It is entirely unacceptable that women must continue undergoing examinations by a gynaecologist who has been convicted—albeit not with final effect—of rape committed while performing his duties. This situation highlights a prioritization of the rights and interests of the doctor and his employment over the interests and protection of numerous female patients.
Although media reports indicate that the institutions responsible for overseeing medical professionals claim they were unaware of the case involving the gynaecologist at the Clinical Hospital Centre (KBC) Osijek, we take this opportunity to note that the Ombudswoman, Tena Šimonović Einwalter, had already in May 2024, in light of this case, proposed to the Ministry of Health urgent amendments to the Health Care Act. These amendments would prevent individuals accused or convicted of certain criminal offences—including rape—from working in healthcare. She also requested information regarding the actions taken by KBC Osijek and the Croatian Medical Chamber (HLK) in this matter.
The Ombudswoman submitted this proposal following her actions in a case based on a complaint from the Centre for Peace, Nonviolence and Human Rights Osijek, after confirmation that a gynaecologist who had been convicted—though the verdict was not final—for the rape of a patient continued to work at KBC Osijek.
She also established that the hospital director had taken no action in response and had not reported the gynaecologist to the Croatian Medical Chamber, although he could reasonably have had knowledge of the incident given that police conducted an on-site investigation and interviews at the hospital.
Furthermore, according to information available from media sources, it was clear that the victim’s attorney had informed the HLK as early as June 2022 of the initiation of criminal proceedings against the gynaecologist. In May, the Ombudswoman requested information about the HLK’s actions in the case, including whether disciplinary proceedings had been initiated. The Chamber informed us that a case is ongoing before the Committee for Medical Ethics and Deontology and that we would be notified of its outcome and any other possible proceedings. However, no such notification has been received to date.
The Criminal Procedure Act provides for the possibility of imposing precautionary measures before and during criminal proceedings, including a ban on performing certain professional activities (in cases where grounds exist for pre-trial detention, which can alternatively be addressed through such precautionary measures). However, in this particular case, no such measure was imposed.
The Health Care Act, as it currently stands, does not allow the hospital director to temporarily suspend the gynaecologist while the proceedings are ongoing, i.e., before a final conviction. Specifically, Article 156 of the Health Care Act addresses only obstacles to employment in healthcare and only in cases of final conviction, and only for crimes against children. It applies solely to healthcare work involving children, not to other patients.
This specific case thus underscores the need for more effective legal regulation to ensure greater safety for patients in such situations, thereby also fostering trust in healthcare professionals and the healthcare system as a whole.
It is urgently necessary to legally require that the director of a healthcare institution remove from duty any individual against whom criminal proceedings have been initiated for specific offences. The Ministry of Health, in cooperation with other experts and professional associations, should define these criminal offences. At a minimum, they should include crimes against humanity and human dignity, against sexual freedom, against public health, and sexual abuse and exploitation of children.
These amendments would prevent situations where a doctor accused of raping a patient during an examination continues to examine other patients. This would not be without precedent, as similar provisions exist in other systems—for example, under the Act on Primary and Secondary Education, the Police Act, and the Social Welfare Act—but are lacking in healthcare legislation.
The state has a duty to do everything in its power to ensure that citizens feel safe and secure when engaging with public institutions. This is especially critical in the healthcare system.
The right to health is a fundamental human right. Healthcare institutions must be safe spaces for patients, and trust between patients and healthcare professionals is essential to the effective provision of medical care. Patients are in a vulnerable position when seeking help from doctors and other healthcare workers, as they depend on them, and are therefore more susceptible to becoming victims of criminal offences.