Healthcare funders seek Parly backing to block proposed regulations 

STAFF WRITER

Zimbabwe’s healthcare funders have appealed to Parliament to block proposed regulations that would bar medical aid societies from owning, managing or operating healthcare facilities, warning the move could destabilise the health sector, undermine investor confidence and trigger constitutional disputes.

In a letter dated June 19, 2026, addressed to the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Eddison Zvobgo Jr, and seen by Business Times, the Association of Healthcare Funders of Zimbabwe (AHFOZ) urged legislators to reject the proposed regulations, arguing they threaten investments in healthcare infrastructure and violate constitutionally protected property rights.

AHFOZ said the proposed measures, if enacted, would have far-reaching consequences for Zimbabwe’s healthcare delivery system, disrupting integrated care models, weakening access to quality medical services and creating significant legal and economic uncertainty.

The industry body argues the regulations amount to an unlawful restructuring of the healthcare sector through subsidiary legislation rather than an Act of Parliament.

“On behalf of our members and the medical aid industry at large, we respectfully seek the intervention and scrutiny of your committee in relation to the proposed amendment,” AHFOZ chief executive Shylet Sanyanga.

“The proposed amendment seeks to prohibit medical aid societies from owning, managing or operating healthcare services or facilities. It further seeks to compel the affected societies to submit divestiture plans in respect of existing healthcare investments.”

She said AHFOZ had already submitted separate representations to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Health and Child Care, outlining how the proposed ban could undermine healthcare access, affordability and protection of medical aid members.

However, she said the latest submission focuses on the legality of the proposed regulations.

Sanyanga argued that while the Minister has authority to issue regulations necessary to implement the Medical Services Act, that power does not extend to imposing a blanket ban on vertical integration or compelling institutions to dispose of lawfully acquired assets.

“The proposed prohibition goes beyond the regulation of administrative, operational or supervisory matters contemplated by Section 16 of the Medical Services Act,” she said.

“It is also our considered view that the proposed amendment is ultra vires the enabling legislation.”

According to AHFOZ, the Medical Services Act encourages the development and expansion of healthcare services and does not prohibit medical aid societies from investing in healthcare infrastructure.

The association contends that introducing such a fundamental policy shift through ministerial regulations rather than primary legislation would sidestep Parliament on an issue with significant implications for investment, property rights and healthcare delivery.

AHFOZ also argues that compulsory divestiture would constitute an unjustifiable interference with constitutionally protected property rights while disrupting established healthcare networks.

It warned that forcing medical aid societies to sell hospitals and other healthcare assets would discourage future investment in healthcare infrastructure, create uncertainty for employees and patients, weaken integrated healthcare delivery systems and ultimately increase costs for medical aid members.

The association further challenged the competition rationale underpinning the proposed regulations, saying competition matters fall within the jurisdiction of the Competition and Tariff Commission under the Competition Act.

Rather than imposing a blanket prohibition, Sanyanga said concerns around vertical integration should be assessed individually through established competition law processes.

“If allowed, the effect of this amendment would be an indirect amendment of the Competition Act in so far as it allows vertical integration,” she said.

AHFOZ warned that the regulations could trigger forced sales of strategic healthcare assets, disrupt provider networks and increase reliance on third-party healthcare providers with limited capacity.

“The practical consequences of the proposed amendment are equally significant,” Sanyanga said.

“Forced divestiture will lead to forced sales of critical healthcare assets, uncertainty for employees and patients, disruption of established provider networks, reduced investment in healthcare infrastructure and increased costs for medical aid members.”

The association urged Parliament to subject the proposed reforms to a full legislative process, supported by extensive stakeholder consultations and evidence-based assessments of their likely impact on competition, healthcare access and affordability.