Operationalising the Health Cooperation Framework between the Government of Kenya and the United States — in full compliance with Kenya’s data protection architecture, including the Data Protection Act and the Health Act — is not optional. It is sacrosanct. And this is precisely why the new cooperation framework, which provides for the transfer, sharing, and analysis of epidemiological and medical data, has triggered ethical and legal anxieties. It should. Questions of data sovereignty, ownership, custodianship, and use lie at the heart of responsible public health governance.
At the centre of these debates, whether viewed through a deontological or utilitarian lens, is a simple question: How does the strategic use of health data serve the interests of the Kenyan people without compromising individual privacy and dignity? Data that is collected, protected, and securely stored but never used for public benefit is of little value. Yet its use must never come at the expense of inalienable personal rights.
To illustrate: What value is there in protecting my data as a young man from Suna East in Migori if that protection yields no benefit for me or my community? Conversely, if the aggregate and anonymised use of that data can lead to better health outcomes, more targeted interventions, and more efficient allocation of public resources — all without exposing me — then the issue becomes one of balance, proportionality, and the pursuit of the greater good.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
In data ethics, the starting point is recognising that every data point represents a human being. Once this is acknowledged, the task is to determine how that data can be used to maximise benefit and minimise harm. This dilemma is not new. When Marshall McLuhan spoke of the “global village,” he gestured toward the interconnected world we now inhabit — one in which pandemics, terror threats, and climate emergencies transcend borders. Health crises are no longer localised; they are global risks that must be addressed at their root.
Health, perhaps more than any other sphere, embodies this interdependence. As the elders in my community say, mountains do not move, but people do and where people move, disease can follow. In this “planetary culture” that scholars now describe, health security is not the responsibility of one nation alone; it is a collective duty.
This is why debates around data sovereignty have intensified globally. The Kenya-US framework has ignited these discussions here at home, with critics — some well-meaning, others misinformed — claiming that Kenyans are surrendering personal information to a foreign government. Political actors opposed to the current administration have amplified these fears, often relying on misinterpretation of the document.
Yet the facts remain straightforward: no credible public health system anywhere in the world collects data without clear rules on purpose, protection, and anonymisation. Ethical practice demands that data be anonymised, confidentiality ensured, and no information traceable to an identifiable individual. A closer reading of the framework — or even a basic understanding of data protection — should reassure residents of Nyikendo in Suna East or any Kenyan in any village. No one will access their personal health records. The data shared is aggregate, not individualised.
But why share data at all? And what does Kenya gain? Yes, Kenya receives billions in health-related support. And yes, donors expect accountability. The shift from a heavily NGO-driven model to a Government-to-Government partnership means the United States must rely on strong monitoring, evaluation, and learning systems — all dependent on reliable health data. These investments are improving the lives of people in Chwele in Bungoma, Nyikendo in Migori, Sagana in Nyeri and beyond. The core question, therefore, is whether holding government — this one or future ones — accountable for results justifies the framework. From a research and data protection standpoint, the answer is yes.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Success!
Almost finished…
We need to confirm your email address.
To complete the process, please follow the instructions in the email we just sent you.
Error!
There was a problem processing your submission. Please try again later.
It is therefore misleading to claim that individuals are at risk of exposure. What is being shared is aggregated epidemiological data to track disease patterns, strengthen early-warning systems, and improve health responses. In a global village, a health threat in Kenya is a health threat in the United States, South-East Asia, and Latin America. A pestilence affects the entire village; if the village elders do not act decisively, everyone suffers.
The duty before us is clear: to ensure that Kenya’s participation in this framework maximises national benefit, protects individual dignity, and fortifies — not weakens — our sovereignty. That duty is non-negotiable, and we cannot afford to ignore it.