Can The Law Tame Murderous Doctors? | Nairalaw

Many patients are injured as a result of medical negligence but
their families do not seek legal remedies. Medical law experts
believe that malpractice suits keep healthcare professionals and
hospitals on their toes. JOSEPH JIBUEZE examines how the right to
quality healthcare can be better enforced.

A Medical malpractice is a serious problem. It is said to fall
behind only heart disease and cancer as the leading cause of death,
according to a study by Johns Hopkins.

It is difficult to accurately estimate how often medical
malpractice occurs because it often goes unnoticed or unreported,
especially where accurate statistics is not readily available.
However, instances of misdiagnoses abound.

There is, therefore, the need for increased medical rights
awareness in Nigeria, experts have said.

Activist-lawyer Bamisope Adeyanju said it was ironic that there
were not too many lawsuits arising from medical negligence or cases
that border on the enforcement of medical rights in a country with
a well documented failing health system.

In contrast, the average number of medical malpractice suits
filed yearly in the United States is about 85,000, according to a
recent report by a US personal injury law firm, Galfand Berger
LLP.

Despite having advanced medical facilities, the Johns Hopkins
study, which analysed medical death rate data over an eight-year
period in 2016, calculated that more than 250,000 deaths per year
are due to medical errors in the United States.

The Nigeria situation

According to statistics by the Medical and Dental Council
Nigeria (MDCN) Disciplinary Tribunal, only 190 complaints of
professional negligence were disposed off in seven years (2000 –
2007).

Between 1963 and 1999, a period of 36 years, the Tribunal
handled mere 92 cases of medical negligence.

The number of cases handled by the tribunal between 2000 and
2007 represented an increase of over 200 per cent.

According to World Association of Medical Law (WAML) Vice
President Mr ‘La-olu Osanyin, “this current statistics would have
quadrupled by now had the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria
(MDCN) not been dissolved incessantly by governments.”

Osanyin, who also chairs the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)
Section on Business Law (SBL) Medicine and Law Committee, believes
there is need for more awareness on medical rights.

A 2018 study by Uwakwe Abugu and Dike Obalum of the Faculty of
Law, University of Abuja and Department of Surgery, State House
Medical Centre, Aso Rock, Abuja, says only about 1.1 per cent of
all medical malpractices cases are enforced through legal
action.

Yet, medical errors and malpractices are prevalent. A study
which focused only on Abia State highlights how serious the problem
is.

The study, conducted by Gabriel Iloh, Abali Chuku and Agwu Amadi
of the Department of Ophthalmology, Federal Medical Centre,
Umuahia, and the Department of Public Health, Federal University of
Technology (FUTO), Owerri, sampled 145 medical practitioners in the
state.

The team found the prevalence of medical errors. The three most
common errors committed by the participants were an error of
medication prescription (95.2 per cent), error of radio-laboratory
investigation ordering (83.9 per cent), and error of physician
diagnoses (69.4 per cent).

Sixty-two (100 per cent) of the participants who committed
medical errors had a negative attitude to error disclosure to the
patients and their families. Of the 62 participants who committed
medical errors, 33.8 per cent were depressed.

Significantly, among those who were medically negligent, the
study found that “none was involved in a lawsuit for medical
errors”.

Medical rights

According to Osanyin, some enforceable medical rights fall
within the right to life guaranteed by Section 33 of the 1999
Constitution (as amended), the right to dignity of human person
guaranteed by Section 34, and the right to personal liberty
guaranteed by Section 35.

A patient also has a right to privacy (as guaranteed by Section
37), but there are exceptions to the doctrine of confidentiality,
as in the case of disclosure under compulsion of law or in public
interest.

Other medical rights, Osayin said, include the right to free
choice of a physician, right to a second medical opinion, right to
refuse to be informed about a medical condition, right to
continuity of medical care, and the right to accept or refuse any
recommended medical treatment, such as transfusion.

According to him, medical negligence occurs when the standard of
care a doctor gives to a patient is inadequate.

