When Healing Becomes Surveillance: The Case of Gifty Amoakowaa v Peace and Love Hospital

“Every patient that walks through your hospital doors brings more than just a health concern—they bring trust. Trust that their personal information, their diagnosis, their treatment history, and even their deepest fears will be kept safe. But what happens when that trust is broken—intentionally or accidentally?”- Emmanuel Gadasu

Case Brief: Gifty Amoakowaa v Peace and Love Hospital

Gifty Amoakowaa has filed a human rights suit against Peace and Love Hospital for installing a CCTV camera in a medical examination room without her knowledge or consent. The case challenges the legality of surveilling patients during sensitive breast examinations, citing violations of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution (Articles 15 & 18), the Data Protection Act 843, and the Patients’ Charter under the Public Health Act. It raises key questions about informed consent, doctor-patient confidentiality, and the ethical limits of surveillance in healthcare. The applicant seeks damages, the removal of the CCTV system, and deletion of any footage. The outcome could set a major precedent for privacy in Ghana’s medical sector.

In a likely-to-be landmark human rights case with major implications for privacy in healthcare, Gifty Amoakowaa is taking Peace and Love Hospital to court for allegedly breaching her constitutional and data protection rights. At the heart of the case is a simple yet provocative question: Can a patient undergoing a sensitive medical examination be unknowingly surveilled in the name of safety?

At stake are constitutional guarantees of human dignity and privacy (Articles 15 and 18(2) of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution), the Ghanaian Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843), and comparable standards under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The context: a CCTV camera installed in a consulting/examination room where breast examinations are conducted, without the patient's knowledge or consent.

CCTV Surveillance in Healthcare: A Breach of Trust?

Both Ghana's Data Protection Act 2012 (Act 843) and the GDPR classify health data as special category data requiring enhanced protection. The use of CCTV in examination rooms where intimate procedures are performed, without prior notification or consent, falls squarely outside acceptable processing grounds under both frameworks.

Act 843, Sections 17 and 20, require that:

• Personal data be collected fairly and lawfully;
• Data subjects be informed of the purpose of data collection (Section 21);
• Consent must be explicit, especially when sensitive data is involved;
• Processing should be necessary, proportionate, and with appropriate safeguards.

The GDPR echoes this through Articles 5(1)(a)-(f) and 9. Consent must be freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous. The data subject should know about the existence of the surveillance, the reason for it, how footage is handled, and their rights to object.

In Gifty Amoakowaa's case, she alleges she was never informed that a CCTV camera was operating during her examination. If proven, this violates not only her constitutional right to dignity and privacy, but also clear obligations under both Act 843 and GDPR. Even under hospital safety justifications, covert surveillance in an environment requiring utmost confidentiality undermines the core of the doctor-patient relationship.

Is Consent Always Required in Surveillance?

Yes, especially in medical contexts. Unlike bank lobbies or public buildings, consulting rooms are zones of high privacy expectation. Surveillance here requires not only consent but also a strong justification.

Under Act 843, consent is not just a procedural formality; it must be:

• Informed
• Prior to collection
• Given freely
• Withdrawable at any time

If the patient wasn't informed or didn’t consent, the collection and storage of video footage becomes unlawful processing. Additionally, failure to label the room as under surveillance or display visible CCTV signs constitutes a lack of transparency and a violation of the fairness principle.

What Could Peace and Love Hospital Have Done Differently?

1. Use a Chaperone: Instead of CCTV, sensitive procedures can be monitored ethically with a trained chaperone present—a standard best practice in many jurisdictions.
2. Get Explicit Consent: If surveillance is truly necessary, the hospital should explain:
   • Why the camera is there
   • What it records
   • Who sees the footage
   • How long it’s kept
3. Install Signage: Clearly label rooms under surveillance and provide privacy notices.
4. Data Minimization: Refrain from recording in high-privacy areas unless absolutely necessary. CCTV can be focused on entrances for security without compromising private examinations.

Chaperone vs. Camera: A Cultural and Legal Shift

Chaperones not only ensure professional integrity during examinations; they also protect both parties from legal challenges. Cameras, by contrast, record permanently, risk breaches, and strip patients of dignity. The use of chaperones is recognized in clinical guidelines across Europe and parts of Africa as a preferred alternative.

The Patients’ Charter
Section 167 of the Public Health Act 851 – Sixth Schedule – Patients Charter subsections 7, 8 and 9 states as follows:

7. The patient has the right to privacy during consultation, examination and treatment and in cases where it is necessary to use the notes of the patient’s case for teaching and conferences, the consent of the patient must be sought.

8. The patient is entitled to confidentiality of information obtained about the patient and that information shall not be disclosed to third party without the consent of the patient or the person entitled to act on the consent of the patient or the person entitled to act on behalf of the patient except where the information is required by law or is in the public interest.

9. The patient is entitled to the relevant information regarding policies and regulation of the health facilities that the patient attends.

Is there a breach of the Patients’ Charter? YES. Section 167 and the Sixth Schedule of Ghana’s Public Health Act, 2012 (Act 851) mandates that patients have a right to:

• Confidentiality
• Dignity
• Informed consent

Installing hidden or undisclosed CCTV violates all three. The psychological trauma cited by the applicant further emphasizes how trust was eroded.

A Precedent in the Making
This case is a wake-up call to all healthcare institutions in Ghana and beyond. While protecting medical staff and facilities is important, it cannot come at the cost of patient dignity, trust, and privacy. Technology should enhance care, not surveil it.

As data protection professionals, we must advocate for ethical practices that balance safety with rights. In a world growing ever more digitized, privacy is not a privilege—it is a patient’s right.

I conclude by saying “In a world where health records can be leaked with a single click, and one misplaced file can cost millions or even lives, data protection is no longer a ‘nice-to-have.’ It is a professional obligation. As health professionals, you don’t just save lives—you also safeguard identities.”

Emmanuel K. Gadasu
CEH, CDPS, CIPM, CIPP-E, BSc IT, MSc IT and Law, LLB*

Email: [email protected] Phone: +233 24391 3077