RIGHT TO KNOW: PRIVACY, PUBLIC OFFICE AND DISCLOSURE OF MEDICAL RECORDS OF PRESIDENT BUHARI.
Do I really need to know whether the President has Erectile Dysfunction going by Ruben Abati's libidinous search for answers to systemic failure in Aso Rock or Blood Coagulation, Sinus Allergy and Asthmatic Episodes?
I do not need to know because they are inconsequential to governance given the constitutional routine to be followed in the event of indisposition of the President.
We are all humans susceptible to sickness either as head of a family or institution and during the period of temporary disability we have associates authorise to act as our representatives. Therefore, the President cannot be an exception and whatever medical informations about the health of the President presented to me as a citizen have no significant negative effects on me in respect of my opinion about policies and outcome of deliverables in this democratic dispensation because I know there are capable hands working with the President.
The fundamental question here is to reflect on whether the above statements can be transplanted into subject We. Put differently do we need to know the medical informations of Public office holders in Nigeria? My answer to that is emphatic NO. Do we need to know the medical records of the President. My answer to that is emphatic NO.
Who is/are Public officer(s) in Nigeria?
For the purpose of this piece I shall take the definition of Public officers as enunciated in the Fifth Schedule of the Federal Republic of Nigeria Constitution as my starting point precisely speaking the interpretation Part 2 Public Officers for the purposes of the Code of conduct.
This is necessary for clarity and to avoid ambiguity noticed in the statements of those canvassing for full disclosure in the use of the term Public office, most importantly and specifically item number 10 is for me very interesting to flesh out my views on this subject matter.
Here is the reproduction of the interpretation (Part 2) Public Officers for the purposes of the Code of conduct.
Part II
Public Officers for the purposes of the Code of conduct
1.
The President of the Federation.
2.
The Vice-President of the Federation.
3.
The President and Deputy President of the Senate Speakers and Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives and Speakers and Deputy Speakers of Houses of Assembly of States, and all members and staff of legislative houses.
4.
Governors and Deputy Governors of States.
5.
Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justices of the Supreme Court, President and Justices of the Court of Appeal, all other judicial officers and all staff of courts of law.
6.
Attorney-General of the Federation and Attorney-General of each State.
7.
Ministers of the Government of the Federation and Commissioners of the Governments of the States.
8.
Chief of Defence Staff, Chief of Army Staff, Chief of Naval Staff, Chief of Air Staff and all members of the armed forces of the Federation.
9.
Inspector-General of Police, Deputy Inspector-General of Police and all members of the Nigeria Police Force and ther government security agencies established by law.
10.
Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Head of the Civil service, Permanent Secretaries, Directors-Generals and all other persons in the civil service of the Federation or of the State.
11.
Ambassadors, High Commissioners and other officers of Nigeria Missions abroad.
12.
Chairman, members and staff of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal.
13.
Chairman, members and staff of local government councils.
14.
Chairman and members of the Boards or other governing bodies and staff of statutory corporations and of ompanies in which the Federal or State Governments or local governments councils.
15.
All staff of universities, colleges and institutions owned and financed by the Federal or State Governments or local government councils.
16.
Chairman, members and staff of permanent commissions or councils appointed on full time basis.
Fellow Nigerians, here is my dillema considering the the long list. Are we saying all these Public officers must make full disclosure of their health status or medical records available for public consumption whenever they are sick or on sick leave? Please note that emphasis is on public consumption not statutory declaration which is protected by constitutional provisions on privacy.
There are people with the view that since Labour Act Chapter 198 (8) sub (1) says ''Every worker who enters into a contract shall be medically examined by a registered medical practitioner at the expense of the employer'' that the president in this case must have to be medically examined before assumption of office.
However, this line of argumentation is fallacious because in sub (2) The State Authority may by order exempt for the requirement of medical examination workers entering into contracts for- (ii) in non-agricultural work which the State Authority is satisfied is not of a dangerous character or likely to be injurious to the health of the workers. Please note that the word State here represents Nigeria i.e Federal/State/Local Government
It is very vivid from the foregoing that the role/job of the President is seen ab-initio by State Authority as not of a dangerous character or likely to be injurious to the health of the President hence no constitutional compulsion on medical examination. Item number 10 specifically states that ''...all other persons in the civil service of the Federation or of the State''
Here again are we to ask every civil servant to declare for public consumption their medical records whenever they are ill or on sick leave? This is not done anywhere as much as I am knowledgeable never being asked by my employer to make my medical records public information and I do not see that happening in Nigeria.
The statutory requirement for medical examination is not an instumentarium for discrimination nor goverment tool to deny citizens jobs based on their medical history the anti- discrimination provisions in the Constitution have taken care of that so what is now the significance of the irresponsible clamour for full disclosure of medical records for public consumption especially when it has to do with the President or Elective offices.
