A former doctor who caused “gratuitous pain and suffering” to children during the course of “unsanitary and dangerous” circumcisions has been sentenced to five years and seven months in prison.
Mohammad Siddiqui, 58, from Birmingham, was a practising doctor when he started visiting homes by appointment to carry out circumcisions on children.
Some of his procedures left the children “screaming” in agony, Inner London Crown Court heard.
Siddiqui had pleaded guilty to 25 offences, including 11 counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, six counts of child cruelty, and eight counts of administering a prescription-only medicine to young and vulnerable patients while ignoring basic hygiene rules and performing non-therapeutic male circumcisions.
Siddiqui was suspended and later struck off the register but continued to carry out circumcisions at family homes, using unsterilised tools and leading to a number of young children having to be taken to hospital following the procedure, including one boy who “almost died”, the court heard.
The charges relate to 21 boys and are dated between April 2014 and January 2019.
Judge Noel Lucas KC said he agreed with the concerns of relatives of Siddiqui’s victims and stated that the regulation of circumcision was “now long overdue”.
He said: “This case has shown that safeguards and protections must now be put in place and put in place as a matter of urgency, to ensure that babies and young children are protected.”
Judge Lucas KC also told Siddiqui he had done “everything you could to delay the wheels of justice to prevent the trial from taking place” since the legal case against him first came to the criminal courts in December 2020.
Accusations of racism and bias, and unfounded complaints about the standard of the legal process were levelled by Siddiqui in a “deliberate and cynical delay” to prevent the case from proceeding.
Siddiqui’s approach was “more than persistent and caused the individuals who were subjected to your unjustified complaints real hardship”, the judge said.
The judge noted that Siddiqui had asked him to recuse himself on occasions from the case, had rejected his offer of help and alleged the hearing was unfair, “anti-Muslim” and “Zionist”.
The judge told Siddiqui: “In making these scattergun complaints, you appear to have entirely overlooked that your victims are Muslim boys and their families.”
Siddiqui changed his plea to guilty two months into his jury trial at London’s Southwark Crown Court, in which he represented himself.
A further 14 charges were ordered to lie on file.
A five-year serious organised crime prevention order, which stops Siddiqui from carrying out non-therapeutic circumcision once he is freed, will start on the day he is released from prison.
From June 2012, Siddiqui ran a private mobile circumcision service and sourced anaesthetic while working in paediatric surgery at the University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust.
He travelled around the UK and by appointment performed non-therapeutic male circumcisions on patients aged between one-month-old and 15-years-old.
In 2015, Siddiqui was struck off the GMC register after a panel of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service found him guilty of failures in performing non-therapeutic male circumcisions in the homes of four children, one of whom “almost died” as a result of the procedure, prosecutor Ben Douglas-Jones KC told the judge.
The boy, only referred to in court as Patient A, was rushed to hospital after he received an injection of Bupivacaine, an anaesthetic used to numb an area of the body during surgery, to which he had an adverse reaction.
Mr Douglas-Jones had told the court: “That child almost died and had to be taken to A&E by ambulance.
“Death or near death is something this defendant (Siddiqui) should have anticipated given his experience.
“That caused unnecessary suffering and pain.”
Despite having been struck off the GMC register following this incident, Siddiqui was able to continue his service until 2019, as non-therapeutic male circumcision is unregulated and is not required to be carried out by a registered medical practitioner.
The judge also heard about a boy aged 15 when Siddiqui circumcised him in 2017.
Siddiqui was initially reluctant to perform the surgery on the boy, referred to as Child A in court due to his age, but carried it out after charging his parents £300.
The court heard the teenager had to be rushed to hospital for surgery after his penis “exploded with blood” due to a blood clot that developed shortly after the procedure.
In hospital, doctors found that Child A’s penis had been fitted with a Plastibell circumcision ring that was “much too small”.
Mr Douglas-Jones told the judge: “That caused gratuitous pain and suffering and rendered the procedure dangerous.
“Clearly, this procedure should not have been done in a billion years, not in this way.”
The prosecution told the judge Siddiqui also used unsterilised tools, including unpackaged pairs of scissors and tweezers, which he would put back into his bag after he completed the procedures.
The former NHS doctor sometimes used a “circumstraint board” to immobilise children during circumcisions, which is considered unacceptable in NHS practice.
He would also ask parents of babies who cried during the surgery to put honey on their dummies to use as a soother, despite children under 12 months being at risk of developing botulism, a rare but serious form of food poisoning, when consuming honey.
After sentencing, Anja Hohmey, of the Crown Prosecution Service, said Siddiqui had left children with “emotional and physical scars” and had shown “a complete disregard” for the impact caused to his victims, their families and communities.
She added: “His actions throughout the court process have caused significant further disruption and distress to his victims and their families, alongside significant additional legal costs due to the length of the delays he has caused.”
Detective Chief Superintendent Fiona Bitters, from Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary, said: “I hope today’s sentence, which is significant, helps to bring some comfort to his victims and their families who have had to wait many years to see justice served for his actions. The circumstances of this case are unusual and novel.”