Academician, Dr Philip Chidi Njemanze, Chairman of the Global Prolife Alliance, has urged the Senate to reconsider aspects of the proposed amendment to the National Health Act 2014, warning that rigid timelines for emergency medical treatment and criminal penalties for healthcare workers could create additional challenges for Nigeria’s already overstretched healthcare system.
In a policy memorandum submitted for public consideration, Njemanze criticised the National Health Act (Amendment) Bill 2026, SB 759, sponsored by Senator Abdulaziz Musa Yar’Adua, particularly its proposed requirement for initial emergency assessment within 15 minutes, commencement of basic stabilisation within 30 minutes and immediate life-saving intervention once a life-threatening condition is identified. The proposed amendment also reportedly prescribes hospital admission and referral deadlines, with violations attracting up to six months’ imprisonment, a ₦300,000 fine or both. While acknowledging the intention to prevent hospitals from denying emergency treatment over inability to pay, he argued that legislation must reflect the realities of medical practice.
He maintained that emergency medicine cannot be regulated like a factory production line because patients’ conditions, available personnel, equipment and the nature of injuries differ considerably. Citing a scenario involving five accident victims arriving simultaneously, including one requiring emergency surgery for massive internal bleeding, Njemanze argued that doctors must prioritise treatment through established triage procedures. He warned that enforcing identical treatment deadlines could create situations where surgeons are pressured to abandon life-saving operations to attend to other patients, describing such an outcome as medically irresponsible.
The Global Prolife Alliance chairman further cautioned against criminalising medical personnel for delays caused by circumstances beyond their control, including shortages of doctors and nurses, occupied operating theatres, unavailable blood supplies, inadequate equipment, lack of intensive care beds and the absence of specialist services. He argued that criminal liability should be restricted to proven wilful refusal, abandonment of patients or culpable professional negligence, rather than unavoidable delays arising from resource constraints. He also warned that excessive punitive provisions could encourage defensive medicine, where healthcare professionals make decisions primarily to avoid prosecution instead of exercising sound clinical judgement.
As an alternative, Njemanze proposed a dedicated Road Traffic Accident (RTA) Emergency Care Bill to establish a coordinated national emergency transportation and treatment system. The proposal includes a compulsory road accident insurance scheme for travellers on designated major highways, with an initial suggested contribution of approximately ₦1,500 per person monthly, subject to actuarial assessment and pilot implementation. He recommended that the scheme be accessible through mobile telephone networks, with each registered individual issued a unique identification code, while passengers, commercial transport operators and private motorists would be able to verify coverage. He stressed, however, that lack of registration or inability to pay must never prevent an accident victim from receiving emergency treatment.
The proposed legislation would also establish a Special Road Traffic Accident Fund to finance ambulance transportation, first aid, emergency stabilisation, surgery, hospitalisation, rehabilitation, medical equipment and training of emergency personnel. Njemanze called for a nationwide network of strategically positioned, GPS-enabled ambulances, equipped with trained personnel and linked to emergency dispatch centres and designated trauma hospitals. He further proposed Federal and State Road Traffic Accident Commissions to administer the scheme, accredit ambulance providers and participating hospitals, verify claims, prevent fraud and publish audited financial reports. Under the arrangement, hospitals would receive reimbursement for verified emergency services, while an indigent protection programme funded through government support, donations and charitable contributions would cover Nigerians unable to afford the proposed insurance contribution.
He further emphasised that the Senate must address the entire chain of emergency response, beginning with accident notification and ambulance dispatch, through on-site first aid, safe transportation, admission into appropriate trauma centres and continued medical care. According to him, many road accident victims lose their lives before reaching hospitals because of the absence of trained emergency responders, inadequate ambulance services and poor coordination between accident scenes and medical facilities. He argued that imposing a 15-minute hospital assessment deadline would not address the time lost when victims are left without appropriate assistance at accident scenes or transported in unsuitable vehicles.
Beyond SB 759, Njemanze urged the Senate Committee on Health to examine other provisions of the National Health Act 2014, particularly Sections 13, 43, 45, 48, 51, 52, 53 and 58, as well as the definition of gametes. His concerns include the standards governing health establishments under Section 13; patient rights and medical research under Sections 43 and 45; consent requirements for the removal of human tissues, blood and blood products under Section 48; donor protection and transplantation procedures under Sections 51 and 52; commercial transactions involving human tissues under Section 53; and safeguards governing post-mortem examinations under Section 58. He also advocated clearer legal protections for reproductive cells, including eggs and sperm, against coercion, trafficking and unauthorised commercial exploitation. He noted that these represent his published objections and called for independent legal examination of the provisions.
Njemanze consequently appealed to the Senate to conduct comprehensive public hearings involving the Nigerian Medical Association, nurses, emergency medicine specialists, trauma surgeons, anaesthetists, the Federal Road Safety Corps, the National Health Insurance Authority, the Federal Ministry of Health, state health ministries, private hospital associations, civil society organisations, accident victims and the Global Prolife Alliance. He urged lawmakers to strengthen Section 20 of the Act by clearly defining emergency treatment, distinguishing triage, stabilisation and definitive care, protecting responsible clinical decisions and ensuring that inability to pay does not prevent treatment.
The Global Prolife Alliance chairman maintained that accountability in the health sector must go hand in hand with adequate funding, infrastructure and institutional support. He urged the Senate to distinguish deliberate refusal of emergency treatment from unavoidable clinical delays, ensure that hospitals maintain appropriate emergency-care capacity and establish sustainable funding arrangements for emergency services. He stressed that the National Assembly has an opportunity to build a healthcare system that protects patients while safeguarding medical professionals who act responsibly, adding that Nigeria needs functional ambulances, adequately equipped trauma centres and reliable emergency financing before imposing unrealistic statutory deadlines on hospitals.
He insisted that the ultimate measure of the proposed legislation should be the number of lives saved rather than the number of medical personnel prosecuted. “Nigeria needs ambulances before it needs more prison sentences for doctors. Nigeria needs trauma centres before it needs arbitrary hospital treatment deadlines,” he maintained in the memorandum, urging the Senate to legislate for the realities of the country’s healthcare system.