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Mr Seni Adio said for a
medical provider to be found liable, there must have been a duty of
care, a breach of that duty, and the patient must have suffered an
injury/damage as a result of the breach.

To succeed in an action for medical negligence, Adio said a
plaintiff must establish the three elements.

According to lawpadi.com, patients can sue a hospital or medical
professional for negligence and claim compensation if they received
poor or substandard treatment, were misdiagnosed, given the wrong
medication, or foreign objects were left in the body after an
operation, among others.

On who can sue, the website says: “Generally, only the person
who has been a victim of the medical error can sue. However, the
situation is different if the patient has passed away or the
patient is a child.

“If the patient has passed away, then the next of kin of the
patient e.g. husband, wife, parents, children etc can sue for
compensation. If a child, it will be the parent or the legal
guardian of the child.

“Doctors, nurses, dentists, opticians and all other medical
professionals owe what is legally known as a duty of care towards
their patients. When this duty is breached and the patient suffers
some damage then it gives rise to a potential claim for
compensation.

“It is important to note at this point, however, that the law
does not require the medical professionals to be perfect every time
they carry out their job. One hundred per cent perfection is not
humanly possible. What the law requires is that the medical
professional must exercise a reasonable standard of care from
them.

“So, if a doctor, nurse or other health professional treats you
with reasonable care, then you will probably not have a claim for
compensation. If the treatment you received was not of a reasonable
standard and this caused your injury, then you may have a
claim.

“The critical thing though is that if you are suing for
compensation, the claimant (the person suing) must have suffered
some harm as a result of the negligence of the act being complained
about.

“You have a period of three years to make a claim for
compensation and this time period runs from the date when you first
received the negligent treatment complained of or the date on which
you first discovered that the treatment was negligent.”

Agbakoba, Raji, Adegboruwa: Why medical malpractice litigations
are low

A former NBA President Dr Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) said there was
need for more enlightenment on medical rights.

“Medical malpractice is a nightmare in Nigeria. As a result of
weak regulatory and legal frameworks not much is in place to
prevent medical abuse.

“I believe general ignorance of Nigerians has not helped check
this menace, so it’s important that regulators, particularly
medical and dental practice board, should take a stronger view of
medical malpractice,” he said.

African Bar Association (AFBA) Justice Sector Programme
Commission Chairman Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa blamed low enforcement
of medical rights on ignorance.

According to him, majority of patients believe that doctors and
other medical personnel are beyond control.

“So, there is need for awareness in this regard in educating the
people on their rights,” he said.

Adegboruwa also identified poverty as a factor, saying: “In most
cases of medical negligence, the patient is at the mercy of the
doctor, who is taken as God-sent to save the life of the patient,
such that it may be counted as ingratitude where cases are
subsequently pursued.

“The patient in most cases does not have the resources to pursue
meaningful redress. Even at that, cultural practices tend to
portray aggrieved patients as trouble makers, especially where the
doctor involved is well known.”

On why less number of such cases ends up in court, he continued:
“Perhaps the most common factor, however, is the technicalities of
proof on the part of the complainant.

“Because parties did not set out for dispute initially, usually
there is no documented evidence to back up the complaints, as the
case file will usually be with the doctor.

“Even when there are resources and evidence, the procedure for
ventilating grievances is too technical and laborious to discourage
complainants.”

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Ahmed Raji, on why he thinks
there are not too many medical malpractice litigations, said until
recently, apart from general law of torts, medical law was not
taught in most of law faculties, nor are there enough specialists
in the area of medical negligence.

Also, most individuals who have the capacity to pursue such
matters in court do not receive medical treatment in Nigeria, he
said.

Raji added: “Majority of the victims either lack awareness
and/or resources to prosecute such matters in court. A lot of
issues are rationalised on ground of faith, hence most victims
don’t bother about courts as everything is attributed to God
especially where death is involved.”

Why some don’t sue

Many are discouraged by a tedious legal system in which cases
hardly end in court. Others are overwhelmed by a murderous system
that leaves potential litigators confused as to whom to hold
liable.

