Historic First: Working GP Dr Patrick Hart Suspended for Climate Protest 

Posted by: Alice - Posted on:

Medical tribunal punishes doctor for taking direct action while categorically disregarding the evidence of the planetary health emergency, the health impacts of air pollution and International Law. 

Dr Hart outside Chelmsford crown court where he was sentenced to 12 months in prison

In the same week that the tribunal heard and then disregarded the context and motivation of Dr Hart’s actions; Aviva announced that millions of homes were becoming uninsurable making it likely that many UK towns would have to be abandoned altogether, scientists reported that the world’s first tipping point had been crossed, and the UK government’s own climate committee announced that we must prepare for at least 2 degrees of warming by 2050 (a level of warming widely accepted as being catastrophic to human health). Earlier this year a report by The Royal College of Physicians warned that air pollution affects almost every organ in the human body, is estimated to contribute to 30,000 deaths in the UK in 2025 alone, and costs more than £27 billion annually.

In testimony to the tribunal Dr Fiona Godlee, former editor of the BMJ stated

“Despite the overwhelming consensus about the threat of climate change and the urgency for action, those who are in a position to act – governments and corporations – have failed adequately to do so. Indeed they have repeatedly been found by the courts to be in contravention of the law. Standard protests have therefore been shown to be ineffective, and doctors who feel compelled to take more direct action are, in my view, justified in doing so, charged as they are with protecting the public’s health. 

In light of this, should the Tribunal sanction Dr Hart? I believe that it should not. Dr Hart has been convicted and imprisoned for causing criminal damage. Acting on his conscience, he has nonetheless paid the price in law for his actions. I do not argue for medical exceptionalism – doctors should not be above the law. But I argue, as does the UK Health Alliance on Climate Change representing over a million UK health professionals, that doctors should not be additionally penalised by the loss of their careers and livelihoods.”

Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) Manchester, 20 October 2025

In a move without precedent in UK medical history, a medical practitioners tribunal sitting in Manchester this week has suspended working GP Dr Patrick Hart from the medical register for 10 months following his imprisonment for an action designed to highlight ExxonMobil’s role in driving the climate crisis and to draw attention to the health impacts of the climate crisis and air pollution. Dr. Hart spoke on the public record during the tribunal of the paralysis and distress (known as eco-anxiety) he had felt prior to taking action and described how he was motivated by the imperative to protect his patients and public health.

“We’ve already lost the 1.5°C safety limit,” he said. “We’re heading towards a 2°C-plus world – an out-of-control feedback loop and climate-collapse hot house Earth…Do you go to the effort of making a point if you know it won’t affect the outcome? I think you do, even if you don’t expect it to change anything – you do it because it feels like the right thing to do.”

Tribunal Rejects Extensive Expert Submissions

The GMC and the MPTS are bound by the “overarching objective” of protecting the public – a duty that increasingly means confronting major health threats like climate change.

The three-person tribunal dismissed extensive evidence, context, and motive; – ruling that Dr Hart’s direct action and resulting prison sentence amounted to “misconduct” that would undermine public trust in the profession. The panel went further, claiming without substantiation that his peaceful actions placed the public at risk. When asked for evidence from Dr. Hart, the panel provided no data or published research to support this claim. 

The tribunal gave no weight to extensive expert submissions, including:

  • – An Independent Legal Opinion, drafted for Lawyers Are Responsible noting the GMC’s need to follow International Law as a public body
  • – Extensive medical evidence demonstrating the escalating health emergency posed by climate breakdown, and thus illustrating the “Exceptional Circumstances” that motivated Dr Hart’s actions
  • – A testimonial video submission from the UN Special Rapporteur for Environmental Defenders, Michel Forst, warning that further punishment of Dr Hart after his imprisonment would amount to persecution under the legally binding Aarhus Convention of which the UK is a signatory 
  • – A testimonial from Dr. Fiona Godlee, former editor of the BMJ (of 15 years) stating no sanction should take place

The Medical Profession at an Ethical Crossroads: Where Every Patient’s Life Hangs in the Balance

The decision marks a defining moment in the history of medicine in the UK and globally. As the climate crisis intensifies, extreme weather will become more frequent. Health threats will exponentially escalate, placing every patient’s life at risk as a result. The moral and ethical duty of all health professionals will come into sharper focus, as the interests of their patients come into ever more obvious conflict with the inertia of our political system, the corporate destruction of our biosphere, and the failure of public health policy and health institutions to prioritise the health and wellbeing of our populations. 
At such a juncture, is it morally or ethically acceptable to allow our medical regulator to dismiss the climate health emergency as irrelevant and label Dr. Hart’s principled and professional actions as misconduct? The tribunal also draws negative inference from a failure to demonstrate “insight and remediation”. Where actions have clearly been taken, not only at personal cost, but based on evidence, and with a clear motivation to protect public health, an expectation of remorse is not only inappropriate but morally abhorrent. As Dr Hart said in addressing this issue; “There is simply a power dynamic here, where ultimately the three of you have the authority over who has insight and who doesn’t”.

