Dates of Fitness to Practise Panel Hearing: 29-30 November 2007
Name of respondent doctors: BANERJEE, Anjan
Registered qualifications: MB BS 1985 Lond
Registration Numbers: 3076723
Registered Address: Middlesex
Panel: Professor B L Gomes Da Costa, Chairman (Lay)
Dr M Phillips (Medical)
Mr M Brown (Lay)
Legal Assessor: Mr A Ostrin
Secretary to the Panel: Mr G Wilkinson
Type of Case: Restoration
Representation:
GMC:
Mr C Hamlet, Solicitor, GMC Legal Team.
Doctor:
Dr Banerjee was present and was represented by Mr N Peacock, Counsel, instructed by DLA Piper.
The Panel met to consider an application for the restoration of his name to the Register by Dr Anjan Banerjee, MB BS 1985 Lond, in accordance with the provisions of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004.
Determination
The Panel determined as follows:
“Dr Banerjee: You have applied to the General Medical Council (GMC) for the restoration of your name to the Medical Register following your erasure at a Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) hearing on 2-9 September 2002. The Panel has considered your application in accordance with the provisions set out in Section 41 of the Medical Act 1983, as amended, and Rule24 of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004.
The Panel has taken account of Mr Hamlet’s submissions on behalf of the GMC, Mr Peacock’s submissions on your behalf and all the evidence, oral and written, before it, including your own evidence. Mr Hamlet has submitted that your application for restoration should be refused due to the finding of your persistent dishonesty which led to erasure in 2002. Failing this, he submitted that the Panel should consider adjourning this hearing and direct that an assessment of your performance be carried out. Mr Peacock submitted that the Panel should grant the application for restoration, while acknowledging that, in the alternative, the Panel could direct an assessment of performance, if it had concerns about the standard of your clinical practice following your period out of practice.
The Panel has heard that in 2000 your registration was suspended for a period of 12 months, following your writing an article in 1988 and 1989 containing information which had been deliberately falsified by you. You submitted an abstract to the British Society of Gastroenterology in 1990, the contents of which you also falsified
In 2002 your name was erased from the medical register as a result of your serious professional misconduct. The PCC found that your actions were motivated by financial gain and the evidence to the PCC demonstrated that you continued to have little or no insight into the seriousness of your actions. The PCC noted that these had not been isolated incidents and that they had taken place over a sustained period. The common thread which ran through all of them had been your persistent dishonesty.
The Panel has carefully considered whether to grant or refuse your application for your name to be restored to the Medical Register. The Panel has had regard to the GMC’s Indicative Sanctions Guidance and the guidance contained on restoration hearings set out in issues 2 and 3 of the Fitness to Practise Bulletin.
The Panel has heard that, despite living at a considerable distance from the hospital, since early January 2003 you have been attending surgical grand rounds in an honorary capacity at the Whittington Hospital NHS Trust. The rounds, at which you have been present on a consistent basis, have been over a prolonged period of time. Mrs XXXX, Consultant Surgeon and Medical Director at the Whittington Hospital NHS Trust, has described these as including “presentations of audits and research work at journal club discussions and regular reviews of morbidity and mortality”.
The Panel has received evidence that you have made substantial efforts to maintain your medical knowledge since the removal of your name from the medical register. These have included your attendance at numerous courses and educational events and the carrying out of on-line continuing medical education activities on a wide variety of subjects. You have also attended colo-rectal outpatient clinics in an observer capacity under the supervision of Mrs XXXX.
The Panel has also heard that you joined the Kingston branch of the Samaritans in July 2005, following successful completion of preparation for your Samaritan duties, and that you have maintained a substantial commitment to the Samaritans since that time. These duties have included your undertaking a four hour duty every week and an overnight duty once a month.
The Panel notes the efforts made by you as part of your educational activities to address the issue of probity and, in particular, that you chose to undertake a module on ethical and legal aspects of pharmaceutical medicine as part of an M.Sc. in Pharmaceutical Medicine at the University of Surrey, completed this year.
The Panel has been impressed by the deep level of commitment which you have demonstrated to medicine as a profession since your erasure and the considerable steps which you have taken to address the failings in probity and ethics which were found against you.
The Panel has received a large number of written testimonials from persons of high standing, both in the medical profession and also the pharmaceutical industry, where you have pursued a career since your erasure. It also received oral testimony from Mrs XXXX, Dr XXXX, Mr XXXX and Mrs XXXX at this hearing. The Panel notes that the considered view of Dr XXXX is that you have undergone “a sea-change” in attitude. The compelling evidence of Mrs XXXX, who has supervised your attendance at the Whittington Hospital over a period of four years, also testified to such a radical attitudinal change. She told the Panel that she has no concerns at all as to your current probity and that she, as Medical Director of a teaching hospital, considered that you could make a valuable contribution to the NHS.
The Panel has been persuaded that you are a “reformed character” with respect to your probity. It is aware that in 2002 the PCC found that you lacked insight into the matters which led to your erasure but this Panel considers that you have now demonstrated comprehensive and genuine insight into your serious dishonesty and lack of probity. This is demonstrated by the actions which you have taken and also by the evidence which you and others gave to this Panel.
The Panel has also heard that the Whittington Hospital NHS Trust will offer you a supported re-entry to the profession, should your application for restoration to the register be granted. Subject to finance and successful completion of the re-entry programme at the Whittington Hospital, the Panel has also heard that the Whittington Hospital NHS Trust may, thereafter, be able to offer you some sessional work. The Whittington Hospital has set up for your benefit an exceptionally robust and supportive framework which will facilitate your safe working in a highly supervised environment should you be restored to the register. The Panel has taken particular account of this fact and your clear evidence that you intend to complete this programme in its entirety.
It also finds that successful completion of the planned tailor-made re-entry programme at the Whittington makes it unnecessary for the Panel to direct you to undergo a formal GMC performance assessment.
While there can be no doubt of the gravity of your previous dishonesty, this has to be balanced against serious and substantial efforts on your part to rehabilitate yourself and the exceptionally strong support you have received from a wide range of senior professional colleagues and advisers, in particular tangible support from those at the Whittington Hospital NHS Trust.
Given the particularities of this case and taking account of the Panel’s duty to ensure the protection of the public and the upholding of proper standards and the reputation of the profession, it is satisfied that it is appropriate and proportionate to grant your application to restore your name to the Medical Register. The Registrar of the General Medical Council will be informed of its determination and a letter will be sent thereafter notifying you when your name has been restored to the Register.
That concludes your case.”
Application for restoration granted
Confirmed
3 January 2008 Chairman