NHS Tayside ‘fell significantly short’ in responding to Eljamel FOI

NHS Tayside “fell significantly short” when asked to provide details linked to disgraced neurosurgeon Sam Eljamel, Scotland’s Information Commissioner has ruled.

David Hamilton has now ordered the health board to release the information that it “incorrectly withheld” after a Freedom of Information (FOI) request was made.

NHS Tayside has also been given until September 17 to carry out a revised review of its response to parts of the request, which was originally made in March 2023.

The health board had been asked for information related to the independent report into Eljamel’s employment carried out in 2019 by NHS Lothian executive Tracey Gillies.

That came after former patients raised concerns that he had harmed as many as 200 people, with some said to have suffered life-changing injuries.

Eljamel had been head of neurosurgery at Dundee’s Ninewells Hospital from 1995 until his suspension in December 2013.

When asked for the report, NHS Tayside “disclosed some information but withheld most of the information” on the grounds that it contained personal data, with the health board also saying it did not hold all of the details sought.

Mr Hamilton however ruled that it had only “partially complied” with FOI legislation by “failing to provide a complete response” to the request and “incorrectly withholding” some details.

After his ruling was published the Information Commissioner said: “While this was not a straightforward request, it is nevertheless the case that NHS Tayside’s approach fell significantly short of the requirements of FOI.”

He added that the health board had taken “a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach when withholding information, failing to carefully consider the case for and against disclosure”.

Mr Hamilton continued: “While most personal information is rightly protected from disclosure under FOI, there will be some cases where release may be appropriate – particularly if it relates to the public and professional activities of senior staff.

“It is essential that authorities consider each case on its own merits, to ensure that the public’s FOI rights are fully respected and upheld.”

In his decision, Mr Hamilton said that given the number of staff employed by the health board, together with the “generic description of most of the job title, and the passage of time since the subject of the request” he was “not persuaded” that some details should be classed as personal data.

He added that he did “not accept that disclosure of most of the job titles of junior members of staff would identify a living individual”.

A spokesperson for NHS Tayside said: “NHS Tayside intends to fully comply with the decision notice from the Scottish Information Commissioner.”