According to the prosecutor, the ministry’s reports were based on two medical expert reports that the prosecutor described as independent.  Photo: Paperjam

According to the prosecutor, the ministry’s reports were based on two medical expert reports that the prosecutor described as independent.  Photo: Paperjam

Luxembourg’s prosecutor is examining whether operations cited in the Philippe Wilmes case could fall under criminal classifications including aggravated intentional assault and battery, forgery, fraud and subsidy fraud. The announcement follows health ministry reports based on two medical expert assessments and does not alter the presumption of innocence.

The Philippe Wilmes surgical case has moved beyond the health ministry’s administrative proceedings, with Luxembourg prosecutors now investigating suspected operations without medical justification.

The prosecutor’s office said on Thursday that the Ministry of Health and Social Security had sent reports on 21 and 22 April 2026 concerning suspicions that an orthopaedic specialist had carried out operations without medical justification.

The development adds a criminal-law strand to a case that has so far centred on Wilmes’ contested suspension from performing orthopaedic surgery. The health ministry extended that provisional restriction by 21 months in April, relying on expert findings that Wilmes and his defence have disputed.

In a press release distributed Thursday evening by his lawyers’ office, Wilmes said he would fully cooperate with the investigation.

Expert reports cited

According to the prosecutor, the ministry’s reports were based on two medical expert reports that the prosecutor described as independent. The office said that, according to the conclusions of those reports, some of the operations performed could have been medically unjustified under accepted professional and scientific standards, and could have resulted in mutilation of the patients concerned.

The prosecutor said these elements led it to open a preliminary investigation, conducted both for and against the doctor concerned. The investigation concerns alleged facts that could fall under criminal classifications including aggravated intentional assault and battery, forgery and use of forgery, fraud and subsidy fraud, without prejudice to other classifications that could be retained as the investigation develops.

The prosecutor’s office said it had also received a written response from Wilmes and would examine it as part of his right to respond.

Wilmes disputes findings

Wilmes has disputed the expert findings underpinning the ministry’s restriction, arguing in April that the operations cited in the case were clinically justified.

His lawyer, François PrumFrançois Prum, has also criticised the way the expert report was produced and challenged the basis of the suspension.