For instance, a political analyst and social commentator Mr Jide
Ojo found himself in such a situation.

His sister, Mrs Tolulope Brimah, a mother of four, would have
been 41 on August 15, 2016, but she was the victim of a failed
health system.

She took ill in 2016 and was admitted to the University College
Hospital (UCH), Ibadan. After being diagnosed with a heart related
ailment, she was placed on oxygen. But, she was weaned off the
oxygen after about a week later.

The family was asked to pay N3million for mitral valve
replacement. They rallied to raise the money. But Mrs Brimah had to
be stabilised before she could go through the procedure.

She was in the process of being stabilised when UCH resident
doctors embarked on a week’s warning strike around May 2016.

“Since it was a warning strike and not indefinite strike, and
since consultants as well as other medical staff were working, I
did not expect in-patients to be forcefully discharged.

“It was the forceful discharge of patients in critical
conditions that led to my sister’s relapse and eventual death the
following week at the Babcock University Teaching Hospital,”

Ojo told The Nation.

The manner of Mrs Brimah’s death could have been a subject of
litigation, with possible multiple defendants, including demands
for refunds and compensation.

Despite the treatment being terminated due to strike, the family
made full payment to the hospital, Ojo said.

Ojo is not even sure of who to hold responsible had the family
decided to seek compensation or legal remedies. He was also
discouraged by a legal system that is full of obstacles.

“There is no point seeking redress since my sister did not die
in UCH. I am not even sure the Medical and Dental Council has been
reconstituted by this administration.

“The wheel of justice also grinds very slowly due to
bureaucratic bottlenecks,” a clearly frustrated Ojo said. “My
sister was murdered by the system.”

As the Executive Director of Molluma Medico-Legal Centre at the
House of Justice in Kaduna, whose work focus on accountability for
medical malpractice and mass atrocities, Ms. Ballason Gloria
Mabeiam has been involved in several medical negligence
litigations.

On why low rate of medical negligence litigations in Nigeria,
she to The Nation: “There are many factors. First is there is low
public enlightenment about the rights of patients.

“Quite often patients do not know that they have the right to
know what exactly the health practitioner is doing and that when
things go wrong, they have a right to legal redress.

“Second, the question of who to hold responsible is a challenge.
Do you hold the laboratory technician for the wrong test results or
the doctor for wrong diagnosis or the nurse for the wrong injection
or pills?

“So understanding causation is more than cause and effect. It
involves proving that someone did or neglected to carry out a
preventable act which led to injury or death of a patient”

Mabeiam was also of the view that a person who suffered an
injury may not want to take it up because they think the cost is
high, coupled with the perception that justice may be delayed or
denied.

“To these, I often say the legal system must first be engaged
before people can say for real that it doesn’t work. Too often the
assumptions are sweeping,” Mabeiam said.

Another major factor, she said, are beliefs. “Something goes
wrong and instead of demanding accountability, some say: ‘It’s how
God wanted it’ or ‘Let’s leave it to God.’ In actuality, God wills
ill to no man and He has given man the right to call matters to
account here on earth,” said Mabeiam.

On challenges, the lawyer said they include patients reporting
and sometimes refusing to follow through because they get
emotionally exhausted from the slow grind of the judicial
system.

Also, doctors sometimes use the Hippocratic Oath to shield their
colleagues by refusing to give information or evidence that will be
useful in securing convictions or proving claims.

The Centre found that quite a number of health practitioners
make assumptions that have no medical or factual basis as far as
diagnosis is concerned.

“It’s typical to go to a hospital and instead of running tests
the doctor just asks basic questions and rounds it up to malaria or
typhoid. They rarely document the process. So, finding sufficient
medical records to identify negligence or malpractice could be
challenging,” she said.

Proving medical malpractice

The Molluma Medico-Legal Centre handled the case of State vs
Sunday Oppah, which highlights the difficulty in proving medical
negligence.

Mr Sunday Oppah was said to have touted himself as a medical
doctor. He claimed to be an oncologist and a field worker with the
World Health Organisation (WHO). He ‘treated’ many cancer
patients.

