FG sued over deal to share citizens’ health data with US

A legal practitioner, Bernard Okpi, has filed a suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja challenging a health cooperation agreement between Nigeria and the United States over concerns about data privacy, constitutional breaches and transparency.

In the suit marked FHC/ ABJ/15/549/2026 and dated 16 March, Mr Okpi is asking the court to determine whether the Bilateral Health Cooperation Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), signed on 19 December 2025, violates the rights of Nigerians.

The defendants in the case include the President, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Federal Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Concerns over data sharing

At the centre of the suit is the provision of the MoU that allegedly allows for the collection and transfer of sensitive health data of Nigerians to the United States government

According to the court filings, the data could include medical records, blood samples, pathogen testing and genetic sequencing.

Mr Okpi argued that a related but undisclosed “Specimen Sharing Agreement” obliges Nigeria to provide such data within five days of request and could remain in force for up to 25 years.

He contended that the arrangement amounts to a breach of the National Health Act 2014, which protects the confidentiality of patient information, as well as the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023 governing the processing and transfer of personal data.

The plaintiff also argued that the agreement violates Section 37 of the Constitution, which guarantees citizens’ right to privacy. Religious and legislative concerns

The suit further raises concerns about alleged emphasis on Christian faith-based health facilities in the agreement.

Mr Okpi said any healthcare programme tied to religious considerations in a multi-faith country like Nigeria could trigger social tension and may contravene constitutional provisions on non-discrimination and freedom of religion.

He also questioned the role of the National Assembly, arguing that agreements with significant national implications should be subjected to legislative scrutiny and approval.

Among other reliefs, the plaintiff is seeking a declaration that the MoU is unconstitutional and an order suspending its implementation, which is scheduled to begin on 1 April 2026.

He also asked the court to compel the government to publish the full text of the agreement.

Government yet to release full agreement.

The controversy surrounding the MoU has been heightened by the non-disclosure of its full contents.