World Health Organization Discontinues Relations with World Medical Association

http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.nuun1982_04

Use of the Aluka digital library is subject to Aluka’s Terms and Conditions, available at http://www.aluka.org/page/about/termsConditions.jsp. By using Aluka, you agree that you have read and will abide by the Terms and Conditions. Among other things, the Terms and Conditions provide that the content in the Aluka digital library is only for personal, non-commercial use by authorized users of Aluka in connection with research, scholarship, and education.

The content in the Aluka digital library is subject to copyright, with the exception of certain governmental works and very old materials that may be in the public domain under applicable law. Permission must be sought from Aluka and/or the applicable copyright holder in connection with any duplication or distribution of these materials where required by applicable law.

Aluka is a not-for-profit initiative dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of materials about and from the developing world. For more information about Aluka, please see http://www.aluka.org World Health Organization Discontinues Relations with World Medical Association

Alternative title Notes and Documents - Centre Against ApartheidNo. 4/82 Author/Creator United Nations Centre against Apartheid Publisher United Nations, New York Date 1982-02-00 Resource type Reports Language English Subject Coverage (spatial) South Africa Coverage (temporal) 1981 - 1982 Source Northwestern University Libraries Description The World Medical Association (WMA) decided in September 1981 -ignoring appeals by the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid and others - to readmit the Medical Association of South Africa and to admit the medical association of the so-called "independent" state of Transkei. The Special Committee then requested the World Health Organization (WHO) to discontinue relations with WMA. The WHO Executive Board decided on 27 January 1982 - by a vote of 27 to one (United States of America) with one abstention - to discontinue official relations with WMA. The WMA may be readmitted on application, "if it reverses its position regarding readmission of the Medical Association of South Africa, and the admission of the Medical Association of the so-called 'independent' homeland of Transkei". Attached herewith are: (a) Text of message sent to WHO by the Chairman of the SpecialCommittee against Apartheid, H.E. Alhaji Yusuff Maitama-Sule (); (b) Statement before the WHO Executive Board by the representative of the Special Committee, H.E. Mr. James Victor Gbeho (). Format extent 9 page(s) (length/size)

http://www.aluka.org http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.nuun1982_04

http://www.aluka.org NOTES AND DOCUMENTS*

NOTES AND DOCUMENTS* No. 4/82 February 1982 WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION DISCONTINUES RELATIONS WITH.'WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION -Note: The World Medical Association (WMA) decided in September 1981 ignoring appeals by the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid and others - to readmit the Medical Association of South Africa and to admit the medical association of the so-called "independent" state of Transkei. The Special Committee then requested the World Health Organization (WHO) to discontinue relations with WMA. The WHO Executive Board decided on 27 January 1982 - by a vote of 27 to one (United States of America) with one abstention - to discontinue official relations with WMA. The WMA may be readmitted on application, "if it reverses its position regarding readmission of the Medical Association of South Africa, and the admission of the Medical Association of the so-called 'independent' homeland of Transkei". Attached herewith are: (a) Text of message sent to WHO by the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, H.E. Alhaji Yusuff Maitama-Sule (Nigeria); (b) Statement before the WHO Executive Board by the representative of the Special Committee, H.E. Mr. James Victor Gbeho (Ghana). All material in these noies ahd'4o6uni'nfs ma' be freely reprinted. . Acknowledgement, together with a copy of te 6ub-4catiowcon-taining the - reprint, would be-appreciated.

