“The central question remains… When a government hospital admits that a patient died because of negligent medical care, what happens next?”
She went into the hospital, expecting treatment…She never returned home.
In September 2025, Aishatu Umar underwent surgery at the Abubakar Imam Urology Centre in Kano.
Unknown to her, a pair of surgical scissors was left inside her abdomen during the operation. For months she returned to the same hospital complaining of persistent abdominal pain.
According to official reports, the true cause was not identified until she underwent another operation in January 2026.
She died during that corrective surgery. She was a mother of five.
Government Hospital and medical negligence
The Kano State Hospitals Management Board subsequently acknowledged that there had been clear medical negligence.
Three healthcare personnel were suspended pending disciplinary proceedings, while the matter was referred to the Kano State Medical Ethics Committee.
The admission of negligence is significant. Public institutions do not often acknowledge such failures so openly.
Yet, the central question remains.
When a government hospital admits that a patient died because of negligent medical care, what happens next?
Does the family receive justice?
Does the law provide an effective remedy?
And what assurance exists that the same mistake will not claim another life?
These questions extend far beyond one hospital or one family. They go to the heart of public confidence in Nigeria’s healthcare system.
Beyond Human Error
Medicine is not an exact science.
Complications occur, even where healthcare professionals exercise reasonable skill and care. The law recognises this reality.
Negligence is something different.
It arises where a healthcare provider fails to exercise the standard of care reasonably expected of a competent professional, and that failure causes injury or death.
Leaving a surgical instrument inside a patient’s body is one of the clearest examples of a preventable medical error recognised worldwide.
Such incidents are often classified as “never events” — serious mistakes that should not occur where proper surgical safety procedures are followed.
Nigeria’s National Health Act 2014 and the MDCN’s Code of Medical Ethics both implicitly recognise the standard of care expected in surgical procedures, though neither explicitly adopts the “never events” framework used in the United Kingdom and United States.
The tragedy in Kano therefore raises not only clinical questions but institutional ones.
Were surgical counts properly conducted?
Were recognised safety protocols followed?
Were warning signs ignored when the patient repeatedly returned with severe pain?
These are precisely the questions that independent investigations are expected to answer.
What The Law Already Provides
Contrary to popular belief, Nigeria does possess a legal framework capable of addressing medical negligence.
A patient — or, where death occurs, the patient’s family — may pursue a civil action in negligence where it can be shown that the healthcare provider owed a duty of care, breached that duty, and caused injury or death.
Professional accountability also exists.
Under the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act, MDCN may investigate allegations of professional misconduct and, where appropriate, impose disciplinary sanctions ranging from suspension to removal from the register of practitioners.
The National Health Act 2014 establishes important principles concerning standards of healthcare delivery and patient rights.
More recently, the Federal High Court affirmed that the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission may investigate healthcare providers where issues of consumer protection arise, even while professional disciplinary proceedings remain within the jurisdiction of the MDCN.
These mechanisms demonstrate that Nigeria is not operating in a legal vacuum.
The difficulty lies elsewhere.
Where The System Falls Short
The greatest weakness is not necessarily the absence of law.
It is the gap between legal rights and practical access to justice.
Medical negligence litigation is often lengthy, expensive and emotionally exhausting.
Families who have already suffered devastating loss must obtain expert medical evidence, secure legal representation and pursue claims that may take years before reaching judgment.
Professional disciplinary proceedings are equally important, but they primarily regulate professional conduct. They are not designed to compensate bereaved families.
Criminal prosecution remains possible in exceptional circumstances where the evidence supports criminal negligence, but such cases are relatively uncommon and require a high legal threshold.
The result is a fragmented system.
One institution examines professional ethics.
Another determines civil liability.
Another considers criminal responsibility.
Each performs a legitimate function, yet none offers victims a single, timely pathway to justice.
For many families, justice delayed becomes justice abandoned.
Human Dignity Does Not End At The Hospital Door
Every discussion about medical negligence ultimately returns to one constitutional principle…
Section 34 of the Constitution guarantees the dignity of the human person.
Section 33 protects the right to life.
These are enforceable fundamental rights.
But the broader directive principles in Chapter II — including the state’s obligation to ensure adequate medical facilities under Section 17 — are not directly justiciable without legislative implementation.
This creates a constitutional paradox: the state promises healthcare for all, but the citizen cannot sue to enforce that promise until Parliament gives them a specific law to rely upon.
That is precisely why the National Health Insurance Authority Act 2022 was so significant. It transformed a constitutional aspiration into a justiciable framework.
Yet, even where rights are enforceable, the practical pathway to justice remains steep.
A hospital is not merely a building where medicine is practised.
It is a place where citizens entrust their lives to professionals.
That trust is the foundation of healthcare itself.
When preventable negligence destroys that trust, the damage extends beyond a single patient. It weakens public confidence in the entire healthcare system.
Patients become fearful.
Healthcare professionals become defensive.
Institutions become reluctant to acknowledge mistakes.
None of these outcomes serves the public interest.
Indeed, international experience increasingly demonstrates that healthcare systems become safer — not weaker — when they encourage transparent reporting of medical errors, independent investigation and institutional learning.
Accountability should not be understood merely as punishment.
Its deeper purpose is prevention.
Time For Stronger Reform
The Kano tragedy should become an opportunity for national reflection.
Nigeria should strengthen patient protection in several practical ways.
First, every healthcare institution should be required to implement internationally-recognised surgical safety protocols, including mandatory instrument counts and documented compliance before every operation is concluded.
Second, complaints involving serious patient harm should be investigated through transparent and independent processes that inspire public confidence while protecting the rights of both patients and healthcare professionals.
Third, government should consider specialised procedures for resolving medical negligence disputes more efficiently. Whether through dedicated tribunals or specialised court divisions, patients deserve quicker access to justice without compromising fairness.
Fourth, public hospitals should maintain adequate professional indemnity arrangements so that successful claims can be satisfied without prolonged disputes over compensation.
Finally, healthcare institutions should publish anonymised annual data on serious adverse events, corrective measures and patient safety improvements. Transparency strengthens trust far more effectively than silence.
The Bottom Line
Aishatu Umar’s death deserves careful investigation, legal accountability where appropriate, and meaningful institutional reform.
But this conversation is about more than one tragic case.
Every Nigerian will one day become a patient — or love someone who is.
When that day comes, citizens should be able to enter a hospital with confidence that established safety systems will protect them; that mistakes will be honestly acknowledged if they occur; and that the law will provide an effective remedy where negligence is established.
That is what health law should guarantee.
That is what human dignity demands.
And it begins with something as simple as counting the instruments before closing the incision.
•Sanu is a Nigerian lawyer, researcher and health law scholar. This column examines contemporary health policy and legal issues through the lens of accountability, justice and human dignity.
