjudication
To access the consultation document: www.gmc-uk.org/The_future_of_adjudication___rules.pdf_48726068.pdf
2013 May 30
Article in the Daily Mail re: ‘Phil Shiner getting rich by suing the British Gov. for compensation for war victims’
by Richard Littlejohn.
Article at: www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2333546/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-He-comedian-hes-certainly-having-laugh-Phil-Shiner-The-Great-Human-Rights-Swindle.html
2013 June 11
The reply from Department of Health regarding the petition presented to Parliament by William Hague states that ‘The Department is developing the legislation to formally set up the MPTS in co-production with the GMC. The legislation will make the necessary changes to the Medical Act 1983, through an Order under s60 of the Health Act 1999’.
‘This will be debated in both the Commons and the Lords’.
Contact from Helen Bright highlighting her petition: Doctors for Justice – a petition demanding Confidential Enquiry into deaths of 100 doctors who died whilst being investigated by the General Medical Council (depressions and suicides.)
2013 September 10
The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT), announce that there will be ‘Further investigation into death of Baha Mousa’. ‘IHAT is responsible for reviewing and investigating allegations of serious historic abuse, has completed a pre-investigative assessment of the available evidence and will, with the specialist guidance of the Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA), work to establish and pursue new lines of enquiry.’
2013 December 2
Article by Bob Bury ‘Is the GMC fit for purpose?’
in ‘Hospital Dr’.
View the article: www.hospitaldr.co.uk/blogs/bob-bury/is-the-gmc-fit-for-purpose
2013 December 15
Article in Sunday Telegraph by Ben Farmer,
“Iraq and the futile quest for ‘justice’ ’’
, pointing out how Phil Shiner has been involved in the IHAT investigation - alleging that he has brought most of the cases but that there was insufficient evidence to support many of them, resulting in a huge waste of time and money.
View the article: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10517784/Iraq-abuse-investigation-just-one-soldier-fined-in-three-years.html
More articles after the collapse of the Al Sweady Inquiry:
'Flimsy abuse claims against British soldiers could tie up MoD for years, it is feared' -
'Soldiers' Iraqi accusers repeatedly lied under oath, al-Sweady inquiry told' -
'Iraqis made up torture claims to get payouts: It was a conspiracy says MoD' -
'Lawyer Phil Shiner's Public Interest Lawyers are representing Iraqi witnesses accused of fabricating claims that prisoners were tortured'
We have been told that the written Iraqi witness statements presented by Phil Shiner PIL to the Al Sweady Inquiry are almost word for word the same as the witness statements he presented at Derek Keilloh's Fitness to Practice hearing. If this is the case, how much credibility should they now be given? We want this to be investigated.
There have been numerous cases reported in the press alleging that the GMC/MPTS have made mistakes over judgments and sanctions, or not properly investigated. It works both ways…
e.g. cases not properly investigated at Mid Staffordshire Foundation NHS Trust. According to The Daily Telegraph an audit by the Professional Standards Authority found that 22 cases out of 100 were mishandled by the GMC and failed to come before the disciplinary panel when they should have done. According to the Daily Telegraph, 25/11/2013, 750 doctors and surgeons have been allowed to continue to work until their fitness to practice hearing in spite of having been convicted in courts of law for crimes which have included taking indecent photographs of a child, drugs trafficking and grievous bodily harm. View:
Nearly 2,000 signatures on the 38 degrees petition.
News from William Hague that the debate setting up the legislation behind the GMC and MPTS is scheduled to take place sometime during the next Parliamentary session. It will now be a new bill rather than simply amending the Medical Act of 1983.
‘..following discussions with the GMC a decision was taken not to proceed with the Adjudication Section 60 Order but instead to include measures to achieve the same effect in a bill in the forthcoming parliamentary session.’
The Draft Regulation of Health and Social Care Professionals Bill should soon be coming to Parliament. The Law Commission have made recommendations to the new draft bill: http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/publications/Healthcare-professions.htm
We note that they recommend a right to have a hearing within a reasonable time; they recognise that the costs of an appeal to a higher court is not reasonable especially when the appellant's income has just been removed; and question if enough guarantees exist to exclude any legitimate doubt about impartiality. They note that there are some concerns that the Office of Health Professions Adjudicator has been abolished. However they do not recommend that there should be any changes to these areas, and they do not recommend that the criminal standard of proof should replace the present civil standard of proof.
