HMC doctors keep strike on fifth day as OPD patients face costly alternatives

PESHAWAR: A strike by doctors at Hayatabad Medical Complex entered its fifth straight day on Monday, leaving outpatient services suspended and forcing many patients to turn to higher-cost institution-based practice for treatment.

Routine services remained shut at HMC, its affiliated Institute of Kidney Diseases and other departments, while emergency care continued. Patients who came for OPD treatment after paying Rs50 were instead pushed towards institution-based practice, where consultation fees start from Rs1,500.

The protesting doctors say they withdrew services to press for an inquiry into what they describe as illegal appointments at the hospital. Young Doctors Association president Asfandyar Bittani said the strike would continue because the health minister had not accepted their main demand to remove the chairman of the Board of Governors and order an impartial inquiry in line with the chief minister’s assurance.

The hospital administration said it would not allow doctors and other staff to disrupt patient care. Administration officials also said reforms were being implemented and alleged that protests were aimed at halting that process. They maintained that appointments to senior positions had been made on merit and said recommendations of the MTI-Policy Board and the government would be enforced to improve patient care.

The health minister said, "We have held meeting with representatives of Young Doctors Association (YDA) and they have committed to end strike and ensure healthcare services in HMC and its affiliated institutions."

Alongside the strike, a separate dispute has surfaced over an inquiry committee formed by the Board of Governors. A former HMC hospital director, in a letter to the secretary of the BoG, objected to the five-member panel and called for an independent and impartial inquiry committee to be constituted by the MTIs Policy Board and the health department.

He argued that the committee members were junior officials who had worked under him and could not lawfully investigate a senior officer. He wrote, "Right to a fair and due process is a fundamental right and the Constitution envisages that every person, against whom proceedings are initiated, is entitled to have his case examined by an independent, impartial and unbiased forum."

The former director also said the committee had been formed on the directives of the same BoG chairman against whom he had already raised allegations of administrative misconduct, abuse of authority, violation of law and procedural irregularities, calling it a conflict of interest. He added that the dean and medical director were the competent authorities to conduct such an inquiry, whereas the nominated officers were administratively junior to him.