Questions on Mandela book fiasco

To borrow liberally from an oftenused expression, it’s a pity one can’t choose one’s family.

Chances are South Africa’s greatest icon, Nelson Mandela, was not proud of all the members of his big family.

And who would blame him; some of his relatives have sought to profit from the Mandela name without paying heed to the damage their actions can do to the reputation of the statesman.

Take the latest saga involving the recent publication of a book on Mandela by Dr Vejay Ramlakan, the late president’s state-provided medical doctor.

Ramlakan has faced a storm of criticism by Mandela’s widow, Graça Machel, and his grandson Mandla Mandela, among others, for revealing intimate and confidential details about Mandela’s last months and days before his death in December 2013.

What is astonishing about the matter is that Ramlakan has defended himself by saying “the family” approved of the publication of the book. It has since been withdrawn by the publishers. But Ramlakan won’t say who specifically in the family gave him the green light.

Given the well-documented family history of squabbles over Mandela’s legacy and worldly possessions, we are inclined to believe Ramlakan that someone in the family approved the project. It follows that it can only be someone very senior.

Then there is the matter of Ramlakan the medical doctor.

Under normal circumstances doctors are forbidden from divulging their clients’ medical records under the so-called doctorpatient confidentiality “rule”.

In this case, Mandela is no more, so it can be argued that his medical condition was in no need of protection. In addition, Mandela was no ordinary man and there is huge public interest even in his private affairs, which is why the publishers funded the book’s publication in the first place.

But wasn’t Ramlakan under some obligation, if not legal, then moral, to keep confidential our icon’s medical matters, as is the norm with members of his profession?

This is indeed a very complex case with no easy answers. Which is why we hope it ends up in a court of law, or some independent body, so an impartial arbiter can pass judgment.