Over the course of a quarter of a century, the Health Professions Council of SA has tried and failed at a cost of more than R20m to sanction Dr Wouter Basson for professional misconduct related to his role as former head of the apartheid government’s secret chemical and biological warfare programme. Basson has now applied for a permanent stay of proceedings, accusing the HPCSA of “ulterior motives”.
His advocate, Jaap Cilliers SC, in his written submissions in a Gauteng High Court, cited HPCSA minutes that gave the impression the “overriding motivation” for incurring exorbitant costs was the “fear for public scrutiny” and to prevent a “speculative public outcry”.
The HPCSA wants to try Basson, dubbed Dr Death, for a second time for professional misconduct related to his role as the former head of the apartheid government’s secret chemical and biological warfare programme, Project Coast, reports News24.
Cilliers questioned whether it was in the public interest that the Council, whose main objective is to protect the public against the unprofessional conduct of medical practitioners, spent further funds to pursue him when there was no evidence anyone was a victim of his actions or that a doctor-patient relationship even existed.
“It is clear… that the merits of the allegations against Dr Basson and/or the protection of patients and/or the general public were not considerations for the HPCSA and/or the subcommittee to pursue the matter,” Cilliers charged. It should be considered that the HPCSA had already spent R20m on the case so far, Cilliers argued, and that within the context of the inquiry, there was no evidence that a member of the public was a victim of his “alleged unprofessional conduct” or that a doctor-patient relationship existed.
The State is paying Basson’s legal costs.
Cilliers said Basson also faced trial-related prejudice as he remained without an expert witness to testify on medical ethics, specifically within the context of the military.
Former SADF surgeon-general Niel Knobel, who testified in the initial proceedings, has since died.
Basson, a cardiologist who has been practising since leaving the South African National Defence Force (SADF) in 1996, instituted his application after the HPCSA notified him of the inquiry last year, more than two decades after complaints were laid.
Citing an “unreasonable delay” in the watchdog’s action against him, he maintained he was acting as a soldier in the then-SADF, not as a medical doctor. However, the professional conduct inquiry found him guilty in 2014, ruling that he had contravened international protocols and conventions and saying he could not rely on military orders to escape his duties as a doctor.
The ruling came seven years after he was charged and half a decade after he was acquitted on criminal charges.
But Basson fought the finding, and in 2019, the Gauteng High Court found in his favour for the recusal of two biased committee members who had been members of medical associations that had advocated for his removal from the medical register.
Thereafter, the HPCSA “fruitlessly”, said his lawyer, unsuccessfully applied for leave to appeal at the trial court, the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court in February 2020.
Three months later, the HPCSA’s professional conduct review committee recommended the matter not be pursued further, “due to the financial risk to the organisation”.
A month later, it met again, noting that the review committee had advised that the case should not be pursued, although it identified “critical issues”.
These included the case having “major public interest”, which would result in public scrutiny should it be abandoned because of costs, which might be construed as a wrong precedent.
The Council then resolved to continue to pursue the matter.
Two and a half years later, the HPCSA’s deputy company secretariat sent a memo to its professional conduct division, questioning whether it still had “the appetite to prosecute” as no progress had been made in appointing the committee.
In November 2022, its Medical and Dental Professions Board met, and questioned it about its “ultimate aim” in pursuing the case. It resolved to proceed.
In July 2023, the members of the initial inquiry formally recused themselves in accordance with the High Court order, and on 14 August 2024, Basson was notified of the new inquiry, due to start on 19 September but later postponed to December as one of the committee members was sick.
Cilliers argued that Basson, now 74, had already “been subjected to emotional anxiety and stress” as well as a financial burden, and that the inquiry also “invades his right to liberty and as an individual”.
He questioned the purpose of further proceedings based on events from 40 years ago.
The HPCSA, which has yet to file its written submissions, denied an unreasonable delay in its initial papers, considering it had been corresponding with Basson’s attorneys since 2020 to convene a new committee.
The SA Medical Association (SAMA) maintains Basson should be removed from the medical register, and has expressed support for the HPCSA’s renewed proceedings, calling for a “just outcome”.
“Accountability in medicine is not subject to expiry. Medical ethics apply in all contexts, including military service, and Dr Basson’s actions were inconsistent with the duties of a medical professional,” said SAMA chairperson Dr Mzulungile Nodikida.
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
HPCSA’s ‘comedy of errors’ in disciplinary pursuit of Dr Death
‘Dr Death’ still awaits charge sheet from HPCSA