Why we can’t disclose Wale Babalakin’s sickness, by LUTH

• Lawyers, others disagree on EFCC’s presence at hospital

THOSE who are still wondering about the nature of the sickness of the chairman of Bi-Courtney Limited, Dr. Wale Babalakin, who is allegedly receiving treatment at the Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH), Idi-Araba, Lagos, instead of facing corruption charges may not find ready answers.

The Chief Medical Director of LUTH, Prof. Akin Osibogun, told The Guardian Sunday that there would not be answers because the hospital authorities were not under obligation to disclose what ails Babalakin.

Upon The Guardian’s enquiries into the nature of the sickness of Babalakin, Osibogun, said: “I cannot tell you that. I cannot even tell the wife unless I have to. If you come here and we discover that you have gonorrhea do you expect me to tell your wife? It is against our ethics to do that unless there is a strong directive from above or by a court of law.”

On when Babalakin will be discharged, Osibogun said: “I will talk to the consultant treating him. It is the direct consultant treating him that is in the position to know that.”

On the security operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) at the hospital, Osibogun said : “I heard there are security operatives around the place. There is nobody disturbing us inside the ward and nobody has given me a court order not to treat him. I am not responsible for any of the security operatives hanging around.

“The security operatives are not disturbing us apart from the psychological effect they can be having on the staff.”

The Guardian learnt that the EFCC’s operatives have been hovering around the hospital premises with a view to arresting the lawyer immediately he is discharged.

Operatives of the EFCC besieged LUTH since last Tuesday to arrest Babalakin allegedly in defiance of the order of a Federal High Court which restrained the anti-graft agency from going ahead with his arraignment and trial.

EFCC’s spokesman, Wilson Uwujare, had told The Guardian that the embattled businessman was being put under surveillance; a statement that has attracted mixed reactions from both legal and human rights experts.