Following the death of nearly a dozen patients from suspected Covid infection at Souillac Hospital, the government appointed a Fact-Finding Committee [FFC] to investigate the circumstances which led to the contamination of dialysis patients by the Coronavirus at Souillac hospital and whether they had received the appropriate care and to establish whether all procedures had been complied with by medical staff and determine whether there was medical negligence or not. That suspicion of medical negligence was a factor in the appointment of the FFC is very revealing and important. 

The minister of health has decided not to make the report public on the ground that the report contains information which may be subject to privileged communications and confidentiality. It should be recalled that the FFC was appointed after a lot of public pressure. The decision of the government not to publish the report has incurred the wrath of the relatives of the victims who want to find out how their loved ones departed this life. 

The report may contain details of medical treatment administered to the deceased patients. The report may also contain the kind of treatment given, whether it was appropriate and whether medical negligence was established. It is not disputed that the medical records of a person are subject to confidentiality under section 300 of the Criminal Code. Medical records of a person would be subject to protection as personal data. However, that confidentiality or protection may be outweighed by the interest in the investigation and prosecution of negligence or crime. 

Since the report is and would not be in the public domain, one can only surmise that those relatives of the deceased who may have testified before the FFC might have given details of the medical condition of the deceased. This in itself would have been a waiver of the confidentiality requirement in individual cases. If medical officers testified, they could only have given details of the treatment with the consent of the relatives of the deceased or pursuant to an overriding public interest as the FFC was investigating suspected medical negligence. 

Even if the minister has qualms about making the report public, an edited version could be made public on what went wrong and the solutions, if any proposed by the FFC. Under the constitution, the right to life is protected and in case of a medical condition people need to know how the life of their loved ones ended. 

In the past, a number of commissions of inquiry and FFCs were appointed by different governments and a few may be mentioned: controversies concerning alleged fraud at SIFB, disappearance of 16 kg heroin under the custody of the police; medical negligence in public hospitals, Food and Mouth disease, Britam. Some of these reports have been made public and others not. 

Before the 1982 elections, the report of the commission on inquiry into allegations of corruption by two ministers – Badry and Dabee – was made public. The report of the Rault commission on drug trafficking was published and this led to the resignation of many police officers. The Britam report was published in the hope that it would an end to the political career of Roshi Bhadain. There may be many reasons, mostly political or social, why reports are kept confidential or released. 

In the case of the Beessoodoyal report, even if the minister is not willing to release the report and would even be less willing to answer any questions in parliament, he could either publish an edited and abridged version with the salient points. Or he may hold a press conference to inform the public on what went wrong without revealing any names and the solutions that are being studied to prevent such a tragedy again. 

Of course, no one can halt death when it is coming. What many people seem to forget and overlook is that the fact of life is death. The moment we are born we are under death sentence. Only the timing is unknown to us. What was the use of appointing a FFC on the deaths that occurred at Souillac with alarums and all that if the whole report were to remain secret? It is no use invoking political or technical considerations over dead persons.