TELEGRAM DATED 20 JANUARY 1982 FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE AGAINST APARTHEID, H. E. ALHAJI YUSUFF MAITAMA-SULE, ADDRESSED TO THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION SPECIAL COMMITTEE AGAINST APARTHEID HAS NOTED WITH GREAT REGRET AND INDIGNATION THAT WMA DECIDED TO READMIT MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH AFRICA (MASA) IGNORING NUMEROUS APPEALS BY MEDICAL ASSOCIATIONS, MEDICAL AND HEALTH PERSONNEL IN SOUTH AFRICA, AND ANTI-APARTHEID GROUPS AS WELL AS SPECIAL COMMITTEE. MASA IS AN INSTITUTION WITHIN APARTHEID SYSTEM, CONDEMNED BY INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AS CRIMINAL. IT HAS VIRTUALLY CONDONED BEHAVIOUR OF DOCTORS INVOLVED IN MURDER OF STEVE BIKO, SOUTH AFRICAN PATRIOT, DESPITE DEMANDS FOR ACTION BY LEADING MEDICAL EXPERTS CONCERNED OVER MEDICAL ETHICS. WMA HAS FURTHER DEFIED INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY BY ADMITTING MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OF TRANSKEI. SPECIAL COMMITTEE RECALLS THAT UNITED NATIONS HAS UNANIMOUSLY DENOUNCED SO-CALLED "INDEPENDENCE" OF THIS BANTUSTAN AND CALLEL ON ALL GOVERNMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS TO REFRAIN FROM ANY RECOGNITION OF, OR CO-OPERATION WITH IT. SPECIAL COMMITTEE CONSIDERS THAT COLLABORATION WITH APARTHEID REGIME AND INSTITUTIONS BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES IS TOTALLY INADMISSIBLE. IT DRAWS ATTENTION TO UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 36/172 LADOPTED ON 17 DECEMBER 1981, CALLING UPON ALL NON- GOVEUMNA. ORGANIZATIONS WHICH HAVE NOT YET DONE SO TO DESIST FROM ANY FORM OF COLLABORATION WITH APARTHEID REGIME AND INSTITUTIONS BASED ON RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN SOUTH AFRICA. I TRUST THAT WHO WILL DEMAND THAT WMA CEASE FORTHWITH ITS COLLABORATION WITH APARTHEID AND BANTUSTANS AND DECIDE TO SUSPEND RELATIONS WITH WMA PENDING SUCH ACTION.

STATWRZT BY H.E. MR. JAMES VICTOR GBXHO (GHANA) ON BEHALF OF THE SPECIAL COMdrITM AGAINST APARTHEID AT 711P MFFTING OF THE FX CUTIVF B!IARD OF THE UOPLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IN GOENEVA 26 January 1982 I am grateful to the Executive Board of the World Health Organization for making it possible for the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid, which I have the honour to represent, to express directly to the Board its total disagreement with the World Medical Association (WMA) in readmitting the Medical Association of South Africa (MASA). The Chairman of the Special Committee, H. E. Alhaji Yusuff Maitama-Sule, would have liked to make the presentation today but for other pressing duties in New York. I have been deputized to speak for the Committee and I crave your indulgence in conveying to you the reaction of the Committee to the extraordinary and regrettable decision of WHA to readmit MASA and admit that of the so-called Transkei. The reaction of the Special Committee to the decision taken by WHA in September 1981 is one of regret and indignation because the Committee, together with a number of medical associations in Africa and elsewhere, had appealed in the name of humanity to those who were then instrumental in orchestrating the readmission of MASA not to do so, but had been ignored. It seems, therefore, that some members of WMA are more concerned with the international image of a country whose policies towards the overwhelming majority of its citizenry have been determined a crime against the conscience and dignity of mankind by the United Nations, than the well-being of those suppressed. The United Nations General Assembly, acting on the recommendations of the Special Committee, has repeatedly called for the total isolation of the racist regime in an attempt to bring international pressure to bear on that regime so as to force it to abandon apartheid. The action of WMA is thus in direct opposition to this goal, since the readmission indirectly restores credibility and international acceptability to a regime that is, after all, the only racial oligarchy in the world. The question of apartheid is at once moral and political. It is political because it is an institutionalized form of racism that denies almost all the fundamental rights that you and I have come to accept as basic to our existence in society. But it is also moral because its supposedly legal practice abuses the dignity and human worth of the black majority in South Africa, and is also incompatible with our civilization and ethics. On both counts it is indefensible because its practice flies in the face of the Charter of the United Nations, threatens international peace and security and violates all the norms outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is the view of the Special Committee against Apartheid therefore, that all individuals and institutions which claim to represent the interest of humanity, not least the medical associations related to United Nations bodies, have an obligation to work towards the complete elimination of apartheid. There is no room for neutrality in the defence of the Charter principles, if we are to avoid human tragedy of the proportions experienced during the Second World War.

