Anthony Brink charges AIDS campaigner with genocide
Former Midweek Cuckoo Anthony Brink has proven just how deserving he is of the dubious honour. He has formally submitted a 59-page criminal complaint to the International Criminal Court in the Hague, charging TAC leader Zackie Achmat with genocide.
His logic? ARVs are toxic. Zackie Achmat was the driving force behind finally convincing the SA government to supply the populace with ARVs through the public health system. Therefore Zackie Achmat has committed genocide. Seriously, it’s like charging oncologists with genocide for prescribing chemotherapy.
Read his 59-page rant (PDF) if you want to. But here’s the bit that for me shows that Brink has gone so far off the reservation that he’s not even in the same zip code anymore:
…it is respectfully submitted that the International Criminal Court ought to impose on him the highest sentence provided by Article 77.1(b) of the Rome Statute, namely to permanent confinement in a small white steel and concrete cage, bright fluorescent light on all the time to keep an eye on him, his warders putting him out only to work every day in the prison garden to cultivate nutrient-rich vegetables, including when it’s raining, in order for him to repay his debt to society, with the ARVs he claims to take administered daily under close medical watch at the full prescribed dose, morning, noon and night, without interruption, to prevent him faking that he’s being treatment compliant, pushed if necessary down his forced-open gullet with a finger, or, if he bites, kicks and screams too much, dripped into his arm after he’s been restrained on a gurney with cable ties around his ankles, wrists and neck, until he gives up the ghost on them, so as to eradicate this foulest, most loathsome, unscrupulous and malevolent blight on the human race, who has plagued and poisoned the people of South Africa, mostly black, mostly poor, for nearly a decade now, since the day he and his TAC first hit the scene.
I almost hope that the ICC doesn’t refuse to prosecute on the ground of stupid. Because if the trial goes ahead, and a ruling or dismissal is in Achmat’s favour, then by my understanding he will have legal reason for a counter-suit of malicious prosecution. At the very least, even if the ICC laughs in Brink’s face, Achmat and the TAC should be suing Brink for defamation. The interesting thing about a defamation case is that, unlike most legal matters, the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that their alleged libelous or slanderous statements are either true, or those that could be expected from a reasonable man. I’d love to see Brink trying to prove either.
And the funniest part of it all? Brink is a lawyer. He should know better.
Frankly, if anyone should be sued for genocide before the ICC, it’s Brink, Manto, Rath and the others who have created such a culture of misinformation regarding HIV and AIDS in this country that we suffer literally hundreds of thousands of AIDS deaths a year.
(PS it looks like I’ll only get to this week’s MC tomorrow. It’s becoming something of a weekend cuckoo, but unfortunately I have a job that gets in the way of my hobbies)