By the time a complaint got to the Centre, Oppah had stopped a
young lady battling breast cancer from receiving any other
treatment from India, Ahmadu Bello University Teaching Hospital or
the National Hospital because he claimed higher expertise.

Oppah had also told the lady she could skip mastectomy and
instead use a ‘new’ medical intervention he was employing on her.
Tragically, the lady died.

Oppah had also given a young man a wrong cancer diagnosis. The
young man was fortunate because when the Centre intervened, another
doctor ran a different test which showed he was cancer-free. The
medication was discontinued, but there was quite some damage on the
young man.

The Centre got the Police to arrest Oppah. The case was
prosecuted from Magistrate to the High court.

The verdict? The court sentenced Oppah to two years imprisonment
with an option of fine.

The court claimed the state was unable to prove that Oppah had
any intent/motive to kill and, therefore, the charge of homicide
could not be sustained.

“By the way, it was very difficult to get people to testify and
give evidence. To my mind, where there is wanton disregard for a
person’s safety resulting in death or injury, it should be
sufficient to ground criminal convictions.

“Where death results, even if motive cannot be proved but there
is evidence that inextricably links and explains a death, then a
case of negligent homicide should be found,” Mabeiam argued.

To underscore the difficulty in proving medical negligence, a
lawyer and partner at Cass Legal, Mr Adebajo Odutola, said his firm
received a complaint from a patient who suffered a serious medical
injury due to a doctor’s negligence. They interviewed 17 other
doctors who all agreed that their colleague was negligent.

However, none of the doctors agreed to testify in court should a
suit be filed.

Odutola said: “Our firm was retained by a woman who intends to
sue her doctor for negligence. It remains one of the worst cases of
medical negligence I have encountered.

“The curious thing, however, is that none of those doctors (all
17 of them) agreed to testify as an expert witness.

“They all bluntly refused, mumbling something about professional
courtesy and their reluctance to ‘spoil someone else’s life’.

“It is shameful that professionals continue to aid each other
even where such professional has acted in a way that falls short of
the standard expected of them.”

A medical doctor, Ugonna Ajoku, gave an insight into why his
colleagues would not testify.

“I’m a medical doctor with a keen interest in medico-legal
issues. I’m quite sure you won’t find a Nigerian doctor practicing
in Nigeria who’ll agree to testify.

“The testifier would be marked as a ‘snitch’ and after you’ve
won your case as a happy lawyer, the doctor is made to face the
hostilities within the practice…Your doctor will testify if there’s
a way to keep him anonymous,” he said.

He suggested a way out: “Find a way to keep your testifier
anonymous or get someone who preferably isn’t Nigerian and doesn’t
practice here.”

Political will needed

The government’s neglect of the health sector does not help
matters. That the sector is poorly funded is no longer news. The
rich prefer to go abroad for treatment.

The Muhammadu Buhari administration dissolved the MDCN about
three and half years ago. While it remained dissolved, the Medical
and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (MDPDT) could not
function.

The board was only inaugurated in November 2018, after much
damage had been done.

Osanyin noted that the Council was reconstituted only after
several bodies clamored for it, with the Nigerian Medical
Association threatening strike.

“The Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal
(MDPDT) is saddled with the responsibility of sanctioning erring
practitioners who have been indicted by the Medical and Dental
Practitioners Investigative Panel after they have established a
prima-facie case against the practitioner.

“However, the tribunal doesn’t award compensation,” he said.

Osayin believes that the delay in constituting the MDCN led to
the emergence of what he called defensive medicine in Nigeria.

“The major reason for this is that doctors who have pending
cases at the investigative panel or disciplinary tribunal, in an
attempt to avoid another reoccurrence of a petition, over-diagnose,
over-investigate and exaggerate treatment of patients.

“Do not forget that some of these cases have been left pending
for four to five years. You can imagine a practitioner having such
encumbrance for such a lengthy period of time.

“Essentially, hospitals practice defensive medicine which
invariably leads to high cost of medical treatment.”

