A debate has emerged in Uganda following the death of MP Helen Nakimuli, with sections of the public demanding details of her medical condition prior to her passing.
However, journalist Edris Kiggundu has pushed back strongly against those calls, saying they ignore basic medical ethics and patient privacy laws.
The discussions, largely driven through social media and public commentary, have focused on Alexandria Medical Centre and whether it should release information explaining the circumstances that led to Nakimuli’s death.
Kiggundu says such expectations are misplaced and legally problematic.
“It is strange and funny how even supposedly exposed and educated people are asking Alexandria Medical Centre to reveal details of Hon Nakimuli’s health conditions that led to her death,” he said.
He emphasized that medical facilities and doctors are bound by doctor-patient confidentiality, which prohibits them from disclosing a patient’s health information without consent.
According to him, this obligation does not automatically end when a patient dies.
Kiggundu added that even post-mortem examinations are limited in what they reveal, focusing only on determining cause of death rather than exposing a full medical history.
He noted that such reports are carefully written to avoid violating ethical and legal standards.
He also pointed out that in many cases, doctors can only share medical details with family members if the patient had previously given permission.
Where no consent exists, access remains restricted, regardless of public interest.
In Nakimuli’s case, Kiggundu suggested that only close relatives may have had partial knowledge of her health condition before her death, with full details still protected under medical confidentiality rules.
“Now that Nakimuli is dead and not in a position to make any decision, only a quack and unethical doctor or facility would reveal details of her health to an emotional public,” he said.
Kiggundu further criticized what he described as public double standards, arguing that many of those demanding disclosure would object if their own medical records were exposed without consent.
The remarks have added to an already heated conversation in Uganda about privacy rights versus public interest, especially when it involves elected leaders.
While some argue that transparency is necessary in cases involving public figures, others insist that medical confidentiality must remain absolute.