Why discriminate/Where comes the need to discriminate against these categories of people?
We have become a nation bereft of deep thinking looking for salacious news to titillate our gossipry wishing others misfortune, a situation exacerbated by media hunting for dirty news that leaves a metallic taste in the mouth of people who are genuinely interested positively in the welfare of all Public officers.
Emotional desideratum of people or citizens is not a legal justification for demanding what is unconstitutional. Let it be succinctly put here that there is no constitutional compulsion on the President or any Elected public officers to make public medical records or informations for public consumption. Therefore, there is no right to know ab-initio.
I do not think we need any provision that is bound to jeopadise the privacy of a section of our populace in the name of bogus transparency. Where is such amorphous provision leading us to? A situation wherein Privacy regulations, Hippocratic oath and the Code of secrecy and the privilege of non-disclosure or the Code of medical ethics in Nigeria shall be subject of impunity with grievous implications for all citizens socio-political and economic wise.
The inherent danger with such misadventure cannot be captured enough in this short piece but one thing is certain our vampire media would make a mincemeat of any medical records revelation and opposition shall take advantage for political capital by spreading spurious narratives weave around such medical records to create political uncertainty and instability in the country.
Please do not come to me with your American story. We are not Americans. We are Nigerians and I do not see United States of America as a good example to follow concerning this subject matter. Really America is an aberration and embarrassment politically speaking. Nigeria should not follow that path wherein candidates go around with exposition of their medical records foolishly making gullible Americans believing that it will engender transparency but the reverse is what obviously come to the fore when they eventually become elected into public office.
The teleology of all these show of shame I do not know. Nothing will be gain by providing medical records for public consumption rather we will be making the citizenry more confused with medical terminologies and narratives that would make it difficult for them to make the right decisions.
Furthermore, it is common knowledge that medical conditions or medical records have no one on one corresponding relationships to the performance of an individual, equally there is no straightforwardly instrumentarium for the prediction of the final outcome of a medical condition at a given time because of the complicated ontolology of diseases.
This whole hullabaloo is mere sensationalism and unnecessary, we should be more interested in the question of policy, institution enhancement and not medical records of Public officers. Governance is not about the President alone we should be more interested in the constitutionality of the president's actions.
The constitution envisages that the President may be sick and the provisions for the transfer of power are vividly incorporated into the constitution so that continuity in governance is secure. Making public medical records of the President is not a constitutional requirement. Therefore, the so called right to know is a mere Emotional Desideratum.
OTUNBA ADE ILEMOBADE IS A PHILOSOPHER
TWITTER@PEARL2PRINCE
I do not need to know because they are inconsequential to governance given the constitutional routine to be followed in the event of indisposition of the President.
We are all humans susceptible to sickness either as head of a family or institution and during the period of temporary disability we have associates authorise to act as our representatives. Therefore, the President cannot be an exception and whatever medical informations about the health of the President presented to me as a citizen have no significant negative effects on me in respect of my opinion about policies and outcome of deliverables in this democratic dispensation because I know there are capable hands working with the President.
The fundamental question here is to reflect on whether the above statements can be transplanted into subject We. Put differently do we need to know the medical informations of Public office holders in Nigeria? My answer to that is emphatic NO. Do we need to know the medical records of the President. My answer to that is emphatic NO.
Who is/are Public officer(s) in Nigeria?
For the purpose of this piece I shall take the definition of Public officers as enunciated in the Fifth Schedule of the Federal Republic of Nigeria Constitution as my starting point precisely speaking the interpretation Part 2 Public Officers for the purposes of the Code of conduct.
This is necessary for clarity and to avoid ambiguity noticed in the statements of those canvassing for full disclosure in the use of the term Public office, most importantly and specifically item number 10 is for me very interesting to flesh out my views on this subject matter.
Here is the reproduction of the interpretation (Part 2) Public Officers for the purposes of the Code of conduct.
Part II
Public Officers for the purposes of the Code of conduct
1.
The President of the Federation.
2.
The Vice-President of the Federation.
3.
The President and Deputy President of the Senate Speakers and Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives and Speakers and Deputy Speakers of Houses of Assembly of States, and all members and staff of legislative houses.
4.
Governors and Deputy Governors of States.
5.
Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justices of the Supreme Court, President and Justices of the Court of Appeal, all other judicial officers and all staff of courts of law.
6.
Attorney-General of the Federation and Attorney-General of each State.
7.
Ministers of the Government of the Federation and Commissioners of the Governments of the States.
8.
Chief of Defence Staff, Chief of Army Staff, Chief of Naval Staff, Chief of Air Staff and all members of the armed forces of the Federation.
9.
Inspector-General of Police, Deputy Inspector-General of Police and all members of the Nigeria Police Force and ther government security agencies established by law.
10.
Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Head of the Civil service, Permanent Secretaries, Directors-Generals and all other persons in the civil service of the Federation or of the State.
11.
Ambassadors, High Commissioners and other officers of Nigeria Missions abroad.
12.
Chairman, members and staff of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal.
13.
Chairman, members and staff of local government councils.
14.
Chairman and members of the Boards or other governing bodies and staff of statutory corporations and of ompanies in which the Federal or State Governments or local governments councils.
15.
All staff of universities, colleges and institutions owned and financed by the Federal or State Governments or local government councils.
16.
Chairman, members and staff of permanent commissions or councils appointed on full time basis.
Fellow Nigerians, here is my dillema considering the the long list. Are we saying all these Public officers must make full disclosure of their health status or medical records available for public consumption whenever they are sick or on sick leave? Please note that emphasis is on public consumption not statutory declaration which is protected by constitutional provisions on privacy.
There are people with the view that since Labour Act Chapter 198 (8) sub (1) says ''Every worker who enters into a contract shall be medically examined by a registered medical practitioner at the expense of the employer'' that the president in this case must have to be medically examined before assumption of office.
However, this line of argumentation is fallacious because in sub (2) The State Authority may by order exempt for the requirement of medical examination workers entering into contracts for- (ii) in non-agricultural work which the State Authority is satisfied is not of a dangerous character or likely to be injurious to the health of the workers. Please note that the word State here represents Nigeria i.e Federal/State/Local Government
It is very vivid from the foregoing that the role/job of the President is seen ab-initio by State Authority as not of a dangerous character or likely to be injurious to the health of the President hence no constitutional compulsion on medical examination. Item number 10 specifically states that ''...all other persons in the civil service of the Federation or of the State''
Here again are we to ask every civil servant to declare for public consumption their medical records whenever they are ill or on sick leave? This is not done anywhere as much as I am knowledgeable never being asked by my employer to make my medical records public information and I do not see that happening in Nigeria.
The statutory requirement for medical examination is not an instumentarium for discrimination nor goverment tool to deny citizens jobs based on their medical history the anti- discrimination provisions in the Constitution have taken care of that so what is now the significance of the irresponsible clamour for full disclosure of medical records for public consumption especially when it has to do with the President or Elective offices.
Why discriminate/Where comes the need to discriminate against these categories of people?
We have become a nation bereft of deep thinking looking for salacious news to titillate our gossipry wishing others misfortune, a situation exacerbated by media hunting for dirty news that leaves a metallic taste in the mouth of people who are genuinely interested positively in the welfare of all Public officers.
Emotional desideratum of people or citizens is not a legal justification for demanding what is unconstitutional. Let it be succinctly put here that there is no constitutional compulsion on the President or any Elected public officers to make public medical records or informations for public consumption. Therefore, there is no right to know ab-initio.
I do not think we need any provision that is bound to jeopadise the privacy of a section of our populace in the name of bogus transparency. Where is such amorphous provision leading us to? A situation wherein Privacy regulations, Hippocratic oath and the Code of secrecy and the privilege of non-disclosure or the Code of medical ethics in Nigeria shall be subject of impunity with grievous implications for all citizens socio-political and economic wise.
The inherent danger with such misadventure cannot be captured enough in this short piece but one thing is certain our vampire media would make a mincemeat of any medical records revelation and opposition shall take advantage for political capital by spreading spurious narratives weave around such medical records to create political uncertainty and instability in the country.
Please do not come to me with your American story. We are not Americans. We are Nigerians and I do not see United States of America as a good example to follow concerning this subject matter. Really America is an aberration and embarrassment politically speaking. Nigeria should not follow that path wherein candidates go around with exposition of their medical records foolishly making gullible Americans believing that it will engender transparency but the reverse is what obviously come to the fore when they eventually become elected into public office.
The teleology of all these show of shame I do not know. Nothing will be gain by providing medical records for public consumption rather we will be making the citizenry more confused with medical terminologies and narratives that would make it difficult for them to make the right decisions.
Furthermore, it is common knowledge that medical conditions or medical records have no one on one corresponding relationships to the performance of an individual, equally there is no straightforwardly instrumentarium for the prediction of the final outcome of a medical condition at a given time because of the complicated ontolology of diseases.
This whole hullabaloo is mere sensationalism and unnecessary, we should be more interested in the question of policy, institution enhancement and not medical records of Public officers. Governance is not about the President alone we should be more interested in the constitutionality of the president's actions.
The constitution envisages that the President may be sick and the provisions for the transfer of power are vividly incorporated into the constitution so that continuity in governance is secure. Making public medical records of the President is not a constitutional requirement. Therefore, the so called right to know is a mere Emotional Desideratum.
OTUNBA ADE ILEMOBADE IS A PHILOSOPHER
TWITTER@PEARL2PRINCE
Comments
Post a Comment