‘Review Medical Act’

A prosecutor at the MDPDT, Mr Ahmed Adetola-Kazeem, called for
an amendment of the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act to make
the MDCN more professional.

According to the Lagos lawyer, cases of medical negligence and
medical malpractice have been on the rise and most do not get
reported to the MDCN, which regulates the practice of medicine in
Nigeria.

“Even even when such cases are reported, justice is either
delayed or totally denied due to the incessant dissolution of the
Council at the beginning of every administration and failure to
constitute it on time.

“It took the present administration about three and half years
to constitute the Council which have the powers to investigate and
discipline erring medical and dental practitioners.

“From my experience as a prosecutor before the MDPDT, many cases
of medical negligence and professional misconduct have been
abandoned half way at the MDPDT since the dissolution of the
Council in 2015.”

Despite the Council being constituted, Adetola-Kazeem said a lot
of damage had been done.

“It will be difficult if not impossible for the victims to get
justice in 2019, when the tribunal will reconvene. Most witnesses
would have lost interest in the cases or be absent at the trial due
to travel, ill health, death or any other reason. Files might also
not be found in some cases.

“The cases will also have to start de-novo (afresh), thereby
putting the victims in a very difficult situation of having to
travel to Abuja where the sitting holds, irrespective of the stage
where the matter was before the dissolution,” he said.

He said the situation makes it easy for many doctors to keep
engaging in unwholesome activities that lead to avoidable
deaths.

Calling for a review of the enabling law, Adetola-Kazeem said:
“Sadly, many of the Council’s dissolutions have, at many times in
the past, been engineered by some top officials of the Council who
benefit from the dissolutions.

“It is hoped that the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act will
be reviewed so that the requirement of the President appointing the
Chairman and some members of the Council will be removed and the
Council can act like other professional regulatory bodies that
don’t get dissolved by the political class but simply ran like a
professional body that it is.

“I sincerely hope that a time comes when victims of medical
negligence are sure of getting justice and erring medical
practitioners are equally sure of reaping the fruit of their
negligence through warning, suspension, fines or having their names
struck off the register of Medical and Dental Practitioners in
Nigeria.”

Endless litigations

The slow wheel of justice is another factor that discourages
patients who suffer injuries from seeking legal redress. For
instance, trial started in October 2018 after almost a four-year
delay in the case of Nabil Hanga, which was filed in 2014.

The Estate of Nabil Hanga and the deceased’s father Mr Mustapher
Hanga sued Royal Cross Medical Center Ltd, De Flight Medics Ltd,
Olamide Orekunrin, Oyedele Jibayo and Olukunle Orekunrin at the
Lagos State High Court, Igbosere.

The claimants, who accused the defendants of causing Hanga’s
death through negligence, are suing for N1.1 billion and are
demanding a refund of $135,000 which they paid for the air
ambulance.

The claimants sought an order compelling Royal Cross Medical
Center to pay them N300 million, being damages for loss of income
and costs incurred in Hanga’s treatment.

They are praying the court to order De Flight Medics and its
management to pay them N500 million in general damages for
emotional distress, financial and social disability caused by their
alleged reckless behavior; N200million as aggravated damages; N100
million, being the cost of initiating and prosecuting the case, and
10 percent interest on the judgment sum until final
liquidation.

The late Hanga was a 26-year-old post-graduate student of
Stamford University and a businessman.

According to the family, the late Hanga went to Royal Cross
Medical Center on May 10, 2012 for treatment. The claimants said he
died “prematurely” on board the plane in which the second to fifth
defendants were conveying him to the United Kingdom for further
treatment.

They alleged that his body “was eventually dumped at Kano where
the family collected the corpse”. The claimants alleged that the
hospital misdiagnosed the late Hanga and the doctor that treated
him “erroneously allowed him to go home” when treatment had not
been completed.

According to them, his condition deteriorated overnight and he
was rushed to another clinic for urgent medical attention, from
where he was later transferred to another Lagos hospital, but he
died on May 12, 2012. The family said Hanga would not have died had
Royal Cross Medical Center not been allegedly negligent at
first.

