Special Hearings — Health Sector Hearings — 1997-06-17

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: I am now going to hand you back to the Chairperson.  I do not have any more questions which I would like to put to you, but I am sure that my fellow panellists would like to put some questions to you.  I will ask Leslie if he has anything to say.  Leslie do you want to make some concluding comments before I pass you on to the Chair?

LESLIE LONDON: I would like to conclude just with some recommendations, some issues which arise out of this.  It was obviously not only public sector services but the whole of the health sector that seemed to imbibe this attitude towards complicity with security.
 We also want to make the point that there were health administrators who facilitated the operation of military security structures, the Joint Management Committees that effectively took control of many of these rural areas.  So the problem was very far-reaching and really permeated the whole structure of the health sector.
 I want to say that there are certain things which would need to be done and this list is not definitive, but there are some issues which we feel the TRC should consider as recommendations to prevent this happening again.
 We believe that all health facilities, whether private or public, should have policies that protect doctor/patient confidentiality, clinical independence and establish institutional independence and accountability, as well as promoting patient advocacy, because these are cases where doctors were not acting as advocates for the patients except in the cases that Betty was describing.
 We would also support a charter of patients' rights that would be developed and driven by a process which patients or clients or communities are central.  
 And that health facilities should have effective ombudspersons who would be accountable to, for instance, with the new structures of hospital boards, have greater community input and the protection of human rights of patients as the priority.
 Lastly, we believe that there's a great deal of documentation that hospitals and many health professionals are sitting with that should be made available to the TRC in terms of memoranda and other papers which demonstrate the extent to which there was complicity in a systematic way between the institutions and the security forces.  
 I will end there.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Thank you Leslie.  Just a comment from me.  One of the things I've found incredible throughout these hearings, not only this particular hearing, is how the State and the organs of the State appropriated, controlled and monopolised violence.  I think it's been clear that there has been violence perpetrated by other political groups, but I think it's striking the way in which the State monopolised forms of violence through it's control of opposition in communities in creating opposition or fostering opposition in communities and denying services, important medical services to certain communities.  I find that quite incredible.
 Thank you Leslie and thanks to you too Sir.  I am now going to hand back to the Chairperson.

WENDY ORR: Thank you Pumla.  Perhaps if I could just comment on the issue of naming of names, because I would hate the audience to think that the TRC is entering into the culture and collusion of silence.
 A number of doctors were named in submissions which were sent to us but unfortunately a number of them had very common names so we had great difficulty locating those doctors and sending them their Section 30 notice as required of us by the Appellate Division decision.  However, we now have sent all those notices out but the doctors have to be given adequate time to respond.  
 Once that procedure has been followed and the doctors have responded or have been given a chance to make representation we will pursue the matter either by referring doctors to the appropriate disciplinary bodies or by releasing the names.  It's just that we are not able to do so at the moment because it would be in contempt of court if we did so.  And that is the reason why we have asked people not to name names, not because we are trying to protect or hide any particular individual.
 Does anyone else have any questions?  Thank you Leslie.   Thank you Mr Nel.  And a safe journey home.  Thank you very much for coming.

JACOB NEL: Thank you.
S A M D C  SUBMISSION

WENDY ORR: We are now going to move directly into the submissions by the South African Medical and Dental Council and then the South African Medical Services and we are going to re-arrange tomorrow's programme to fit in those people who we have not been able to hear today.  
 So I would like to ask the representatives of the South African Medical and Dental Council to come up to the table.  I believe it's Dr Becker and Mr Prinsloo.
 Thank you gentlemen, welcome, you've had a long day and a long wait.  Thank you for bearing with us and your patience.  Dr Fazel Randera will be facilitating your evidence.

DR RANDERA: Dr Becker, Mr Prinsloo good afternoon.  Before I ask you to take the oath, let me just as a way of introduction put both of you in context.  Dr Becker and Mr Prinsloo of course, you are here representing the new Interim Medical and Dental Council.
 Dr Becker you have a past president of the South African Medical and Dental Council and in fact sat on the Council from 1980 and presently still sit on the Council.
 Mr Prinsloo you have been working for the South African Medical and Dental Council since 1965, and if I remember rightly you have been the Registrar of the Council since 1980.
 You've heard a great many things said today about, not only the Council, our health services, the Medical Association of South Africa and I am sure you have many things to say in response.

LEN BECKER: (sworn states)

NICO PRINSLOO: (sworn states)

DR RANDERA: Dr Becker are you going to start.

LEN BECKER: Thank you Dr Randera.  I would just like to apologise on behalf of the President of the Interim Council, Professor Karachiram who has had to leave the proceedings because she has other commitments elsewhere.
 We have prepared a submission to the Commission which the Commission has received.  However, I think many of the people that are here today have not had insight into this submission, and I thought it would be wise to inform them of the contents of that submission.  So I will ask Mr Prinsloo to briefly go through that.  I don't think he needs to read the whole thing, but if he could just mention the most important aspects of that submission to the Commission.