MedicWatchAn independent record

Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing

HCPTS panel strikes off Nabeela Anjum after terrorism convictions

The biomedical scientist was struck off after two convictions for failing to disclose information about a planned terrorist attack.

MedicWatch editorial · Published 18 July 2025 · Updated 23 September 2026

Erasure (struck off the register)

Data last checked: 23 September 2026Report a correction

What does “struck off the register” mean?

The regulator directed removal from the register in this decision. The decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions. Check the official register for the practitioner's current registration status.

Concerning Nabeela Anjum, biomedical scientist (Health and Care Professions Council BS43047).

Decision date: 18 July 2025 · Hearing started 17 July 2025 and ended 18 July 2025

In plain English

The HCPTS panel considered biomedical scientist Nabeela Anjum's convictions for failing to disclose information that could have helped prevent a planned terrorist attack. It found no insight, remorse or remediation and a real risk of repetition, with serious potential harm to the public. The panel concluded that no lesser sanction was sufficient and struck her off.

Charges

Ms Anjum was convicted at Leeds Crown Court on 14 May 2024 of two counts of failing to disclose information about terrorism. The convictions concerned her failure to tell police information that she knew or believed could materially assist in preventing a planned terrorist attack.

Findings

The panel accepted the convictions and found Ms Anjum's fitness to practise impaired on personal and public grounds. It found no insight, remorse, apology or remediation, a real risk of repetition, and grave potential harm to patients and the wider public. It concluded that only removal from the register could protect the public and maintain confidence.

Mitigating and aggravating factors

Aggravating factors

Lack of insight, remorse or apology; lack of remediation; and service-user harm or potential service-user harm, including serious potential harm to patients and the wider public.

Source

All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions Council determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.

Spot something incorrect?

If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.

Choose what works for you. Your choices are remembered for 180 days and you can change them any time using Cookie settings.