Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Former Newport GP sacked over sexual misconduct

Dr Ibrahim Hayat was a Newport Labour councillor between 2007 and 2022.

Former Newport GP sacked over sexual misconduct

AN independent tribunal has struck off a former Newport GP and Labour councillor after finding him guilty of sexual misconduct.

The tribunal, following a hearing concluded on Wednesday (22), ordered that Dr  Ibrahim Hayat's fitness to practice is currently impaired and imposed an immediate suspension, pending a 28-day appeal window.


The tribunal also determined to erase Dr Hayat’s name from the Medical Register.

During an examination in September 2015, Dr Hayat, a Labour candidate at the time, inappropriately touched a female patient and made explicit comments.

The patient, described as vulnerable during the incident, accused the doctor of engaging in sexually motivated behavior, a charge deemed "deplorable" by the General Medical Council (GMC).

The GMC investigates doctors and brings a case against them to the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS). Tribunals make independent decisions about a doctor’s fitness to practise medicine in the UK.

Despite the serious allegations, Dr Hayat continued to work as a locum GP for the Aneurin Bevan Health Board, subject to agreed restrictions to safeguard patients.

The doctor asserted that he notified the Labour party about the accusations. The party, however, denied having any knowledge of sexual misconduct but acknowledged being aware of his suspension.

In response to the authorities' decision, Dr Hayat expressed shock and devastation, stating that he had reflected on the complaint and engaged in professional development courses related to consent, confidentiality, chaperones, and safeguarding adults in primary care.

The authorities, however, deemed Dr Hayat's actions an abuse of trust, finding his remedial actions vague and insufficient. They concluded that his behaviour fell significantly below the expected standards of a doctor, with a substantial risk of repetition in the future.

"I would have liked to have gone back to work but have not worked for some time due to ill health including breast cancer. I would dearly love to take this to appeal in the High Court but I don't have the energy or the resources to take this matter further," Dr Hayat was quoted as saying by the BBC.

"I need to focus on my health and my loving family. I thank everyone for their support during what has been a long road to try to get justice."

A spokesperson for Aneurin Bevan University Health Board emphasised their commitment to patient safeguarding, stating they had investigated Dr Hayat's conduct and liaised with the GMC to impose restrictions ensuring patient safety.

More For You

Shepherd's Bush Market

The proposed redevelopment of Shepherd's Bush Market includes adding more stalls and shops and building 40 homes.

Via LDRS

Hammersmith and Fulham Council rejects community bid to protect Shepherd's Bush Market

Ben Lynch

Highlights

  • Hammersmith and Fulham Council have refused to list the 110-year-old market as an asset of community value.
  • The market serves diverse communities with African, Caribbean, and Asian goods including traditional foods and hijabs.
  • Major redevelopment plans approved in 2023 will see construction begin in early 2026.
Hammersmith and Fulham Council has rejected a community group's application to protect Shepherd's Bush Market as an asset of community value (ACV), dealing a blow to efforts to preserve the historic multicultural marketplace.

Friends of Shepherd's Bush Market applied for ACV status earlier this year, hoping to safeguard the site's future amid concerns over approved redevelopment plans by developer Yoo Capital. The group sought community ownership of the market, which has served diverse communities since opening in 1914.

The council cited three reasons for refusal, primarily stating the application "fails to demonstrate why the markets are considered to be 'social interests' and not standard retail services." Officials also noted the inclusion of operational land belonging to Transport for London and discrepancies in the application documents.


Keep ReadingShow less