May I add, Sir, that the international law against racial discrimination and apartheid embodied in several instruments, includes the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. MASA's corporate conduct and that of the huge bulk of its members, vis-d-vis the crime of apartheid, is one of collusion in and abetment of some of the specific offences listed in article II of this Convention. As far as the perpetration of apartheid is concerned, the Special Committee holds, first and foremost, the racist r~gime in Pretoria responsible. But action cannot be limited to that rigime only for the reason that not only must those who openly or covertly aid and abet the crime of apartheid share in the blame, but also because we are aware that the racist regime has often used individual countries, institutions and persons to further its obnoxious and racist objectives in order to make apartheid more acceptable to the international community. This is one of the reasons why WMA must share in the blame for aiding and abetting the continued existence of apartheid. The decision to readmit NASA was not an event sprung on WMA by its weighted balloting system. A close examination of the records will show that it was carefully prepared by certain friends of South Africa like Dr. Andre Wynen, Secretary-General of WMA, and the American Medical Association (AMA). Earlier in 1981, an AMA delegation visited South Africa and made a number of statements supporting NASA and the South African health system. The Special Committee was one of those bodies that had appealed to AMA not to undertake the visit to South Africa but the request was ignored. In fact, the Committee's cable was not even acknowledged. Not only was the visit made, but AMA actively assured ASA of its support and also encouraged it to seek readmission to WHA. This attitude is borne out by the statement made by Professor De Klerk, Chairperson of the Federal Council of MASA: 'We are almost back in the fold again because three gentlemen (AMA) have gone in to bat for us." Similarly, the Committee was informed of the curious personal crusade of Dr. Wynen to have NASA return to WMA. It is no secret that he actively encouraged the readmission and continues to defend it even after the general condemnation that greeted the event. The language he employed in his reply letter dated 10 November 1981 and which was addressed to WHOis a typical example of Dr. Wynen's supercilious and insensitive attitude towards the criticisms of the sordid role that NASA played in the Steve Biko crime. He referred in that letter to the murder of Steve Biko, which the whole world has heard about, as: "the case of the young black student S. B. Biko." It seems that the whole world knows, except Dr. Wynen, that Steve Biko was an outstanding black political leader and a great patriot who died in detention after police interrogation in September 1977 and that he had been kept incommunicado, naked and manacled, in solitary confinement for 20 days prior to his death, as established at a subsequent inquest. This is the hero, the murder of whom is described by Dr. Wynen as "the case of a young black student." These are the words of the man who wants to convince the rest of the world as to his objectivity.

Let me also recall that it was at the invitation of Dr. Wynen that MASA sent a delegation to the 33rd World Medical Assembly held in Venezuela. It was after the delegation's return that it informed the MASA Federal Council in a report that "good relations had been established with representatives of other associations, notably the Verbend der Artze Deutschlands, the British Medical Association and the Australian Medical Association", and that "there were no sour political notes apart from one irrelevant observation by a delegate from another African country which was dealt with firmly by the Chairman of the WMA Council". In addition, Dr. Wynen visited South Africa for six days and was reported by South African Digest to have concluded that "South Africa's medical service is among the best and we would like to have her back in the family". NASA was so elated and encouraged by Dr. Wynen's visit that it recorded in the minutes of its Council's meeting of 12-14 May 198o, that"Dr. Wynen had been extremely impressed with what he had seen in South Africa...he had not been scared to say so publicly, and...this had been of tremendous benefit to both the NASA and to our country as a whole". The minutes go on to record that Dr. Wynen had guaranteed that '"ASA would not again be subjected to the discriminatory treatment received previously.. .MASA could henceforth rely on the strong support of the WMA Council, and notably the American Medical Association." I have dwelt at length on the part that Dr. Wynen played personally in the readmission of MASA into WMA because he exerted a personal effort to see this happen and managed to persuade AMA to back him up. This is the man who later writes in his reply to WHO that he has no comment nor opinion on the recoummendation of the WMA Council. The United Nations Special Committee is convinced, therefore, that WMA actively contrived the readmission of MASA against the overwhelming advice of international opinion. At this stage, let me try to explain the Special Committee's uncompromising stand against NASA, especially since many have been led into the erroneous belief that it is a harmless non-governmental association preoccupied with health matters only and not politics. Dr. Wynen even suggests that those who are against the readmission of MASA are confusing it with the South African Medical and Dental Council. Nothing can be further from the truth. To understand the implication of MASA in the implementation of the policies of apartheid, we should remember that a medical association is not Just any other learned society, but one that comprises highly intelligent individuals who have taken an oath to bind their professional expertise with a deeply moral attitude towards their patients and society in order to ensure service to humanity. MASA is no exception. It has pledged, like all other sister associations which uphold the Declaration of (September 1948), not to permit consideration of religion, nationality, race, party politics or social standing to intervene between the duty of its members and their patients. But in reality NASA co-operates fully in a political and health system that not only serves the needs of an affluent minority but denies equal, even equitable treatment to the black majority. Apartheid in South Africa ensures that beds are empty in white hospitals while black patients lie on the floor in over- crowded and under-staffed black hospitals. It allows the training of only about 3 per cent of black doctors in a population that is over 80 per cent black. This is the system that MASA operates in, collaborates with, and has done precious little to change. All of its members know that the system is not accidentally so, but rather kept so because of the inhuman laws of apartheid.

