The public has the right to know

If a political leader is ill or dying so what? Does the health of a political leader concern the public? Is sickness not a private matter?

Well, in journalism we say the public has the right to know. So when a political leader is bedridden that is news and good fodder for opinion writers.

If the political leader was elected by the people and he is answerable to the people, and if he is indeed a man of the people, his subjects, his followers will be concerned about his health so that they can pray for him and wish him speedy recovery.

But if the political leader is a brute who ascended to power through a bloody coup and rules with an iron fist, people will want him to meet his maker very fast.

A political leader is a public figure. He is always in the limelight. If he doesn’t appear in public for some time, even if he is vacationing, people will ask for his whereabouts. If the political leader is charismatic and is always on TV people will notice his absence or silence.

But even when a publicity-shy political leader is out of the limelight, it is likely that his minders might leak out the secret that he was seriously ill, or was admitted in a secret hospital. And the public will know.  And that can become some juicy subject of public discussion.

When the Venezuelan socialist leader Hugo Chavez fell ill and went missing there was speculation. He had gone to Cuba and was diagnosed with a cancerous growth around his pelvic region. The state media was mum. Speculation was rife with bloggers writing that he had cancer. After some visits to Cuba and Chavez was assured by doctors that the growth was malignant and therefore not life-threatening. The smiling Chavez returned home dancing to a crowd of enthusiastic supporters.

But suppose the cancer had spread in his body and his days were numbered it is most likely that the story would have been that of denial and secrecy especially if he knew that his opponents were waiting on the wings to win in the next elections.

Communist countries are well known for keeping secret a leader’s illness. The recent example is that of North Korea’s Kim Jong-il. His pancreatic cancer was kept a secret, and even his death was announced two days later.

When a political leader is ill his minders will shield him from the media. He will not have access to the media to know anything being said about him. They will feed him with lies. The leader may want to tell his people that he was indeed ill, but his minders would censor such news to deny opponents the chance to speculate on the future of the throne.

In olden days a king’s illness was kept a top secret for fear of a power vacuum, a power struggle, or worse, a palace coup. In some communities an ailing king was killed by his own brothers within the palace so they could replace him.

In Africa’s politics when it is the turn of some people to eat a political leader’s allies or members of the kitchen cabinet will play a key role in keeping a leader’s illness a top secret. Spin doctors and hired journalists will do their bidding to keep the public busy with issues that will deflect attention from the leader’s sickness.

If indeed the political leader was visibly terminally ill, there would be a total blackout of news about his health.

The news blackout is aimed at giving the allies the opportunity to work on a smooth succession plan that will assure the allies their daily bread.

In any case, sickness is sickness. You can hide stolen money in a foreign bank or a hole, but not agony associated with physical sickness.

When a political leader is conspicuously absent from the public for the obvious reasons, people will be concerned. They will ask questions. If they don’t get convincing and satisfactory answers, they will fabricate stories that will diffuse in the bars and public transport.

Fabricated stories are always damaging especially if the speculations are morbid.

When a political leader is missing in public on grounds of illness the public has the right to know. It is a matter of common sense: if the people have the right to vote into public office leaders of their choice, then it follows that they too have the right to know how their elected leaders are faring health wise.

Journalists should get the news about the leader’s sickness and communicate it to the public responsibly. By reporting responsibly such news I mean the journalist should obtain the news from a credible source, and not to rely on rumour peddled in bars.

A well-informed public is empowered, leaving no room for speculation. Playing hide and seek with the truth is not being honest.