Health workers protesting outside the GMC offices in London

Failure to Consider Exceptional Circumstances

In his closing statement to the tribunal, Dr Hart challenged its members to confront their individual role in a wider moral crisis:

“To quote the 19th century economist Frederick Bastiat: ‘When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, they create for themselves a legal system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it.’ You cling to a rule book written by those in power – one that authorises plunder of the Earth at unprecedented scale. But that book is no longer fit for purpose. Either we rewrite the rules by choice, or they are rewritten for us by the immutable laws of physics”.

“The greatest health threat to all of us is the unfolding climate catastrophe. If we do not stand up to the fossil fuel companies and the politicians who enable them, we will have failed our patients”.

He further reminded the GMC that Paragraph 68 to 70 of GMC sanction guidance allows tribunals to take no action in “exceptional circumstances”. “What,” he asked, “could be more exceptional than the collapse of the climate systems on which all health depends?”

Hidden Systemic Bias Exposed

Throughout the hearing, Dr Hart emphasised that his actions were an expression of his moral integrity and stemmed not from self-interest but from his understanding of his duty as a doctor.  

He further made it clear that his purpose in participating in the tribunal was not to achieve any particular outcome but to “speak truth to power”. He acknowledged that in doing so his chances of censure were increased, reflecting that the tribunal were of a demographic (wealthy, late middle aged men) that in his experience were most likely to “defend their position and the system which brought them their success”.

The case reveals how rigid institutions fail to respond to existential threats, with tribunals applying outdated frameworks to unprecedented circumstances while ignoring the moral imperative driving healthcare workers to act. On hearing the result Dr Rammina Yassaie, medical ethicist stated

“The GMC describe Hart as ‘lacking insight’ despite their own clear cognitive dissonance as, on the one hand, they recognise the climate crisis as a health crisis, whilst on the  other hand they discipline the very doctors who are sounding the alarm.

Hart’s case exposes moral failings in the GMC’s regulatory processes which are clearly not designed to deal with cases of doctors who are acting for a purpose higher than themselves.”

Amid Intensifying Measures Against Medical Protests

Dr Hart’s case follows two previous tribunals against retired GPs Dr Sarah Benn and Dr Diana Warner, making him the first practising GP to be suspended for peaceful protest.

Although the GMC insists it must refer any doctor sentenced to imprisonment to a tribunal, in its prosecution of these cases it continues to treat convictions as automatic evidence of misconduct, regardless of motivation, context, or public support. The GMC has yet to justify how peaceful protest by doctors, widely endorsed as legitimate conscience-led action, can automatically be assumed to erode public confidence in the profession.

Growing Professional and Public Backlash
The British Medical Association has publicly condemned disciplinary action against doctors convicted of “nonviolent civil disobedience,”passing two motions at its Annual Representatives Meeting in January 2025 in support of “…those convicted of forms of civil disobedience which do not involve violence against the person”,  and affirming that any doctor removed for such protest should be regarded as “colleagues in good standing”.

Nationwide support for Dr. Hart has rapidly grown, evidenced by:

  • – Regular vigils outside GMC offices in Manchester and London
  • – A 2,000-signature open letter signed various high profile signatories including former Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams, Dr Marina Romanello, Professor Bill McGuire and Caroline Lucas
  • – National petitions affirming that climate protest aligns with medical ethics
  • – Solidarity statements from medical royal colleges and healthcare unions
Vigil in support of Dr Hart held in Bristol

Media Contact:  

Email: contact@healthforxr.com

Website: HealthforXR

About Health for XR – represents healthcare professionals advocating for urgent action on the climate and health emergency. Founded in 2019, the organisation campaigns for recognition that climate breakdown poses the greatest threat to public health in the 21st century. It supports healthcare workers who take conscience-led action to protect patients safety and public health and communities. Providing legal support, professional solidarity, and public advocacy,  – the network includes 100s of healthcare professionals across the UK and globally.

Call for Action

The suspension of Dr Patrick Hart represents a critical juncture for the medical profession. As climate breakdown accelerates and health impacts intensify, the question becomes whether medicine will stand with those courageously acting on evidence, or with institutions that prioritise conformity over conscience.

Healthcare workers, medical students, and the public are urged to: