By A Correspondent| The government’s decision to gazette the Medical Services Amendment Act, 2026 has sparked criticism, with opponents arguing that the new law is yet another indication of the failure of Zimbabwe’s public healthcare system, forcing private hospitals to shoulder responsibilities traditionally expected of State institutions.

The legislation makes it a legal requirement for private hospitals and clinics to admit and treat every patient facing a life-threatening emergency, regardless of whether they can immediately pay for treatment.

Under the new law, private healthcare providers must care for emergency patients for at least 48 hours or until they are stabilised before any transfer can take place.

Government spokesperson Nick Mangwana announced the development, saying the amendment bars private medical institutions from refusing emergency patients because of financial limitations. He said those who defy the law could face stiff penalties, including fines or imprisonment.

According to the new legislation, heads of private healthcare institutions, or practitioners who unlawfully refuse emergency admissions, risk “fines up to level 8 or imprisonment for up to one year.”

Critics argue that instead of addressing the chronic collapse of public hospitals through improved funding, staffing and equipment, the government has shifted the burden onto private healthcare providers while offering no clear guarantee that they will be reimbursed promptly.

The law also empowers the Minister to direct private medical facilities to provide specialist services to public emergency patients during declared public emergencies.

While the legislation states that cost-recovery arrangements may be negotiated with either the State or the patients, critics question whether such payments will be made efficiently given the government’s history of financial constraints.

The gazetted amendment changes Chapter 15:13 of the Medical Services Act and defines “emergency medical treatment” as treatment required to address a “life-threatening but reversible deterioration in a person’s health status that causes an immediate risk to a person’s life or long term health” until the patient’s condition has been stabilised.

Opponents say the measure highlights the government’s inability to restore confidence in Zimbabwe’s struggling public health sector, arguing that compelling private institutions to absorb emergency cases is not a substitute for rebuilding the country’s own healthcare system.