Ghana has rejected a proposed health agreement with the United States, citing concerns that provisions would have granted American entities access to sensitive health data without adequate safeguards. The decision makes Ghana the second African nation to withdraw from such agreements, following Zimbabwe’s rejection in February, as concerns grow over data privacy protections under the Trump administration’s “America First” approach to global health financing.
The rejection highlights deepening African skepticism toward health agreements that prioritize American interests over local data protection standards.
Ghana’s Data Privacy Objections
Arnold Kavanbo, executive director of Ghana’s Data Protection Commission, explained the country’s decision to reject the health agreement. He told the Associated Press that the scope of data access required “far exceeded what is normally required for the purpose that was specified.”
The commission determined that the proposed agreement contained provisions allowing American entities to access sensitive health data without the necessary protections and guarantees that Ghana deemed essential.
The specific concerns centered on:
Scope of data access exceeding stated purposes
Insufficient safeguards for sensitive health information
Lack of adequate privacy protections
Absence of guaranteed data security measures
Trump Administration’s “America First” Health Strategy
The proposed Ghana agreement is part of a broader Trump administration initiative replacing previous health financing arrangements. The new approach, which began in late 2025, replaces a set of health agreements previously administered through the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which has now been dismantled.
The United States has negotiated similar health agreements with approximately twenty African nations under this revised framework, offering substantial American funding to support public health systems and disease outbreak response in countries severely impacted by reduced American health assistance.
Substantial Financial Commitments with Conditions
The proposed agreements offer American funding in the hundreds of millions of dollars to support public health infrastructure in some of Africa’s most vulnerable nations. For countries dependent on international health assistance, these financial commitments are significant and could substantially impact disease control efforts and health system capacity.
However, the agreements have raised significant questions about data privacy protections and the conditions attached to American funding.
Zimbabwe’s Earlier Rejection Sets Precedent
Ghana becomes the second African nation to formally reject such agreements. In February, Zimbabwe’s authorities rejected a similar proposed agreement citing concerns about health data issues, justice considerations, and national sovereignty.
Reports also indicated that Zambia rejected portions of the agreement, though no final decision has been made in that country.
African nations rejecting or questioning the agreements:
Zimbabwe: Rejected in February citing health data, justice, and sovereignty concerns
Ghana: Rejected citing data privacy safeguard deficiencies
Zambia: Rejected portions pending further decision
Nigeria: Accepted with modifications limiting assistance primarily to Christian healthcare providers
Inadequate Safeguards and Restricted Implementation
African activists argue that these agreements often lack sufficient safeguards for sensitive health data usage and sometimes contain restrictions on how funding is deployed. Nigeria’s agreement exemplifies such restrictions, with the United States committing assistance primarily to Christian healthcare providers rather than providing universal health system support.
These conditions raise concerns that American health assistance may be conditional not only on data access but also on ideological or sectarian preferences, potentially undermining universal healthcare principles.
Broader Pattern of Data Sovereignty Concerns
Ghana’s rejection reflects a broader African concern about data sovereignty and the terms on which foreign entities access sensitive information. Health data represents one of the most sensitive forms of personal information, containing detailed information about individual medical histories, vulnerabilities, and treatment patterns.
The willingness of the Trump administration to condition funding on data access has prompted African nations to reassess whether American health assistance advances their populations’ interests or primarily serves American institutional interests.
US State Department Non-Response
The US State Department did not immediately respond to inquiries from the Associated Press regarding the Ghanaian official’s statements about the rejected agreement.
The lack of official response suggests the administration has not prioritized addressing African concerns about data privacy in health agreements.
Conclusion:
Ghana’s rejection of the proposed health agreement represents a significant assertion of data sovereignty and patient privacy protection by an African nation. As more African countries question the terms of American health financing, the Trump administration faces growing resistance to its “America First” health strategy, raising fundamental questions about whether conditional health funding serves global health objectives or primarily advances American institutional interests.
