Annex A
MLS/G3352/18/GWS
14 October 2002
Strictly Private and Confidential
Mrs Sarah Bedwell
General Medical Council
178 Great Portland Street
London
W1W 5JE
Dear Mrs Bedwell
Independent External Review
1.
I write with an update report for the PAC's meeting on 16 October 2002, as
requested.
Documents
2.
After my interim report dated 22 August 2002, Dr Colman drew my attention to the
fact that she had raised concerns that opening the second box of documents would
infringe her right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European
Convention on Human Rights and that I had omitted to deal with them. I addressed
these concerns in a letter to Dr Colman, dated 27 August 2002.
3.
In my letter, I stated that I considered that processing the data contained in the
second box of documents, in accordance with the provisions of the Data Protection
Act 1998, could not reasonably be thought to infringe her right to freedom of
expression. I determined that my examination of the data for the purposes of the
review would place no restrictions on Dr Colman's right to hold opinions or receive
or impart information without interference by public authority. I also decided that
even if my processing of the data were to amount to an infringement of Dr Colman's
Article 10 ECHR right (which I did not accept that it did), that infringement would
be prescribed by law under the provisions of the DPA 1998 and/or paragraph 9 of
Schedule 1 to the Medical Act 1983.
4.
Accordingly, I asked Mr Smith to open the second box of documents. He did this on
28 August 2002, under the supervision of another solicitor from Clifford Chance who
has no connection with the review. Both Mr Smith and this other solicitor were
satisfied, on reviewing the documents, that none of them could be properly thought
to be subject to any legal professional privilege belonging to Dr Colman.
5.
Mr Smith subsequently arranged for these documents to be collated, arranged in
chronological order and inserted into the chronological bundle I have had prepared.
At Dr Colman's request, Mr Smith also arranged for the documents contained in an
A4 lever arch file of written submissions which she sent me (which Mr Smith copied
to Mrs Bedwell on 28 August 2002, following my instructions) into the chronological
A1
bundle. Mr Smith sent a revised list of the documents contained in the chronological
bundle to Dr Colman, Mr Stein (her solicitor) and Mrs Bedwell on 13 September
2002.
6.
I regard the documents contained in the chronological bundle as the core evidence
which I must consider before reaching conclusions in the Review.
Interviews
7.
I have met 14 further interviewees in connection with the review, including Dr
Colman herself on 3 October 2002. This latter meeting was held at Clifford Chance's
offices and attended by Dr Colman, her solicitor Mr Stein, her junior Counsel (Hugh
Southey) and one of her original nominators to the GMC, Dr Bridget Iver. At Dr
Colman's request, a transcript of the meeting was prepared.
8.
I have now completed the series of interviews I intend to conduct with respect to the
review.
9.
Not all interviewees I have seen have yet returned the draft notes of our meeting to
Mr Smith with their comments.
Future Conduct of the Review
10.
When I met Dr Colman on 3 October 2002, Mr Southey said that he and Mr Stein
would prepare some further written submissions on Dr Colman's behalf. Dr Colman
has also informed me that she wishes to add some written notes by way of further
explanation to what she told me on 3 October 2002. I have yet to receive either of
these, but expect to be in a position to consider them within a few days.
11.
Any provisional conclusions I reach which are adverse to any person will need to be
disclosed to them, in the interests of fairness, for their comments. Although it is
difficult for me to be precise about timing, I am currently hoping to be in a position
to reach this stage of the review at about the end of October 2002. Any document I
produce in this respect will be confidential and will not be determinative of the
review as it will only contain provisional conclusions. Fairness requires that I should
consider very carefully any representations which are made to me in response to
these provisional conclusions, and I shall do so before I am in a position to finalise
my report.
12.
For completeness, I enclose a copy of the note of my meeting of 24 September 2002
with the President and certain members of the PAC.
Yours sincerely
George Staple
cc.
Dr Colman
A2