REQUIRING POLICE REPORT BEFORE TREATING GUN SHOT VICTIMS IN NIGERIA.

Edited By Asykobi

This excerpt examines the process of notifying the police of gunshot injuries before  doctors can treat the victims in Nigeria. It argues that the process is of doubtful criminological value, as it has not had any notable impact in terms of aiding the arrest of violent criminals, and by same token, reduction of violent crimes in Nigeria. Based on this, it is further argued that the there is no justification for the breach of ethical obligations of doctors to preserve life and act in the best interest of their patients.

Generally, the paper maintains that Nigerian doctors should stick to their primary calling of preserving and restoring health; they should not be transformed into law enforcement machinery that compromise interest of patients.
Within the ethical confines in which they operate, doctors at different times may have to make difficult choices between protecting societal interests, such as control of crimes, and protecting the individual private interests of their patients. The appropriate stand of doctors in such context has been a subject of divergent opinions and views. Two judicial commentaries, though of different periods, reflect the divergence.
Avory J once declared,
There are cases where the desire to preserve [the confidential relation which exists between the medical man and his patient] must be subordinated to the duty which is cast on every good citizen to assist in the investigation of serious crime.
In more recent times, the Supreme Court of Canada, declared,
The primary concern of physicians… must be the care of their patients… Physician must not be made part of the law enforcement machinery of the state.
The subject of appropriate role of doctors in crime control, or public interest, plays out in the practice among generality of doctors in Nigeria not to treat victims suffering from gunshot injuries without prior report of the injuries to the police.Recurrent reports in newspapers and other media reflect the high rates of armed robberies and other violent crimes in Nigeria. One of the measures of the Nigerian police to confront the crimes is an arrangement that doctors should not treat gun shot victims without a prior notification of the injury to the police. 

 This, seemingly, translates to obtaining ‘police clearance’ or authorization before treating gunshot victims. The reasoning for this device is that it offers some chances of detecting and apprehending felons who might have sustained gun shot injuries in the course of activities. Essentially, doctors stand like dragnets in which some violent criminals may be enmeshed in the course of seeking medical attention. There is no provision in the Nigerian Police Act  that specifically authorizes the Nigeria Police Force to fetter the hands of doctors in the treatment of patients suffering from gun shot injuries. There is also no legislation compelling doctors to notify the police or require a police report before treating gunshot victims. 

Summarily, doctors are ethically required to avoid external interference in taking decisions whether and how to treat patients. Legitimacy for the procedure, perhaps, can be set within the framework of some relevant statutory provisions. One of such provisions is section 4 of the Police Act, which empowers the police to undertake “prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, the protection of life and property.” Arguably, some support also seems to lie in section 34 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides,
 “Every person is bound to assist a…police officer reasonably demanding his aid- [a.] in the taking or preventing the escape of any other person whom such…police officer is authorized to arrest.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE RIGHTS OF AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD IN NIGERIA

Image
Edited By: Asykobi An illegitimate child has been referred to as a child born out of wedlock, while a legitimate child is an issue of wedlock. Plainly, a child born out of wedlock whose paternity has been acknowledged by his natural father is as much legitimate as one born in wedlock. That is not the case, however. A child born out of wedlock during a marriage is illegitimate under the Act, whether or not the child is acknowledged by the natural father; unless by custom, someone else has a prior claim to paternity of such a child. Where a child is born out of wedlock, the first question is who is entitled to the paternity of the child? The question is essential, particularly in a polygamous setting. The controversy as regards paternity has always been between the natural father and the mother’s father or the person who has paid the bride price on the mother. Customs vary. A majority of communities favor the claim of the man who had paid the bride price of the mother. This...
Read more

RIGHT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW

Image
Edited By : Asy'kobi Under the Nigerian criminal justice the constitutional right of an accused person is enshrined in Section 35 and 36 of the Constitution of  the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 such rights include, the right to be informed promptly in the language that he understands, the details and nature of the offence of the accused, the right to be given adequate time to prepare his defence, the right to defend himself in person or by legal practitioner of his own choice, the right to have an interpreter free of charge if he does not understand the language of the court, the right to have record of the proceeding kept and the right to have copies of this within seven days of the conclusion of the case, the right to remain silent during the trial, the right not to be tried and convicted twice for the same offence, the right to be presumed innocent until he is proved guilty and the right not to be charged for an unwritten offence. All these rights are aimed at ensurin...
Read more

IMMUNITY CLAUSE OF SECTION 308 OF THE NIGERIAN CONSTITUTION

Image
Edited by: Asy"kobi Meaning and limits of section  308 The provisions of section 308 of the Constitution came up for interpretation in the case of  Abacha vs. Fawehinmi,  wherein his lordship, Uwaifo, J.S.C., held thus: The immunity provided for does not apply to the person in question in his official capacity or to a civil or criminal proceeding in which such a person is only a nominal party. The immunity is to protect such a person from the harassment of his person while in office for his action done in his private capacity before or during his tenure in office. In fact in the present case, the suit is against the “Head of State and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces (General Sani Abacha) ” and it is in respect of his alleged action in his official capacity. The immunity provided for in the Constitution does not arise and does not apply. Also, in  Rotimi vs. MacGregor,  the then Military Governor of Western State, 1 st  appellant herein,...
Read more