Doctor is cleared after UK's first FGM prosecution amid claims of 'show trial'

 
Cleared: NHS doctor Dhanuson Dharmasena (Picture: PA)
Standard Reporter5 February 2015
WEST END FINAL

Get our award-winning daily news email featuring exclusive stories, opinion and expert analysis

I would like to be emailed about offers, event and updates from Evening Standard. Read our privacy notice.

An NHS doctor has been cleared after the first female genital mutilation prosecution to be brought in the UK.

Dhanuson Dharmasena, 32, smiled while his family sobbed and hugged each other as he was cleared by a jury in less than 30 minutes.

It had been claimed he illegally stitched a young mother back up after she gave birth - re-doing the FGM she had as a six-year-old in Somalia.

But his defence barrister Zoe Johnson QC said Dharmasena had been "hung out to dry and made a scapegoat" for hospital failings.

His speedy acquittal at London's Southwark Crown Court will prompt questions about why the Crown Prosecution Service chose such a marginal case for the UK's first prosecution.

Hasan Mohamed, 41, was cleared of abetting the offence.

In a statement after the verdicts, Dr Dharmasena said: "I am extremely relieved with the court's verdict and I am grateful to the jury for their careful consideration of the facts.

"I have always maintained that FGM is an abhorrent practice that has no medical justification; however I cannot comment further on the details of this case due to patient confidentiality.

"I would like to thank my family, friends, legal team and all those who supported me through this difficult time and I look forward to putting this matter behind me."

Mr Mohamed's lawyer, Ali Hussain, branded the case a "show trial". He said: "Following today's verdict, I am delighted that my client has been acquitted.

"He should not have been prosecuted and the jury's verdict confirms what he has always said - that he did nothing wrong.

"My client has suffered months of stress and the humiliation and lost precious time with his two young children.

"My client strongly believes this case was nothing more than a show trial - an effort by the CPS to regain some confidence after failing to bring a prosecution despite FGM laws being in place since 1985."

The "barbaric" practice of FGM has come under the spotlight in recent years, with Hollywood star and UN Special Envoy Angelina Jolie joining the international fight against it.

Also known as female circumcision, it involves the removal or injuring of part of a woman's genitals for non-medical reasons. It is highly dangerous and can be fatal.

The CPS announced it was launching Britain's first prosecution last March, attracting a flurry of media reporting.

But, as the prosecutor Kate Bex made clear in her opening, the landmark case was a far cry from the stereotype of the "back street clinic" cutter.

The two-week trial heard the alleged victim was rushed to the Whittington Hospital in north London on November 24 2012.

But hospital trust failings meant she had not been placed on the FGM pathway as she should have been.

Instead Dr Dharmasena, then a junior registrar, faced the "nightmarish scenario" of discovering she was circumcised as she went into emergency labour.

The well spoken doctor from Ilford, Essex, cut the woman open to deliver the baby, and then partially re-stitched her afterwards because she was "oozing" blood.

He insisted he only carried out a single figure of eight stitch, which he thought was in her medical interests. He was later told by superiors he should have sutured her on either side.

Speaking on the court steps Mr Hussain added that Mr Mohamed's friends and family in the Somali community "are against FGM".

Asked if he thought the prosecution case was brought because of political pressure, he said: "It may well have been. I'm not in a position to say one way or another."

The CPS defended its decision to bring the prosecutions.

Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said: "It was right that we put this case before the court and on three separate occasions, once before trial and twice during the trial, the judge dismissed applications by the defence to stop the case, thereby agreeing that the evidence should be considered by a jury."

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in