But it appears the employment tribunal is trying to block the public and press from attending the hearing

Next week in a cramped magistrates court in Southampton an employment tribunal judge will hear an extraordinary case about an extremely popular obstetrician and an exemplary clinician who was sacked by the Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust after he raised issues of patient and staff safety in its maternity services.

The trust has denied that he was dismissed because of whistleblowing or raising patient safety issues -claiming that it wants people to speak up about these issues. In a statement last June it said : ” no member of staff has ever been dismissed for whistleblowing or raising concerns over patient safety; and they never will be.” But despite the dispute with Dr Pitman going on for four and a half years it has never said publicly why it dismissed him and will have to explain itself to the tribunal next week.

In the meantime the 57 year old obstetrician and gynaecologist has had unprecedented support from the people in Hampshire . A Facebook group called Friends of Martyn Pitman was set up by Lynda Emptage, a patient of Martyn’s for 20 years, who was so upset about news of his dismissal, that she wanted an inquiry. It now has 1,700 members.

He has also been publicly praised by  Broadchurch actress Sarah Parish who credits Martyn with saving not only her life but also her daughter Nell’s life. She had a late baby in her early 40s and without his intervention in an emergency she believes both of them would have died. He has also had an article about his concerns in The Times and appeared on breakfast TV.

The timing of the case is also embarrassing for the trust as it comes straight after the national scandal at the Countess of Chester hospital where Lucy Letby, a nurse, was convicted by a jury of murdering babies and the management of the trust emerged as threatening doctors and forcing them to write a letter of apology to her after they raised genuine concerns.

The trust appears to have been extremely reluctant to have any employment tribunal hearing at all. In April this year it attempted to strike out his defence and was largely unsuccessful.

Now the trust has decided to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayer’s money employing the former head of Old Square Chambers and part time employment judge, Mark Sutton, for the three week hearing. Mr Sutton is more used to taking cases to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal as well as representing trusts and doctors ” fitness to practice ” cases. His CV says he” is the sort of person who would inspire confidence in any judge” but also an expert lawyer on doctor’s disciplinary cases.

Dr Pitman, who is backed by the British Medical Association, is also represented by Old Square Chambers. His brief is Jack Mitchell. His CV on Old Square Chambers website says he is the ” go to junior counsel ” for whistleblowers and he has written two books on whistleblowing and an article on  whistleblowing in sport. He has represented Babcock, Eurotunnel, Paul Smith, Royal Mail, Thomson Reuters, The Ritz, Terrence Higgins Trust and the BBC in previous cases. He has represented clients with successful claims against companies including, Lloyds Bank, HSBC and HP.”

So whatever happens in this case Old Square Chambers are going to make a small fortune out of this hearing. Solicitors in the case are Bevan Brittan, for the trust and Capital Law for Dr Pitman.

There is also some concern about whether the public and the press will be able to hear and report the case. For a start Southampton Magistrates Court is a very small one. Some people say it is pokey and will hardly hold many people once the teams of lawyers and staff from the trust have taken up the seats. The entrance as you can see above is hardly inviting. Given the huge interest among the public in the case with 1700 on one website supporting Dr Pitman it is rather surprising the court authorities chose such a pokey venue.

It is also not listed as a hybrid hearing – both in person and on line – even though Southampton can have hearings remotely. People, including myself, and a number of distinguished physicians and whistleblowers across the UK have applied for a remote link to hear the proceedings but have had no response from the employment tribunal service beyond a standardised letter of acknowledgement.

Frankly as the judiciary is supposed to be committed to ” open justice” I think a refusal to allow people to attend remotely will be seen as ” hole in a corner justice” particularly as employment tribunals do not keep a record of the proceedings themselves.

Please donate to Westminster Confidential to allow me to continue my forensic reporting.