|
EDITORIAL: The right
to medical care
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has often spoken of his respect for the judiciary,
pledged to never interfere in individual cases and lectured government officials
on acting in accordance with the law. However, the recent brouhaha over former
president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) sudden transfer from Taipei Veterans General
Hospital (TVGH) in Taipei to a prison hospital in Greater Taichung suggests
otherwise.
Chen, serving a 20-year jail sentence for corruption, has been diagnosed with
severe depression, sleep apnea, non-typical Parkinson’s disease, speech disorder
and mild cerebral atrophy. Yet, despite a professional evaluation by Chou Yuan-hua
(周元華), Chen’s attending physician at TVGH, who said the former president should
be allowed to convalesce at home or at a hospital closer to home where he can
benefit from family support, the Ministry of Justice early on Friday morning
abruptly moved Chen to Taichung Prison’s Pei Teh Hospital without notifying
Chen’s family.
Granted, the matter is within the ministry’s mandate, but can judicial
authorities truly say they had acted in accordance with the law as Ma has often
instructed them to do so?
When it comes to providing medical treatment to prisoners, the Prison Act
(監獄行刑法) states that the ministry has the option of applying medical treatment in
prison, transferring the patient to a prison hospital or receiving treatment
outside prison and granting medical parole — all of which are aimed at the
speedy recovery of the patient.
Taking into account that the first clause in Article 7 of the Administrative
Procedure Act (行政程序法) states that the conduct and methods adopted by a
government agency, in a bid to guarantee people’s rights and enhance
administrative efficiency, as well as public trust in the government, “should be
helpful in achieving the purpose,” one has to wonder whether relocating Chen to
a prison hospital is the best way to achieve the purpose of treating Chen.
After all, TVGH clearly suggested in its report that convalescence at home or at
a hospital closer to home that allows Chen to benefit from family support is
better suited to treating Chen’s ailments. However, by sending Chen to a prison
hospital, judicial authorities have not only blatantly disregarded the
hospital’s professional assessment, but may have violated the Administrative
Procedure Act.
Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu (曾勇夫), in response to condemnation by angry
pan-green lawmakers over Chen’s sudden transfer, reminded the public that “Chen
is not only a patient, but also an inmate.”
Indeed, “do the crime, do the time” and Chen, convicted of corruption, should
serve time in accordance with the law.
However, Chen’s right to medical care should not be neglected just because he is
a prisoner. As the first clause of Article 10 of the Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights states: “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated
with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.”
Quick to come to the ministry’s defense, Ma said that Chen has already been
accorded special treatment, as he will have access to an 800m2 special
convalescence area and be allowed unlimited visits by family members.
That may be true, but the issue is not how much space Chen is given to walk
around, rather, it is the professional medical care and environment that can
best help him recover.
As Chen’s physical and mental state continues to deteriorate, prompting concern
among human rights activists, one can only hope that the Ma government realizes
that the sanctity of life — including that of a prisoner — is no laughing
matter.
|
