Following threats of civil unrest by the masses over the deliberate suppression of Freedom of Information and the breach of the Information Request Act by the ministry, the Minister of Health, Chief Alex Madubuko, came to court to clear the misconceptions being generated by the ongoing trial. According to the press, the ministry has known for years there was insufficient evidence for the broad claims being made by condom promoters that condom protects against a variety of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies.
As usual, after the oath taking and introductions, Barr. Nwaka had bombarded the Minister with questions to the admiration of everyone.
“Sir, we’ve been told condoms are the best thing that can ever happen to us. We’ve been told of its countless advantages–cheap, easily affordable, less complicated and with absolutely no side effects. But sir, we would like to know; what of its disadvantages or is it possible for a product to have so many advantages without any disadvantage?”
“It is absolutely impossible. No product can guarantee that.”
“Good, what then are its disadvantages?”
“People sometimes use condoms inconsistently and incorrectly. They sometimes snag it with their finger nails or teeth. Though some do contain manufacturing errors, but all these things are due to human errors. A properly used condom may prevent the transmission of HIV virus during an individual sexual act. But people use them incorrectly and inconsistently.”
“According to many experts, sir, the problem with condom education is that it encourages sexual activities outside marriage and once young people enters into this kind of activity, they take risks, fail to use the condom or use them incorrectly and the inevitable result is that once a sexually transmitted pathogen enters a promiscuous population, infection spreads like wild fire, is this true?”
“Well, in the first instance, people will keep having sex and trying to lure each other to bed. Since condoms offer protection, we certainly need to encourage people to use it.”
“Yes or no, please.”
“Yes, a vigorous condom promotion policy could increase rather than decrease unprotected sexual exposure if it has the unintended effect of encouraging a greater overall level of sexual activity.”
“Is it true also that condom creates a false sense of security? That is, it could burst or slip off completely during use, something like that?”
“Yes, of course. Nothing is 100%.”
“Sir, I guess it is also true that the chances of contracting HIV/AIDS during the so called ‘protected’ sex approaches 100% as the number of sexual episodes increases and this is to say in the end the protection offered by condom is no protection at all?” 
“Objection. My lord, the question is leading,” the defense counsel objected.
“Goes to motive.”
“Over ruled, you may answer the question.”
“You can’t prove that. You know that’s subject to your research methods.”
“You’ve not answered my question.”
“Yes, naturally the more you have sex, the more your chances of contracting AIDS. It’s a natural and common law.”
“Sir, is it also true that there is insufficient evidence to prove that condoms do stop the spread of STDs including AIDS and unwanted pregnancies?”
“No.”
“No? I doubt it. Have you seen the report by London University Medical School, published by the British Medical Journal, The Lancet opining that vigorous condom promotion policy could lead to an increase in AIDS?”
“No.”
“My lord, I wish to tender this evidence.”
“Show to the defense counsel.”
“I have no objection.”
“Evidence is hereby admitted in court, you may continue.”
“Sir, in 1994, an actuarial analysis of the AIDS epidemic in the US stated and I quote, ‘condom creates a false sense of security (they are not fool proof and have shown a failure rate of about 20-30 %), and may cause an increase in sexual activity or less careful choice of sexual partners,’ end quote. Is this in your scientific literature?”
“Yes.”
“Then why is the public not being told? Why are you withholding the information from the public?”
“You see, these things are not so. We are talking about sex, something that is inherent in all of us. You see, whether we like it or not, sex is a basic right for all and sex between two consenting adults is nothing less than human nature.”
“You haven’t answered my question.”
“I was coming to that. Besides, there could be a public health disaster if the public gets the impression that our government thinks condoms don’t work.” 
“So condoms don’t work?”
“I didn’t say that. All I’m saying is that it is extremely important that the public understand the difference between condom being inadequate and facts being inadequate. And given that condoms protects against a variety of sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS and unwanted pregnancies, we certainly have to encourage people to use condom.” 
“How successful has the condom philosophy been?”
“Well, so far so good. It’s a fairly new program, you know?”
“Fairly successful, you said?”
“Yeah,” he said confidently.
“Like this?” he asked, pointing at Frankie.
The crowd booed.
“With 15 year olds getting pregnant and dropping out of school, is that what you mean, sir?”
“There has to be exceptions.”
“So, you admit that some would be sacrificed?”
“I…I,” he stammers.
“Sir, do you know that it is because of the activities of people like you and the deliberate withdrawal of information about the failure of condom and contraceptives that the futures of millions of innocent teenagers worldwide are being wasted?”