It is the view of the Special Committee that MASA also shares complicity in this unethical attitude towards the blacks because it fails to question glaring abuses such as that typified by the Steve Biko case and succeeding cases of police torture and killings. In spite of the furor aroused by the brutality of the South African police and the complicity of certain named doctors, MASA did nothing, as a group of persons who have taken the oath I referred to earlier, for over two years. Even when it moved, it merely endorsed the view that the doctors involved in the treatment of Mr. Biko had exercised reasonable skill and care. This was the conclusion of MASA even though the Chief District Surgeon, Dr. Benjamin Tucker, had admitted at the subsequent inquest that he had not held the interest of his patient, Steve Biko, paramount and had subordinated it to the interests of security. Apart from him, Dr. J. W. Lang and Dr. Colin Hersch also attended Mr. Biko in detention and their role again must be considered highly suspect as that of Professor Hennie Snyman whose report was a white-wash of the whole inquiry. The Executive Board's action on this matter will give hope and courage to all those who stand up against apartheid, like the medical faculty of the University of Witwatersrand which publicly dissociated itself from the Biko investigation. Let me recall to the Board that the Biko case is not alone - police torture and deaths in detention continue in South Africa, and South African doctors are consistently called in to muffle or pervert the evidence. The evidence suggests that MASA is indeed guilty of the cover-up of the wilful negligence of the white South African doctors. The attitude of MASA in this regard was a classic case of the crime of omission which is just as reprehensible as positive co-operation with the racist Pretoria regime to oppress and suppress the black majority. Until it learns to speak up against actions that are palpably iniquitous and calculated to promote racial discrimination against the majority of the country's population, MASA will share in the responsibility for the hideous crimes that are euphemistically called apartheid. If WMA knowingly offers protection and respectability to MASA which has been roundly condemned by international public opinion, then the obvious inference is that WMA has cast its lot with HASA and those who support apartheid and it must suffer international condemnation and rejection, with its prot6gfs. The argument it often used by WMA and its collaborators, that they are a professional non-governmental organization involved in the promotion of better health among peoples of all nations, and are therefore not preoccupied with political issues such as the anti-apartheid campaign. In fact, WMA seeks to be excused in this particular case for the reason that its decision to readmit MASA has nothing to do with politics. The Special Committee and many other governmental and non-governmental organizations have long dismissed this approach as dishonest because in failing to take political action WHA and similar organizations and individuals assist and facilitate the political advantage of the perpetrators of apartheid. What is more, for as long as politics continues to be the science of the rationalization and sensible ordering of the activities of human beings by good government, no sphere can be considered to be outside the purview of politics.

-6- The bad faith in the action of WMA is brought out even more clearly in the aberrant corollary decision taken at the September 1981 meeting to admit the Medical Association of the bogus Transkei. The decision of the racist Pretoria regime to push further its policy of racial separation and separate development by the creation of socalled independent bantustans, has been categorically rejected by the United Nations which unanimously denounced the so-called "independence" of this bantustan and called on all Governments and non-governmental organizations not to extend any recognition or co-operation to it. These United Nations resolutions have been widely publicized and WMA, as a reputable international body, cannot be ignorant of the fact. Its action, therefore, is a flagrant defiance of international public opinion and must make it repugnant to the international community. As I said earlier, the United Nations has always called for an increased isolation of South Africa from the international community as a means of forcing the racist r~gime to abandon apartheid and in fact, to avoid the situation breaking out into a full-scale war. Although the call is yet to be heeded by all Governments and organizations, its limited implementation has had the dosired effect on the regime. The isolation it has been forced into has teen most felt in the context of its membership of international organizations, and participation in international sports and other cultural events. We know that the isolation imposed on South Africa through expulsions and boycotts in the fields of trade, sports and entertainment - additional to the weight of the mandatory arms embargo - have had a tremendous impact, and this because of the great lengths that it has recently shown itself prepared to go in order to regain international acceptability. It is no longer a secret that the racist regime spends millions of dollars every year in rehabilitating its image abroad through the winning over of the public media, the influencing of individuals and organizations to show sympathy towards or collaborate with South Africa, and promote the general acceptance of apartheid. The recent action of WMA is the accomplishment of one such objective which can be of joy to none but the racist regime. Apartheid is not a matter within the domestic jurisdiction of South Africa because this has been long rejected by the United Nations. It will therefore constitute a classic case of incongruity to wish that WHO maintain its normal official relations with WMA. If this has not been clear in the past, I wish to now draw the attention of this august body to General Assembly resolution 36/172 L adopted on 17 December 1981, which calls upon nongovernmental organizations to co-operate in actions against policies of apartheid. The Special Committee strongly urges this Executive Board, therefore, to adopt a decision that would suspend the formal relations between itself and WMA and to demand that WMA cease forthwith its collaboration with apartheid and bantustans. It would be a legitimate action in defence of human values. Distinguished members of the Board, the fight against apartheid is after all a matter of conscience which all decent human beings must exercise. The struggle against this evil system has been led by the non-white world largely because its existence is an affront to their recently won freedom, independence, and I dare say, human dignity. To say that it polarizes us on racial lines gen.prallv is unfortunate and regrettable. We appeal to our

