A GP who participated in a climate protest blocking the M25 motorway is appearing in front of a medical practitioners’ tribunal this week.
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) will inquire into the allegation that in September 2021 the High Court issued an injunction order preventing Dr Diana Warner from protesting on the M25, which Dr Warner breached on 27 and 29 October 2021.
The retired GP from Bristol took part in climate protests organised by campaigning group Insulate Britain, which staged the roadblock on the M25 in 2021. The action saw protestors gluing themselves to the tarmac and barriers on a slip road to the motorway during rush-hour.
It comes after Birmingham GP Dr Sarah Benn, who took part in climate change protests at a Warwickshire oil terminal in 2022, was referred to the MPTS for multiple breaches of a court order and was suspended for five months.
The GMC has said in new a new clarifying document that it has a ‘legal duty’ to consider any concern that is raised about a doctors’ actions, and that if a doctor has been convicted in a criminal matter and given a custodial sentence, this must be referred to tribunal.
About Dr Warner, the MPTS said: ‘It is alleged that the court found Dr Warner’s breaches were deliberate and in contempt of court and committed her to prison for a period of two months and 30 days respectively.
‘It is further alleged that, on 31 May 2022, at Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court, Dr Warner was convicted of criminal damage to public property and was sentenced to 12 weeks imprisonment.’
Dr Warner practised as a GP from 1989 until her retirement in 2019 in surgeries in and around Bristol.
She was a member of the Green Party and stood as Green Party general election candidate in 2015 and 2017.
The Good Law Project, a not-for-profit campaigning organisation which supported Dr Warner, said that in 2021 Dr Warner and other members of Insulate Britain ‘repeatedly blocked the M25 as part of a campaign to tackle fuel poverty and reduce CO2 emissions, despite a High Court injunction’ and that she admitted breaching the order.
It added: ‘She admitted breaching the order twice and was sent to prison for periods of two months and 30 days.
‘When Warner came forward last year to tell the GMC she had been imprisoned, they opened an investigation.
‘Since her retirement, Warner is no longer practising medicine, but if the GMC refers her case to a tribunal she could face suspension for her activism or even being struck off the register.
‘The threat of these sanctions could have a chilling effect on doctors’ ability to protect their patients through protest, so Good Law Project is supporting Warner in this case.’
The Good Law Practice, the group’s law firm, said that the protests were ‘an act of peaceful civil disobedience’ and ‘did not involve any violence’, and added that the police ‘were notified in advance of the M25 protests’ and that Dr Warner ‘did not seek to resist arrest when the police arrived’.
‘Dr Warner has not sought to undermine the reputation of the profession and hopes that she had not done so,’ a submission to the tribunal on behalf of Dr Warner said last year.
‘On the contrary, her conduct has been with what she believes to be the best of intentions and in line with her duties as a doctor.’
Pulse understands that the Good Law Project is no longer directly involved in the case.
The case has been listed for 10 days until 16 August.
An MPTS tribunal’s decision to suspend Dr Benn earlier this year sparked discussions among the profession with some doctors criticising the verdict as they thought her actions posed no threat to patients, and the BMA has been calling for a review.
Following Dr Benn’s case, Pulse revealed that several GPs were concerned about a conflict of interest for the deputy chair of the BMA’s GP Committee England as he was a medical member on the panel that made the decision.
Deputy chair Dr Julius Parker then said he will ‘pause’ his involvement in MPTS tribunals following the criticism.
Pulse Writing Competition 2024
Fancy yourself as the next Pulse blogger? Enter our writing competition now!
Why are the GMC taking an interest in a GP that gave up practice 5 years ago? Write in her ‘file’ the problem to be activated should she request a licence to practice and move on. Don’t waste money and don’t give her the oxygen of publicity.
That being said having myself given up 7 years ago the GMC would get a very very dusty answer should they start sniffing round my door, not that my current lifestyle would give them any reason.
There are actually three issues going on here:
1. Double Jeopardy and punitively instilling fascist fear in the profession. Its pointless but spiteful and in-line with the personalities of paper-pushers at the GMC – just meet them
2. The GMC actively undermining HMCTS as it is not for the courts to police doctors for non-medical matters. If there are enough cases, it justifies the GMC in the future registering its unregistered private prosecution-only tribunal
3. Racism and changing perceptions of the courts – The GMC tends to take these actions against BAME doctors but due to High Court action showing GMC-racism and Court of Appeal action, the GMC are deliberately taking action against White doctors on Criminal action they feel the public will support – but that is unfair and racist to the doctor
If she has chosen to stay on the Register after retirement then she has chosen to remain subject to GMC regulation.
Her choice.
Presumably she is seeking some sort of martyr status.