Is the government overstepping its bounds, or is it simply safeguarding national security? This question lies at the heart of a heated debate surrounding the audit of Ghana’s health data systems. Dr. Kwame Sarpong Asiedu, a Democracy and Development Fellow in Health at the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana), has weighed in, asserting that the government is well within its rights to scrutinize these systems. But here’s where it gets controversial: he categorizes health data as national security information, a claim that has sparked intense discussions.
Dr. Asiedu’s comments come amid a high-stakes standoff between Lightwave E-Healthcare Solutions Limited and the Ministry of Health. The ministry alleges overpayment and accuses Lightwave of deliberately disrupting healthcare services to undermine the government. Lightwave, the company behind Ghana’s National E-Healthcare Programme and the Lightwave Health Information Management System (LHIMS), vehemently denies these claims, labeling them as ‘misleading and unfounded.’ The company insists it has fulfilled all contractual obligations and that its system continues to support efficient healthcare operations.
And this is the part most people miss: according to a November 3, 2025, report by myjoyonline.com, Lightwave’s Senior Project Manager, Eric Agyei, revealed that the company had not been formally notified of any audit, despite reports of individuals visiting hospitals under the guise of Lightwave representatives. Dr. Asiedu clarifies that while the government has the authority to conduct audits, such actions must follow due process and comply with existing laws.
‘Health data is national security data,’ Dr. Asiedu explains. ‘It includes critical information like disease and death rates, prevalence rates, and medication usage. The government has every right to audit the entire data chain, from the data controller—the hospitals—to the data processor. This is a globally accepted practice.’
He emphasizes that Lightwave, as a data processor, does not own the information it manages. ‘The data ultimately belongs to the state,’ he states. ‘The audit is non-negotiable because Lightwave is not the data owner. No one should deceive themselves into thinking the government lacks the authority to investigate every step of the process, from patient to hospital to data processor. The law permits end-to-end scrutiny.’
However, Dr. Asiedu raises a critical counterpoint: if Lightwave’s claims of impersonation during the audit are true, it could signal serious ethical and legal breaches. ‘Impersonation, if proven, is unacceptable,’ he asserts.
The Ministry of Health has yet to publicly address Lightwave’s latest statement, but the controversy has reignited broader debates about data ownership, cybersecurity, and accountability in Ghana’s digital health systems. As the country pushes to expand electronic healthcare nationwide, these questions become even more pressing.
What do you think? Is the government justified in treating health data as a matter of national security, or does this approach risk overreach? And where should the line be drawn between oversight and intrusion? Share your thoughts in the comments—this is a conversation that needs your voice.