European and American friends and colleagues to ask themselves what they would have felt if most of the Third World countries they know today had been sovereign and independent in the 1930s and 1940s and had chosen to maintain very close ties with the Third Reich and Hitler on the excuse that the Nazi doctrine of racial purity, which was a form of racism, was of no political consequence to the non-European world. This is the revulsion felt by the black people for the spurious arguments advanced by organizations like WMA. Let me take advantage of this appearance before WHO and eminent doctors to state that we in the Special Committee, and I might add in the Organization of African Unity, consider the role being played by MASA and WMA as being not too different from the role played by many Nazi doctors during the Second World War. This is borne out by the Nuremberg subsequent proceedings before United States Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10 which, in sum, rejected the plea of many phisician defendents that they were only doing a medical duty in co-operating with Nazi officials, and found that they had aided and abetted in medical abuse and depraved the medical profession. Certainly, when the time of retribution comes, the Precedent of Nuremberg will not be lost on the United Nations and on the African people. It is incredible how short human memory can be in Europe where millions were killed in an unprecedented racial bigotry only less than fifty years ago. The Charter which the Special Committee and WHO uphold sets out to avert a repetition of that apocalypse and there is both political and moral justification for this noble objective. Before I conclude, I wish, on behalf of the Special Committee, to pay a deserving tribute to WHO and to its Director-General for the firm and consistent opposition it has given to apartheid, and also for its co-operation with the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid. Members of the Special Committee are keenly aware of the positive stand of WHO and sympathize with the embarrassment that the WMA decision entails for WHO. But the way out is to remain principled and uncompromising in face of the challenges of the supporters of apartheid. We hope that the decision will be unequivocal in the discontinuance of relations with WMA. I wish also to congratulate those Medical Associations, especially the 'African Associations and the British Medical Association, which voted against Othe readmission of the MASA to WMA. Their contribution is greatly appreciated by the Special Committee for their sense of honour. The thanks of the Special "'Comittee against Apartheid go in equal measure to the OAU Representative, His Excellency Mr. Moureddine Djoudi, Deputy Secretary-General, for the lucid and compelling presentation made to the Standing Committee of this Board. Ihe Special Committee has worked in close collaboration with OAU on matters 0ertaining to racial oppression in South Africa and Southern Africa as a whole. ikeregard the force of the arguments made during the OAU presentation as one A ore manifestation of the concern felt in Africa. We hope that many more )rganizations will follow this example in fearlessly repudiating apartheid and ill its friends, supporters and collaborators.

Mr. Chairman, I turn now to the report of this Board's Standing Committee on non-governmental organizations, as contained in document EB 69/38 dated 25 January 1982, and I wish to take this opportunity, if I may, to express my satisfaction and total agreement with its recommendations. I am referring particularly to paragraphs 14-19 where the Standing Committee recommends that this Board discontinue official relations with WHA. I hope you will allow me to make a few observations on the positive report of the Standing Committee. The Standing Committee, in paragraph 19 of its document, recommends to the Executive Board as follows: "1. Decides to discontinue official relations with the World Medical Association; however, it may be readmitted, on application, if it reverses its position regarding readmission of the Medical Association of South Africa." This recommendation is similar to that made to WHO by the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid and I welcome it. But, with the greatest of respect, I wish to remind the Board that the recommendation overlooks one very important fact. I am referring, of course, to the issue concerning the admission of the Medical Association of the so-called Transkei. Although one could assume that the present formulation englobes that issue even if rather obliquely, I am of the opinion that the specific reference to MASA legally limits the responsibility of WMA in seeking a resumption of official relations with WHO. It is my view therefore, that in accepting the recommendation of the Standing Committee, this Board might seriously and specifically consider introducing a proviso relating to the admission of the so- called Transkei. The Special Committee in particular and the United Nations as a whole, attach special importance to this matter because it is one on which there is a verifiable consensus and its omission from your decision might imply disagreement with the rest of the United Nations family. It would be an unfortunate omission in the circumstance, and would please the racist re gme tremendously.... In conclusion, I therefore request that the resolution adopted by the WHO Executive Board should deny official relations to WHA on both counts: that it expel MASA as well as the Medical Association of the so-called Transkei.