“Condoms are still the best thing that can happen to a society that is addicted to sexual pleasure, though abstinence still remain the most effective way of combating STDS including AIDS and unwanted pregnancies, but this approach is not feasible for most of humanity because people are sexually active, before, during and after marriage with multiple sex partners. They are entitled to accurate information on how best to stay healthy when they are sexually active.”
“Did you say accurate information?” he jeered. “Is that what you are giving to the society?”
“Yes. We tell people the most effective ways to stay alive.”
“And that is by encouraging people to use condoms?”
“Yes, it’s the core part of it.”
“Sir, at the point of going to bed, your partner tells you she is HIV positive, will you still go ahead and sleep with her with the best quality condom?”
“Objection. My lord, the question is leading,” the defense counsel intervened.
“Goes to motive,” Barr. Nwaka counteracted.
“Over ruled. You may answer the question.”
“Of course, no.”
“Why, sir,” the prosecuting counsel asked. “Please, can you explain to this honorable court why you will encourage people to sleep with HIV carriers with condom but will not sleep with them yourself?”
“Condoms can only reduce the risk but does not eliminate it?”
“Sir, is it true that condoms have naturally occurring holes called voids and that these voids are 50 times larger than the AIDS virus?”
“I don’t know about that.” 
“You don’t know about it? Hardly believable. Have you seen this report?” He asked, holding up a paper, “I’ll read it out to you; ‘Electron micrographs reveals voids (holes), 5 microns in size(50 times larger than the virus), while fracture mechanic analysis, sensitive to the largest flaws present, suggests inherent flaws as large as 50 microns (500 times the size of the virus). Have you seen this report?”
“No. It’s probably a new report and we based our findings on the best available reports at that moment.”
“My lord, I wish to tender this scientific report as evidence.”
“Show to the defense counsel”
“Objection. My lord, one will like to know the source of the report and its content.”
“The source is no other place than the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a reputable US agency. My lord, the fact that condoms do indeed contain pores was first highlighted in 1981 by an FDA study and it might interest you to know that this report has been part of the scientific literature for years and as old as the disease itself.”
“Wait a minute, are you telling me that the fact that condoms do indeed have naturally occurring holes has been part of the scientific literature for years?” the judge asked, stupefied.
“That’s it, my lord, a pure case of medical cover-up.”
“Phew!” the judge blew out his cheeks. “You may continue.”
“That’s not all, my lord, in 2001, the National Institute of Health (NIH), an agency of the US, in collaboration with the Food And Drug Administration (FDA), The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted a research on the effectiveness and lack of effectiveness of condoms, I want you to tell this honorable court what you did with the information contained in that report.”
“The fact that condoms are not fool proof is not in question, but given that it protects against a variety of sexually transmitted diseases, we certainly need to encourage people to use it.”
“One more question. Sir, on a very personal note, what is your opinion about abortion?”
“Personally, I think a woman should have the right to regulate her fertility. I mean, a woman should have the right to a safe means of terminating an unwanted pregnancy if she doesn’t want to carry the pregnancy to term. Hence, the imperative for legalizing abortion,” he paused. “You know, over 4 decades of economic and social developments, people have come to organize their personal relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society; this includes reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail. You know what I mean? An entire generation has come of age to assume (this) concept of liberty.”
“In other words, you are saying what we did has separated sex from responsibility for resulting life for so long that to change the rules on people now would be unfair, is that what you mean?”
“Well, yes.”
Turning to the judge, he said. “Well, my lord, you heard it straight from the horse’s mouth and there is no better proof that our failure to do the right thing-provision of accurate and medically sound information about sex and sexual matters (failures of condoms and contraceptives) are the very reasons why AIDS, teen and unwanted pregnancies are on the increase. It is also true that the refusal to provide abstinence only sex education and ante-natal care to teeming, innocent young mothers like this,” he said, pointing at Frankie. “Who are getting pregnant out of wedlock because of the alarming failure rate of condoms and other contraceptives are unjust and an act of violence against women and girls that violate their reproductive, maternal and basic rights.”
“You are saying in a nut shell that those who want to keep their babies should be allowed to do so without punitive measures?” the judge asked.
“Yes, my lord.”
“I happen to know a little bit about the title X abstinence only program.”
“I’m aware of that your honor and that’s why I am confident requesting for a favorable verdict.”
“That will be all for today,” the judge said. “Hearing will continue tomorrow by 9:00 am.”