Health Minister Faces Scrutiny Over LHIMS Transition Failures — Expert Analysis by Dr. Joshua Zaato

Introduction

In a recent statement that has ignited national debate, Dr. Joshua Zaato, Senior Lecturer and Political Scientist at the University of Ghana, has publicly criticized Health Minister Kwabena Mintah Akandoh for mismanaging the transition from the Lightwave Health Information Management System (LHIMS) to the newly developed Ghana Health Information Management System (GHIMS). Dr. Zaato’s remarks, delivered during an interview on PleasureNews’ AM Show, center on the government’s inability to anticipate and mitigate disruptions in health information services during the transition. With Ghana’s digital health ecosystem at a crossroads, this controversy underscores systemic challenges in IT governance, contractual accountability, and strategic leadership within public health institutions.

Analysis

Dr. Zaato’s Critique of Minister’s Leadership

Dr. Zaato’s criticism hinges on the Health Minister’s failure to implement interim solutions to stabilize health data accessibility during the LHIMS-to-GHIMS transition. He questioned why the ministry did not address system vulnerabilities proactively, noting that a competent leader would have deployed contingency plans to prevent service interruptions. “The Health Minister should have recognized the potential risks and ensured fallback mechanisms were in place,” he stated, emphasizing the disparity between the ministry’s awareness of the LHIMS system and their reactive approach to its obsolescence.

Minister’s Counterargument: Contractual Blackmail Claims

Health Minister Akandoh responded to Zaato’s claims by alleging that LHIMS administrators deliberately disrupted the system to coerce the government into retaining unfavorable terms from an existing maintenance contract. He clarified that negotiations for GHIMS were complicated by the vendor’s demand for unrestricted access to administrative controls. “The vendor resisted government oversight, creating a crisis scenario where continuity was jeopardized,” Akandoh stated on the Government Accountability Series. This assertion frames the transition as a battle between public interest and private-sector resistance.

Background on LHIMS and GHIMS

LHIMS, currently under maintenance by a private contractor, has served Ghana’s public health sector for over a decade. However, its limitations in scalability and data integration have prompted the government to develop GHIMS—a state-owned digital platform designed to enhance data sovereignty, interoperability, and long-term security. The transition was initially projected to complete by 2024, but delays have exacerbated tensions between stakeholders. Akandoh’s administration argues that GHIMS will grant Ghana greater autonomy over sensitive health data, reducing reliance on foreign IT infrastructures.

Transition Challenges: Technical vs Strategic Issues

The ongoing debate highlights two parallel challenges: technical deficiencies in legacy systems and strategic missteps in leadership. Zaato attributes disruptions to a lack of transitional planning, while Akandoh blames contractual disputes. Experts note that hybrid challenges—technical gaps unresolved due to managerial delays—may be at the core of the crisis. For instance, inadequate staff training on GHIMS and unresolved compatibility issues between old and new systems contributed to service fractures.

Summary

The clash between Dr. Zaato and Health Minister Akandoh reflects broader tensions in Ghana’s digital health transformation. Zaato emphasizes administrative accountability for failing to safeguard health services during the transition, while the minister shifts blame to contractual inflexibilities. As GHIMS emerges as a cornerstone of national health data policy, the controversy underscores the need for transparent governance, robust contingency frameworks, and collaborative stakeholder engagement in public-sector IT projects.

Key Points

Accountability in Leadership

Zaato insists that the Health Minister must be held responsible for lapses in transition planning, regardless of external factors. Leaders in public health IT must balance foresight with adaptability to address legacy system risks.

Contractual Complexities and Government Autonomy

Akandoh’s claims reveal challenges in negotiating equitable terms with private vendors. Ensuring data sovereignty requires clear contractual frameworks that prioritize state control without stifling innovation.

System Transition Risks

The LHIMS-to-GHIMS case study illustrates the dangers of inadequate contingency planning. Delays in phased migrations and insufficient staff upskilling exacerbate operational vulnerabilities.

Practical Advice for Effective Health IT Transitions

Implement Phased Transition Strategies

Adopt incremental rollouts with pilot testing to identify system incompatibilities early. For example, parallel operation of LHIMS and GHIMS could mitigate disruptions during the final switch.

Develop Robust Contingency Plans

Maintain backup servers, redistribute workloads, and establish emergency response teams to address technical failures. Zaato’s call for “stopgap measures” aligns with industry best practices in disaster recovery planning.

Prioritize Stakeholder Training

Invest in continuous professional development for healthcare workers to ensure seamless adoption of new technologies. The GHIMS team should organize biweekly workshops to bridge competency gaps.

Enhance Transparency in Procurement Processes

Publicly document contract negotiations and system evaluations to build trust. Transparency reduces accusations of blackmail and fosters collaborative problem-solving, as recommended by Zaato and Akandoh.

Points of Caution

Perils of Rushed Digital Transitions

Hastily decommissioning LHIMS without verifying GHIMS’s readiness risks patient data loss and operational paralysis. A 2023 WHO report noted that 62% of developing nations face IT transition missteps due to poor risk assessment.

Balancing Innovation with Legacy Systems

While GHIMS aims to modernize healthcare, abrupt retirement of LHIMS could destabilize rural clinics reliant on its infrastructure. Phased decommissioning remains critical to equity in service delivery.

Navigating Political and Technical Dynamics

Public health IT projects require politicians to comprehend technical nuances. Zaato’s critique highlights the need for ministers to collaborate with IT specialists rather than relying solely on policy directives.

Comparison: LHIMS vs. GHIMS

Data Ownership and Control

LHIMS operates under a maintenance contract granting the vendor significant data governance authority, whereas GHIMS positions the government as the sole custodian. This shift aims to eliminate third-party oversight, though it introduces new governance complexities.

Technical Scalability

GHIMS boasts enhanced interoperability with international health databases, unlike LHIMS’s isolated framework. However, its open-source design may pose cybersecurity challenges if not rigorously tested.

Cost Implications

While GHIMS reduces long-term licensing fees, upfront costs for infrastructure upgrades and staff training may strain public budgets. Zaato’s critique indirectly questions whether the financial burden was adequately assessed.

Legal Implications

Contract Enforcement and Breach Risks

If Akandoh’s allegations about LHIMS contractors are substantiated, Ghana’s Public Procurement Act (2003) could compel renegotiation of terms. Legal precedents in IT sector disputes, such as the 2019 Ghana National Petroleum Authority controversy, stress the importance of clause enforcement.

Accountability Under National Policies

Section 12 of the Health Facilities and Services Act mandates ministers to ensure “uninterrupted access to health records.” Zaato’s argument aligns with this provision, suggesting Akandoh’s office may face disciplinary action if systemic failures persist.

Conclusion

The LHIMS-GHIMS transition epitomizes the complexities of modernizing healthcare IT in resource-sensitive environments. While Zaato’s call for leadership accountability resonates with governance reforms, Akandoh’s focus on contractual accountability highlights the multifaceted nature of digital transformation. Resolving this dispute demands a synthesis of technical expertise, legal rigor, and ethical leadership to ensure Ghana’s health data sovereignty without compromising service continuity.

FAQ

Sources

• PleasureNews’ AM Show interview with Dr. Joshua Zaato (2025).
• Government Accountability Series on LHIMS-GHIMS transition (October 29, 2025).
• Ghana Health Service official statements on GHIMS deployment timelines.
• World Health Organization, “Digital Health Transition Challenges in Low-Income Countries” (2023).