The 38% petition is still open – please sign in support of Dr Keilloh:
View: Comments from the 38° Campaign
Questions – This documents shows the many questions we are asking about this case and surrounding events. You may also have questions. We would like some answers.
Although the GMC/MPTS had been going through a 'consultation period', many of those who wrote asking questions did not have them answered but received 'blanket' replies.
See: Letters 11-14
Many of the letters since early 2013 have asked for a review of the case, but it is only this month that the MPTS have told us that ‘the MPTS has no legal power to undertake any review of its decisions’
The draft bill has not yet come to Parliament and Jeremy Hunt has said it will give more time for it to be thoroughly discussed and to get it right.
The GMC is reviewing their 'indicative sanctions guidance and the role of apologies and warnings'. You can take part in the consultation on the GMC website. We are concerned that the consultation only focusses on sanctions against doctors, making these sanctions more rigorous, but does not look at the process which arrives at the judgement.
View: The GMC sanctions guidance review
View: How we would like to see the law change.
2014 December 17
The Defence Secretary, Michael Fallon, made a statement in Parliament on the report into the Al-Sweady Inquiry.
Find it in column 1407 at:
2014 December 18
'Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary has announced that the lawyers who brought the charges in the Al Sweady Inquiry should make "an unequivocal apology" to the soldiers whose reputations "they attempted to traduce" '
The Guardian: 'In a Commons statement, Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, described these allegations as “shameful and despicable”, and criticised Phil Shiner, the Iraqis’ lawyer, for making claims that turned out to be baseless...'
The Times: 'Human rights lawyers falsely accused British soldiers of war crimes in a “shameful” attempt to use the legal system to attack and impugn the military, the defence secretary said yesterday. Michael Fallon demanded an apology from two law firms after a £30 million inquiry into alleged battlefield murder, mutilation and torture found that Iraqi witnesses had lied systematically. The figure included £5.6 million in lawyers’ fees.
“It is now beyond doubt that those allegations were without foundation,” the minister said in an angry speech before parliament. He reserved particular criticism for Phil Shiner, a leading member of Public Interest Lawyers, who made the first claims of war crimes.
“I challenge him and the other lawyers involved to issue an unequivocal apology to the soldiers whose reputations were traduced, and to the taxpayers who have had to pay the costs of exposing these lies,” Mr Fallon said.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority is investigating possible breaches of professional standards by Public Interest Lawyers and a second company, Leigh Day.'
2014 December 21
It is now two years since the MPTS erased Derek Keilloh from the Register.
Phil Shiner reported him to the GMC as being 'unfit to practice'
The Al Sweady Inquiry has collapsed from 'lack of credible evidence'. Phil Shiner's 'Public Interest Lawyers' (PIL) played a major role.
We had heard that there was an uncanny similarity between some of the Iraqi witness statements presented during the Baha Mousa Inquiry, and the Al-Sweady Inquiry, even though the latter was about a different event.
We noticed that the Iraqi witness statements at the original MOD courtmarshal were changed by the time they were presented by Phil Shiner at the Baha Mousa Inquiry, but when we went back to verify we discovered that they had disappeared from the www.
Although it was originally addressed to the MPTS/GMC, we will now be sending the 38% petition to Parliament, probably after the general election. William Hague our MP could take it now but as a member of the cabinet he cannot speak about it when it is presented.He is stepping down so we will ask our new MP to present it. We have had a meeting with William Hague who has given us advice about revised wording for the petition. We are now saying that:
- Removing Derek Keilloh from the Medical Practitioners register was a travesty of justice.
- It was not in the public interest to erase a very good and well-loved family GP.
- That the judgement should have been made ‘beyond all reasonable doubt’, not ‘on the balance of probabilities’
- and not on reasons of supposed public interest rather than clinical failing.
- That the complaint was made by lawyers acting for Iraqi families, from a war zone ten years ago, rather than from his NHS patients who are the people who have suffered from his erasure.
- That it is unfair that an erased doctor can only make an appeal within 28 days of being struck off, when he has just been deprived of his income, no longer has financial support for legal affairs, and is still in shock.
- That the Professional Standards Authority only exists to protect patients and will only investigate cases which they believe have been too lenient, there is no equivalent body to support those who believe that the sanction has been too severe, prejudiced or faulty.
- That witness statements made on behalf of the Iraqi nationals (by PIL) were accepted without the opportunity for cross-examination.
- That the Al-Sweady Inquiry collapsed due to a lack of convincing evidence (presented by PIL) therefore that
- the Iraqi witness statements presented at the Baha Mousa Inquiry and the Al-Sweady Inquiry should be compared and investigated.
If you have signed the petition as it was originally worded and do not wish your signature to remain on it, please let us know at email@example.com.
2016 January 18
Here we are a year later, we have not given up and at last we feel we are getting somewhere. Our new MP Rishi Sunak is being very helpful and obtaining the Iraqi detainees witness statements for us when he can. We are doing the research ourselves.
The Iraq Historic Allegations Team are very much in the media at the present time. They are researching if allegations which have been made against British soldiers in cases other than this one are true. The Baha Mousa Inquiry found that in this case the detainees were illegally abused during their 'conditioning', we are not disputing that. However, Derek Keilloh still maintains that he was not aware that it was happening.
Sign the petition at: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/p/support-Derek-Keilloh
The changes in the law that we were expecting have happened, but not as we would have wished, not far enough. Here are some of them:
From the MPTS website:
In March 2015 the UK Parliament, Scottish Parliament and the Privy Council approved a Section 60 Order amending the Medical Act 1983, introducing a number of changes to help improve the running of MPTS hearings.
The key change that will apply to hearings concluding on or after 31 December 2015 is:
The GMC will have a right of appeal against decisions made by MPTS tribunals. Doctors already have a right of appeal to the High Court in England and Wales, Court of Session in Scotland or High Court of Northern Ireland.
The key changes that will apply to hearings starting on or after 31 December 2015 are:
The MPTS will also have the power to run hearings with a legally qualified chair. In such circumstances, a legal assessor will not be present.
The MPTS will be placed on a statutory footing, meaning that it will no longer exist solely as a committee of the GMC but will have its own place in the law. This ensures clearer separation between the GMC’s investigation function and the MPTS’s adjudication function.
More details here: http://www.gmc-uk.org/S60_Consultation_outcome_report.pdf_62959778.pdf?dm_i=2SYE,2NI2,1D0JE5,7MZL,1
Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) was acting for the Iraqi families when he reported Derek to the GMC for fitness to practice. PIL has been under investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) since the collapse of the Al Sweady Public Inquiry for 'lack of credible evidence'. See 2014 April above. The Ministry of Defence presented a dossier of allegations against Phil Shiner to the SRA. See: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/phil-shiner-interview-a-righter-of-wrongs-in-iraq-or-the-worst-kind-of-ambulance-chaser-10262065.html
We understand that he himself will now face a tribunal for 'professional misconduct'.
There are currently 3193 signatures on the petition which will be presented to Parliament and a copy sent to the GMC and MPTS shortly.
The petition of nearly 3,500 signatures was presented to Parliament by our MP Rishi Sunak on the same day that Theresa May became our new Prime Minister.
Phil Shiner has asked for privacy for his tribunal. A privilege he did not afford to Derek.
The Ministry of Defence have announced that they will review all cases brought by Phil Shiner which have tarnished the reputation of army personel. We are asking that Derek's case be included.
We have complained against Phil Shiner to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and they have asked for documentary evidence to substantiate our claims so that they may include our complaints in their investigations.
Phil Shiners firm PIL has been forced to close due to the withdrawal of their contract to undertake legal aid cases.
The GMC/MPTS are still legally unable to review Derek Keilloh's case.
8 December 2016
The Solicitors Regulation Authority will be bringing allegations against Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers at a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal hearing to be held 23 January 2017 – 17 February 2017.
Phil Shiner has admitted to some of the charges against him and has said that he expects that he will be ‘struck off’ on the grounds of unprofessional conduct.
