Life Esidimeni case to resume with call to charge three officials with culpable homicide
The Life Esidimeni inquest will resume in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, on Thursday, where Section27 will argue that former Gauteng Health MEC Qedani Mahlangu, former director of the Mental Health Directorate, Dr Makgabo Manamela, and the owner of Precious Angels NGO should be charged with culpable homicide.
This is for their alleged involvement in the tragic deaths of 141 mental healthcare users in 2016.
The legal counsels who represent the families of the victims as well as the officials allegedly involved in their deaths, will present oral arguments over the next two weeks in the inquest before Judge Mmonoa Teffo.
In terms of the Inquests Act, the judge must determine the cause of the deaths of the 141 mental healthcare users who died after they were moved from Life Esidimeni into unlicensed and unprepared NGOs.
The judge must then decide whether, on the face of it, the conduct of any person caused or contributed to any of the deaths. The decision to prosecute is made by the National Prosecuting Authority once the court has made its findings.
Section27 represents 44 mental healthcare users who died in the most inhuman, cruel and degrading circumstances while under the care of the state.
Many of the people who died suffered starvation, dehydration, neglect and severe violations of their human rights.
Section27 will present its argument (based on the evidence already before the court) that the deaths of at least 10 of the mental healthcare users were caused by the conduct of Mahlangu, Manamela and the owner of Precious Angels.
The arguments before the court will include that Mahlangu made the initial decision to terminate the Life Esidimeni contract. She then continued to make a series of reckless decisions in relation to the project for months while chairing project team meetings.
Section27 said this included putting pressure on the Gauteng Department of Health officials to implement the termination (of the) project over an extremely short period of time.
“Mahlangu made these decisions having been warned of the risks of termination, the impracticalities of continuing with the implementation of the project and the insufficiency of measures in place to mitigate the risks and impracticalities,” Section27 will submit.
It will also argue that Manamela was the de facto project leader and directly involved in implementation of the termination project.
“She signed licences for NGOs that she knew had not been properly assessed and then failed to ensure that they were paid timeously. She was warned both before and during the implementation of the project about risks and failed to mitigate these risks sufficiently,” Section27 said.
They will also ask that Ethel Ncube, who was the owner of Precious Angels, be held accountable.
This institution saw the deaths of 20 mental healthcare users, the first of whom died less than two weeks after being moved into her care.
“As the owner of the NGO Precious Angels, Ms Ncube housed mental healthcare users in the most deplorable conditions. She knowingly operated an unlicensed NGO, continued to accept patients even after it was clear that she had neither the staff, the resources, nor the facilities to care for them and that taking additional people would compromise their health.”
Section27 added that she employed unskilled workers to take care of patients who required specialised care and allowed them to be housed in conditions that were squalid and inhumane.
“The conduct of Ms Mahlangu, Dr Manamela and Ms Ncube each caused the deaths of the mental healthcare users in the Life Esidimeni tragedy,” SECTION27 will argue.
Counsel for Mahlangu, Manamela and Ncube will meanwhile ask the court not to hold them accountable for the tragedy.
It will be argued on behalf of Mahlangu that she did not make the decision to terminate the contract with Life Esidimeni and was not involved in the implementation and execution of the termination project.
She argues that it is only officials who were involved in implementation that may have a case to answer. She is of the view that their conduct also fell short of the requirements for liability.
Mahlangu is of the view that she was misled about implementation of the plan and will ask the judge not to make a recommendation that she be prosecuted.
Manamela is of the view that she did not take the decision to terminate the contract with Life Esidimeni and had previously drafted a plan to reduce beds at Life Esidimeni in phases.
She maintained that she oversaw the implementation team and tried to assist when problems arose.
Ncube will likewise argue that she is not to blame, as she was not personally responsible for the physical care of mental healthcare users.
The families represented by AfriForum will, among others, argue that the judge recommend the prosecution of Mahlangu, Manamela and (former head of the Gauteng Health Department, Barney) Selebano for murder.
“The Life Esidimeni disaster and the legal processes associated with it, including the arbitration and the inquest, are unique and unprecedented in South Africa.
“We hope that the inquest will serve its purpose to promote public confidence in the criminal justice system and reassure the public that unnatural deaths will receive proper attention and investigation and that appropriate measures will be taken to prevent similar occurrences in future,” Section27 said.
Pretoria News