The claimants, through their lawyer Mr Bruce Ighalo, said Royal
Cross Medical Center “negligently failed to provide the medical
treatments that Nabil Hanga required which he was at their
facilities to receive.”

The family said the deceased should have been admitted for
follow-up procedure and tests rather than allowing him to go home
on that occasion.

On the hospital’s alleged negligence, the claimants said it was
discovered that the late Hanga had blood in his urine.

“The first defendant (Royal Cross Medical Center) failed to
carry out urgent tests, investigations, and scans ordinarily
necessary to establish the extent of damages and or illness that
Nabil Hanga came to them for,” the claimants said.

They further alleged that De Flight Medics, which was allegedly
paid to fly the late Hanga to the United Kingdom, does not have or
own an air ambulance and is not authorised to operate any but
leases private passenger planes not designed as air ambulances
“through which they extorted money from the claimants”.

They alleged that the company was set up “to extort money from
unsuspecting victims like the claimants who at desperate and
precarious situations will usually not have enough time to make
investigations before parting with money for their services”.

The claimants said family members rallied to get foreign
exchange within a short time and a total of $135,000.00 was paid at
De Flight Medics office in Lagos in the early hours of May 11,
2012.

The claimants averred that Hanga died about one and a half hours
after the take-off of a De Flight Medics plane, which allegedly had
to detour to Kano to dump the dead body with the family.

The family said Olamide Orekunrin, a medical doctor at De Flight
Medics, “is not a registered medical doctor in Nigeria”.

“Though she was registered in the United Kingdom, she was
subsequently suspended for misleading a hospital authority in the
United Kingdom,” the claimants alleged.

The claimants alleged: “The aircraft provided by the second to
fifth defendants was in no way a medicalised air ambulance as it
was not equipped for advance life support and did not have an
interior that reflected this.

“The aircraft ambulance did not have ventilators, medications,
ECG and monitoring units, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPRA)
equipment and stretcher.

“The aircraft had no provision for drips/drips-stand, no
convenience, no sockets to plug medical gadgets. We hereby plead
the report prepared by Dr Shirley N. Amaechi…”

But, Royal Cross Medical Centre, in its statement of defence,
denied every allegation contained in the original statement of
claim and urged the court to dismiss the claim with substantial
cost.

De Flight Medics denied the allegations, saying the late Hanga
was already at a critical stage before being evacuated. It also
denied the claim that its aircraft was not an ambulance, saying the
plane was equipped with medical facilities.

Olamide Orekunrin denied that she was not qualified to practice
in Nigeria as a medical doctor, while the De-Flight Medics and
management denied the extortion allegations, adding the claimants
were not entitled to any refund.

They urged the court to dismiss the suit. The trial will
continue on February 6, but with appeals still likely to follow
after defence and judgment, is there an end in sight?

Another medical negligent case that is yet to make a headway in
court is the one initiated in 2016 by an Abuja law firm, Abalaka
and Co, on behalf Portia Sambo, the mother of late Sandra
David.

The estate of Portia Sambo sued the Federal Staff Hospital,
Abuja for allegedly negligently causing the death of her
daughter.

The plaintiff is demanding a compensation of N500 million from
the hospital for alleged ineptitude in the treatment of the late
Miss David for correction of a complication in her gallbladder.

The plaintiff accused the hospital of causing the late Miss
David’s condition to deteriorate. The deceased, 29, who worked at
the Bank of Agriculture, was in March diagnosed with gall bladder
complications requiring surgical correction.

She had asked for only a few days off work and went for
treatment. The hospital denied the allegation of negligence.

The suit, filed in 2016 at the Federal High Court in Abuja, is
yet to be heard. When the case came up on November 15, it was
further adjourned until next month due to docket congestion.

Way forward

Consumer Protection Council (CPC) Director-General Babatunde
Irukera, speaking at an NBA Section on Business Law (SBL)
conference on Medicine, Accountability and Law, called for holistic
reforms and improvement of critical components of patient care,
including infrastructure.

