         |
Background to the Suspension of Dr Raj Mattu
77. During a public meeting on 7 September 2002 further information was gained about the extent of Mr Stoten's briefings through the remarks made by Mr R Ainsworth MP about their discussions. It was clear that misinformation had been passed to Mr Ainsworth, who correctly and rightly raised the official position of the Trust.
78. Amongst the many false and misleading claims made by Mr Stoten was his assertion that the Trust had completed the investigation into the allegations against Dr Mattu in May 2002, and that Dr Mattu had continued to frustrate the process ever since and refused to provide a response. Mr Stoten had also argued to Mr Ainsworth that the procedure was held up since May purely because the Trust had been waiting on a reply from Dr Mattu. It became apparent that Mr Stoten had expressed a view which had serious inaccuracies, with material omissions and inclusions.
79. Mr Stoten privately jointly briefed MPs about Dr Mattu again on 7 November 2002, during a visit to London. Mr D Roberts, the current Chief Executive, accompanied him throughout this meeting.
80. During this meeting Mr Stoten again told MPs that it was not the Trust but Dr Mattu who was to blame for the delays in the procedure, and that a number of additional complainants with new and serious complaints had emerged. He told MPs that he had decided to convene an independent panel to hear the case and that he would abide by its decision. It was also claimed that there was a threat to de-select Mr Bob Ainsworth, and for Dr Mattu to stand against him.
81. During this meeting Mr Stoten also made disparaging remarks about Mr Brian King, Chairman Dr Raj Mattu Reinstatement Committee. This included claims that Mr King had been abusive and aggressive towards him and during Trust Board meetings, and that Mr King had made some very serious allegations.
82. It has become apparent that the Trust has yet again breached its own procedures and decided now to convene a panel, even though the policy (# 16) under which Dr Mattu is suspended does not have a panel.
83. After advising Dr Mattu's representatives about their change in procedure, to which Dr Mattu and his representatives never agreed but acquiesced, the Trust has even breached this procedural change by now constituting and composing the panel in a manner that may be prejudicial to Dr Mattu and definitely outwith how they first advised.
84. The Trust is now also refusing to provide Dr Mattu the opportunity to complete his evidence and rebut the allegations against him. After over 10 months of suspension, the trust has declared that they are not going to reconvene and complete even a single interview with Dr Mattu before reaching a view and concluding their inquiry.
85. On 5 December 2002 the Trust instead informed Dr Mattu that the panel would convene on 13 December 2002 to decide upon whether there is a prima facie case to proceed to a disciplinary hearing.
On behalf of Dr Raj Mattu Reinstatement Committee,
PO Box 2912, Coventry. CV1 3YX
For more information contact: mail@drmrc.co.uk