The Law society Gazette 8 December 2016 states:
· ‘Shiner has admitted encouraging and authorising unsolicited direct approaches to potential clients arising out of the 2004 'battle of Danny Boy'
· ‘Shiner also admitted acting without integrity when authorising his firm to enter an agreement in June 2015 paying Z to change his evidence to the Al-Sweady inquiry. Shiner admitted a lack of integrity in further improperly presenting changed evidence from Z to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
· ‘Shiner said he acted recklessly when making allegations at a 2008 press conference that the British Army had unlawfully killed, tortured and mistreated Iraqi civilians.
Telegraph 8 December 2016: ‘Iraq human rights lawyer Phil Shiner faces being struck off after admitting recklessness over Army abuse claims’:
The case against Philip Joseph Shiner and John Dickinson of PIL is due to come before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on 23 January 2017 – 17 February in Court 1
Phil Shiner was instrumental in bringing Derek Keilloh before the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service for fitness to practice (mainly on the accusation of lying). We believe that Derek was ‘struck off’ the register as a direct result of Phil Shiner manipulating the evidence against him, and also of manipulating the press against him prior to the hearing.
Phil Shiner has himself already admitted (see above) to:
- ‘acting without integrity when authorising his firm to … pay…to change his evidence.’
- and ‘admitted a lack of integrity in further improperly presenting changed evidence’
- and ‘acting recklessly when making allegations at a press conference’
Although what he has admitted to happened after
Derek Keilloh’s FIT hearing, there is no proof that he had not already
‘acted without integrity’, ‘changed evidence’ and ‘acted recklessly when making allegations to the press’. At what point in time did Phil Shiner begin to act unprofessionally?
The GMC/MPTS are still legally unable to review Derek Keilloh's case.
The Government are not legally able to press for Derek’s case to be reviewed.
2 February 2017
During the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal hearing twenty two of the twenty four charges against Phil Shiner were proven beyond all reasonable doubt (the criminal standard of proof). This morning he was declared dishonest and was 'struck off' on the grounds of professional misconduct:
We expect that criminal proceedings against him will follow. We believe that he brought the case against Derek Keilloh in order to raise his profile even further before he continued to make further claims against the British Army. Phil Shiner was the only person to benefit from this action - Derek, his family and his patients were the victims.
7 February 2017
On Sunday 5 February, after contacts from several reporters wanting to know if they would now review Derek's case, a spokesman for the General Medical Council said: ‘We carried out a thorough and independent investigation into the allegations that we received about Dr Keilloh. That case relied on a substantial body of witness evidence, including the testimony of several medical experts.
For that reason we don’t believe the panel’s decision to erase Dr Keilloh from the medical register is called into question by Mr Shiner’s professional conduct. However, if Dr Keilloh feels that he has grounds to challenge that decision, he should apply to the Courts for an appropriate order.’
We ask: if that 'substantial body of evidence' was supplied by Phil Shiner, had it already been manipulated and embellished?
Also, as the 'the testimony of several medical experts' was not all directed against Derek, did the GMC choose who they wanted to believe. Because of the enormous amount of prejudice before Derek's hearing, we suspect that the decision to strike him off had already been made.
We are of the opinion that, based on the huge amount of support Derek is now being given since Phil Shiners erasure, in the eyes of the public his name is already cleared. Thanks you all.
We are shocked by the unacceptable inhumane treatment that caused the tragic death of Baha Mousa, and severe injury to the other detainees. The behaviour of the guards was completely contrary to our beliefs and ethics. We do not condone torture or violence of any kind. Reading the witness statements and transcripts has been deeply disturbing.
The original Iraqi victim witness statements make grim reading as presented by Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers. However, witness statements from both sides, both written and verbal under cross examination have varied and changed over time – from court martial to Public Inquiry into Fitness to Practise Hearing (FTP). It is difficult to know where the truth lies. At the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service FTP hearing written statements were accepted as facts without opportunity for cross questioning, making the truth even more difficult to determine. Dr Keilloh is punished for consistently telling what he perceives to be the truth, and for sticking tenaciously to the same story.
We believe that Dr Keilloh is not and has never been lying about knowing what was happening in the detention centre; that he is not and has never been complicit in a ‘cover up’ about the abuse. He was a young, unprepared doctor thrown into a stressful and traumatic environment, where he understandably focused on using his medical skills to deal with the immediate situation.
When he does so we understand that he will have to prove that his skills as a doctor are up to date,