‘Jewish supremacy’ doctor suspended pending regulatory investigation

A three-day Interim Orders Tribunal (IOT) considered whether restrictions should be placed on the British-Palestinian doctor’s registration while an investigation takes place, but not on the allegations themselves.

Emma Gilsenan, for the GMC, called for Dr Aladwan to be suspended pending investigation, claiming the comments on her X account were “most certainly” antisemitic and supportive of terrorism and/or supportive of violence.

October 7 was described as the day Israel was “humiliated” while Hamas members were called “oppressed resistance fighters, not terrorists” and “martyrs”, she said.

Other posts refused to “condemn” Hamas, October 7, or the “armed resistance to occupation”.

“I would join the Palestinian armed resistance now,” one post said.

Gilsenan described how a comment made a “mockery” of female Israeli hostages by suggesting they were “falling in love” with resistance fighters and it was the “first time they have seen real men”.

Others labelled Britain’s Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis “Rabbi Genocide” and claimed the media attention following the Manchester synagogue attack, in which two men died and others were injured, was an example of “Jewish supremacism”.

“Apparently, the lives of four Jews in Manchester are more significant than 53 lives of Muslims in Gaza,” the post read.

“This is racism and Jewish supremacism. This is Western civilisation.”

Further posts claimed the Holocaust was a “fabricated victim narrative”, that “Zionism” is compatible to “Nazism” and that Jewish people are “the most despicable” people on the planet”.

Gilsenan also accused the doctor of making a “throat-cutting” gesture to Jewish protesters during a counter-demonstration in June 2024.

A previous IOT in September ruled not to impose any restrictions on Dr Aladwan, saying it did not believe the complaints against her were “sufficient to establish that there may be a real risk to patients”.

But it prompted Health Secretary Wes Streeting to say that “sickening comments” had no place in the NHS “and action needs to be taken to root the evil of racism out”.

He also promised to overhaul the way medical regulators investigate cases of antisemitism.

The General Medical Council (GMC) then re-referred Dr Aladwan’s case back to the MPTS for a second IOT hearing.

Gilsenan said the doctor had continued to post online since the earlier hearing and there was an “increase in tone” of alleged antisemitism, supporting violence and supporting terrorism.

Therefore, there was a risk her alleged comments would undermine public confidence in her and her profession, and it was “more likely than not” that the doctor would later face a misconduct hearing.

While some of the doctor’s comments could be considered “political speech”, she added, there was no right under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects freedom of expression, to publish “racist or antisemitic” statements.

The tribunal panel granted an application by the GMC to include information from the Metropolitan Police relating to the doctor’s arrest in October on suspicion of misusing a public communications network, sending malicious communications and stirring up racial hatred.

Kevin Saunders, counsel for Dr Aladwan, had earlier failed to get proceedings halted after claiming ‘an abuse of process” by the GMC and “apparent bias” by the tribunal panel.

He said the doctor had an “impeccable” medical record and was herself a victim of genocide and dispossession.

Saunders claimed Dr Aladwan had exercised her freedom of speech to speak out against genocide and crimes by Israel, including those identified by the United Nations.

He claimed “lobbyists” had sought to bring the case against the doctor, describing it as “lawfare” brought about by the “clamour and intrinsic pressure” around it.

Dr Aladwan’s comments constituted “political speech not hate speech, he added, and he accused the GMC of a “seismic shift” by seeking a “draconian” suspension rather just restrictions on her registration as they did at the first IOT.

But the panel decided to impose the 15-month suspension.

The GMC could eventually refer Dr Aladwan to a full medical practitioners tribunal if it concludes she has a case to answer over the complaints it has received.