Port Louis — The HIV/Aids Preventive Measures Bill is under discussion at government level. The Health minister, Satish Faugoo should introduce it soon after Parliament resumes in March. He is also expected to review measures considered as detrimental to people suffering from the disease to make them feel less rejected and misunderstood by society. A second meeting is planned between the attorney general, Rama Valayden, and minister Faugoo on the issue on Thursday.

If the bill includes certain positive steps to fight the spread of Aids, it also contains unclear measures that look unacceptable to associations fighting against the disease. One of the main decisions in the bill is compulsory testing, which the concerned would however be allowed to refuse. Obviously there is a paradox in the legal text.

Any officer from the ministry of Health would have the right to force someone to take the HIV test if he/she has reasonable grounds to believe that the person might be infected. Here already, one can wonder what "reasonable grounds" mean. The president of Pils, Dhiren Moher, can't help thinking that people will be judged on their physical appearance.

Partly responds to needs

Astonishingly enough, minister Faugoo explains that the ministry would have no right to test somebody without his/her consent. If the person refuses, the health officer would have to resort to a judge who would decide whether the person should be tested or not.

However, compulsory testing for people making blood or organ donations is definitely a positive measure to prevent the virus from spreading without jeopardising the human rights of the individual.

The provision of clean needles to drug addicts is another important measure in the bill. Today, the main method of contamination is through infected needles and associations have been requesting this for a long time.

However, the bill seems to respond only partly to real needs. Drug addicts would be able to obtain a clean needle only if they are following a rehabilitation programme. This is seen as blackmail by organisations, which believe it won't work. Drug addicts might not accept to take clean needles for this reason and the bill might not reach its objective. "This system is abortive because we know how drug addicts work. It will only lead to a waste of money," asserts the director of Centre de Solidarité, Audrey d'Hotman.

The bill also makes provision for people already infected to take necessary precautions to avoid affecting others. With this in mind, a doctor would be entitled to disclose the state of an infected patient to his/her spouse after giving him/her "reasonable opportunity to disclose his infected status to his or her sexual contact".

Here again, the issue is debatable. It is true that no one has the right to contaminate another person if he/she knows what he/she's doing. However, disclosing one's infected status can only be a personal decision. What the organisations would like is to take part in the debate while the bill is being prepared and give their contribution as they are aware of the grass-roots realities.