“Can professional responsibility bridge the infrastructure and
outcomes gap?” he wondered. Among others, he wants a code that
defines standard of care.

A pharmacist, Taiwo Dairo, said good medical practice also
involves allied healthcare professionals, such as pharmacists, who
he said must not supply to patients any drug or medicine likely to
be abused and which may be detrimental to health, such as
counterfeit medicine.

A professor of surgery at the Benue State University, Shima
Gyoh, said each doctor must recognise and accept their limits.
General medical practitioners cannot do what specialists who deal
in in-depth treatment of conditions can, he noted.

Patients, he said, should participate fully in all major health
decisions. He also wants a review of the law which provides that
the Minister of Health can act when the MDCN does not exist. To
him, this is wrong as the ministry cannot perform the functions of
the medical tribunal.

According to Gyoh, many medical practitioners go through
training and start practicing without knowing anything about
medical regulation, which he said “does not happen in the legal
profession”.

A medico-legal consultant, Dr Joel Akande, called for a review
of some state laws that appear to be in conflict with federal
laws.

He added: “The critical issue affecting laws and medico-legal
practice in Nigeria is enforcement.

“Supremacy of the rule of law in general is subsumed and/or
affected by customary issues, religion, ethnicity, poor access to
justice, need for restructuring of the legal system for speedy,
efficient, accessible and fair dispensation of justice; insurance
structure and enforcement, and poverty and ignorance.

“Also, we have an obsolete mental health law (a part of
healthcare that accounts for 20 per cent). No effective
medico-legal system can exist without addressing these issues,” he
said.

Adio called for better enforcement of existing laws, saying:
“Section 303 of the Criminal Code provides for holding a medical
practitioner criminally liable for acts constituting gross
negligence.”

Osayin, who is the convener, Nigerian Medical Law Summit, said
as the “medical law malpractice industry” has come to stay,
healthcare and legal professionals need to develop capacity in the
area.

He called for compulsory professional indemnity insurance for
healthcare practitioners, as well as compulsory teaching of medical
laws in all medical schools / colleges of medicine, as well as
public enlightenment.

Adeyanju, a lawyer with the Socio-Economic Rights and
Accountability Project (SERAP), urged other civil society
organisations to beam their searchlights on activities of health
institutions and workers.

“People are not aware that they have medical rights. SERAP and a
few others are doing advocacy on medical rights and health sector
reforms but others need to join.

“More people should file cases even at the ECOWAS Court so that
there will be more pronouncements to drive advocacy. We need more
hands on deck.

“The rights in Chapter 2 of the Constitution are now justiceable
because the ECOWAS has pronounced on it, but there is limited
jurisprudence on it. The African Charter on Human and Peoples
Rights has been domesticated, as well as other international
conventions that have been ratified, which make health rights
justiceable. So it means anyone can go to court and enforce them,”
she said.

For Mabeiam, the chicken is coming home to roost. She said:
“This year, there was the tragic case of a medical doctor who died
due to medical malpractice. A hospital secretary also reported to
our centre on the notorious situation of wrong or assumed tests.
People just scribble down test results without checking a
patients.

“It is now becoming increasingly clear that stakeholders need to
agree to take up the issue of accountability squarely as the victim
could be anyone. We are some way off but we are glad that we are
well into the journey.

“I will call for more awareness about patient rights. This
should be included in the primary documents a patient receives in
the hospital. Knowing your rights enables you to ask questions and
to keep track of the process.

“We also call on the MDCN, who often say their mandate is to
regulate medical practice not medical practitioners, to widen the
scope of their mandate in order to accommodate both.

“What needs to be done is to ensure that patients who do not
have to die stay alive and when they are killed when they shouldn’t
die, that we pull legal and medical resources to ensure
accountability.

“This will create a big win for everyone because quacks will be
flushed out of the system so the real health practitioners can
thrive, medical and health standards will be raised and lives will
be saved.”

Culled from Thenation

Related