Why This Case Matters

I am a British Palestinian war surgeon who was accused of antisemitism and supporting violence and terrorism a few weeks after I decided to speak up for my patients in Gaza. After a full public hearing, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal found every allegation unproven. The GMC (the UK's medical regulator) is now asking the High Court to review that decision. 

This case matters beyond one doctor. The Tribunal heard the evidence and applied an objective legal test. If a fully reasoned tribunal decision can be overturned in these circumstances, the practical independence of professional tribunals is placed at risk.

Your support funds a fundamental legal test about fairness, the rule of law, and the integrity of professional disciplinary tribunals across the United Kingdom.

Case Background

My name is Ghassan Abu Sittah, I am a reconstructive surgeon who has spent more than three decades treating civilians injured in war. I am co-editor of 'The War Injured Child'. I have worked in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Gaza. I have advised the World Health Organization on war injuries and treated victims of the 2005 London bombings in the UK.

In October 2023, I had to perform surgical amputations on six different children in one night, I have been forced to use vinegar as antiseptic, and intravenous paracetamol as pain relief during surgery. I decided I had to speak up about what I witnessed - medical realities which represented a moral and humanitarian catastrophe.

The Complaint

In November 2023, my accounts of what I had witnessed in Gaza were published by Sky News, the BBC, CNN, the New York Times, the Guardian and the Telegraph. On 13 December 2023, UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) sent screenshots of my social media history to the GMC alleging that "Dr Abu Sittah's support for terrorism, antisemitism... bring the profession of doctors into disrepute".

The Interim Orders Tribunal examined the facts and the evidence carefully, expressing concern that "no independent translation or verification of the translation offered by UKLFI of the Arabic language posts in question has been provided by the GMC". 

The Tribunal also ruled that "It was unable to accept the GMC's submission that there was a risk that Dr Abu-Sitta would discriminate against Jewish or Israeli patients because the only evidence before the Tribunal on this point suggested the contrary". The Tribunal refused to grant an interim order against me.

The GMC continued to act on UKLFI's allegations and advanced them against me again at a full public hearing in January 2026. The Medical Practitioners Tribunal heard the evidence against me in a full public hearing, applied an objective legal test to evaluate that evidence, and again rejected the allegations. 

The Tribunal was chaired by Ian Comfort, a barrister and magistrate who was appointed by Her Majesty the Queen in 2019 as a Commissioner for the Criminal Cases Review Commission (the body that reviews alleged miscarriages of justice). It found:

1. No evidence that I was antisemitic
2. No evidence that I was supportive of violence or terrorism
3. No impairment of my fitness to practice medicine

Cleared by an independent tribunal – now facing a High Court challenge by the regulator

Normally, that would be the end of a professional disciplinary case, but the GMC is asking the High Court to overturn an independent tribunal's decision.  

There is already cross-party consensus, and consensus across British medical institutions, that the power to appeal Tribunal decisions should be removed from the GMC even where doctors have been convicted of serious crimes. I have never been convicted, accused, or even questioned by the police in relation to any criminal act. Why is this power being used against me?

Why You Should Care

If you believe in free speech, the direct testimony of humanitarian doctors helps the public to understand the consequences of State violence. Speaking about those realities is part of medical ethics and advocacy for some of the world's most vulnerable patients. What clear parameters exist when regulators seek to overturn the decisions of tribunals in cases which are politically charged? 

If you've marched for Gaza or spoken out for international humanitarian law, this case matters to you. When doctors who bear witness to humanitarian catastrophes are silenced, the truth gets buried.

If you're a medical professional, this case affects you directly. The GMC is using your mandatory registration fees to pursue litigation against a doctor who was cleared by an independent tribunal. Tomorrow, it could be you facing the GMC.

If you believe justice must be fair and seen to be fair, this case demands your support. A doctor was investigated, the facts of his case were rigorously examined, and he was cleared of wrongdoing by the Tribunal. That should be the end. Help me ensure it is.

Why I Need Your Help 

The stakes are high. Treating civilians in conflict zones is the centre of my professional life. I rely on my private practice in the UK to help support my work as a war surgeon. GMC sanctions could severely hamper that work.

I am an individual doctor facing a regulator with vast resources. Litigation in the High Court is expensive, but every donation, large or small, directly enables my case to be heard fairly against the UK medical regulator’s formidable legal resources.

The estimated cost will be at least £150,000. All funds raised will be held in my solicitors' client account and used exclusively for legal costs. I will provide regular updates on the case's progress. If we raise more than we need, then additional funds will be used for supporting related litigation and defending humanitarian advocacy. 

Your donation will:

1. Defend the independence of medical tribunals so they can focus on their proper task of protecting the public
2. Protect doctors' ability to advocate for their patients
3. Establish important precedent about the limits of professional regulation over lawful speech

Please help me to defend fairness in professional regulation of doctors, and to defend a doctor's right to advocate for his patients.

Thank you for your support,

Ghassan Abu-Sittah