The ambitious National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme runs the risk of becoming an aspirational policy rather than a reality unless fundamental deployment obstacles rooted in systemic policy misalignment, fragmented governance structures and legal constraints, are addressed first.
Writing in the SA Medical Journal, N Mofolo and C Heunis present a critical analysis of five major constitutional violations, multi-departmental co-ordination failures and financial sustainability concerns that they believe threaten the NHI’s transformative potential.
Mofolo and Heunis write:
Our perspective challenges current execution strategies, and proposes that without comprehensive organisational reforms addressing constitutional alignment, inter-departmental co-ordination and fiscal realities, the NHI risks becoming an aspirational policy rather than an operational reality. This analysis aims to promote scientific discourse about the need for systemic reform as a prerequisite for successful universal health coverage (UHC) deployment in this country.
The signing of the NHI Act on 15 May 2024 marked what many celebrated as a historic milestone towards UHC. This landmark legislation promises to transform a fragmented health system into a unified framework, providing healthcare based on need rather than the ability to pay.
However, our perspective challenges the predominant optimism among policy advocates surrounding this legislation, acknowledging that media and civil society commentary reflects substantial scepticism regarding implementation feasibility.
Addressing proponents’ arguments
While advocates argue that deployment obstacles are typical for transformative policies and can be resolved through adaptive management, we contend that the scale and nature of legal, fiscal and co-ordination barriers represent fundamental organisational impediments rather than manageable execution difficulties.
This opinion piece frames the NHI’s obstacles as symptoms of deeper systemic misalignment requiring constitutional, monetary and governance reform before meaningful progress can occur.
As we have demonstrated previously, health workforce policies were misaligned with NHI requirements even during preparatory phases. Such policy incoherence is inevitable given absent enabling organisational frameworks
The constitutional crisis perspective
Our analysis reveals that the Act faces fundamental juridical crisis, rendering roll-out legally vulnerable. Legal analyses identify five major constitutional violations, making the NHI constitutionally untenable.
Specific constitutional solutions required
Section 27 amendment: Explicitly define UHC achievement without restricting existing private medical schemes’ healthcare access. Unlike current provisions that may force patients into inadequate public systems, amendments must guarantee enhanced rather than limited access options.
Section 22 clarification: Establish precise limitations on state regulatory powers over healthcare professionals. The Gauteng High Court’s Certificate of Need (CoN) ruling demonstrates that current regulatory frameworks systematically violate professional freedoms.
Provincial powers framework: Define exact circumstances permitting national legislation to override provincial health authority, with mandatory consultation processes. Current centralisation creates organisational tension between national imperatives and provincial autonomy.
Addressing counterarguments: Proponents argue that legal infractions can be resolved through legislative amendments rather than constitutional reform. However, the Board of Healthcare Funders court case and Solidarity ruling establish legal precedent, suggesting deeper constitutional incompatibilities, requiring fundamental amendment rather than statutory adjustment.
International comparison: Unlike SA, successful UHC systems in Canada and Australia established clear legal frameworks before deployment, preventing the juridical vulnerabilities currently plaguing the NHI.
Multi-departmental co-ordination: A systems failure perspective
These constitutional challenges are compounded by unprecedented co-ordination requirements across government departments
The NHI requires co-ordination across 12 government departments, yet institutional arrangements perpetuate the fragmentation that the policy seeks to address.
Specific co-ordination solutions
Mandatory intergovernmental framework: Establish legally binding co-operation processes, with performance indicators and penalties for non-compliance. Health infrastructure depends on public works departments, whose priorities diverge from health timelines, and Treasury controls allocations, potentially misaligned with NHI demands.
Integrated information systems: With debt-service costs now consuming >20% of government revenue, fiscal space for the substantial technological investment required by NHI is severely constrained. NHI requires unified patient registration systems linking the departments of Home Affairs (identity verification) and Social Development (means testing), replacing independent operations that currently compromise service delivery efficiency.
Beyond administrative integration, success depends on interoperable electronic health records and billing systems across provincial boundaries and public-private interfaces.
Current fragmented digital infrastructure, with provinces and private entities operating incompatible systems, creates substantial co-ordination barriers requiring significant technological investment before implementation.
Fiscal reality: Current gross domestic product (GDP) growth, averaging 1.9% for 2025-2027, with debt-to-GDP ratios exceeding 73%, makes sustainable NHI funding mathematically impossible without either significant tax increases or reduced service promises, neither of which existing policy acknowledges.
The brain drain challenge: Research shows that 914 900 South Africans had emigrated by mid-2020, 120 000 of whom had professional qualifications.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development data indicate that >23 400 SA health professionals are working in the UK, New Zealand, the USA and Australia.
While advocates suggest skills retention programmes can address emigration, SA Reserve Bank data confirming debt-service costs reaching R385.9bn annually indicate financial limitations preventing effective retention incentives.
Urban-rural disparities: beyond regulatory solutions
Beyond co-ordination failures, regulatory approaches to health equity face fundamental limitations. Our perspective questions beliefs that regulatory instruments can address profound urban-rural health disparities, with only 12% of doctors and 19% of nurses working in rural areas, despite rural populations comprising nearly half of the country’s residents.
Rural areas lack the economic infrastructure, career development opportunities and quality-of-life amenities necessary to attract and retain healthcare professionals.
The certificate of need misconception: The Gauteng High Court’s unconstitutional declaration requiring healthcare providers to obtain government approval before establishing new facilities, expanding services, or relocating practice, validates our perspective that regulatory coercion cannot substitute for addressing fundamental monetary barriers.
Organisational solutions required: Rather than regulatory compulsion, rural healthcare requires comprehensive fiscal development addressing infrastructure, career opportunities and quality-of-life amenities. Brazil’s successful rural health programmes succeeded through monetary incentives and infrastructure investment, not regulatory mandates, demonstrating organisational strategies’ superiority over coercive instruments.
Acknowledging the NHI’s vision while challenging implementation
Despite these critical observations, we explicitly acknowledge the NHI’s potential benefits: universal coverage, financial risk protection and improved service quality. While advocates argue that existing difficulties reflect normal policy maturation requiring patience and adaptive management, the evidence of five legal infractions, multi-departmental failures and fiscal limitations suggests systemic rather than developmental problems.
The NHI addresses legitimate equity concerns by bridging the two-tiered system. However, socioeconomic inequalities and employment obstacles limiting formal employment to 45% of working-age adults constrain revenue generation essential for NHI sustainability
Systemic reform requirements
Legal prerequisites
Successful NHI deployment requires three fundamental legal prerequisites that must be established before roll-out. These are: (i) a constitutional amendment defining state healthcare powers while protecting individual rights; (ii) an intergovernmental co-ordination Act establishing mandatory co-operation with dispute resolution mechanisms; and (iii) an economic sustainability provision requiring demonstrated fiscal capacity before implementation.
Performance monitoring framework
Constitutional amendments must mandate transparent performance metrics and independent evaluation mechanisms to ensure NHI accountability and enable course corrections during implementation phases.
Phased implementation strategy
This framework necessitates a five-phase deployment strategy that prioritises structural reform over immediate service expansion. The approach progresses sequentially through:
(i) a constitutional phase (12-18 months) addressing legal framework deficiencies through parliamentary amendment processes;
(ii) a governance phase (6-12 months) establishing functional co-ordination mechanisms across departments;
(iii) an economic phase achieving minimum growth and employment targets;
(iv) a pilot phase (12-24 months) testing integrated delivery in controlled environments; and finally,
(v) a scale phase, expanding based on demonstrated success rather than policy promises.
While this approach requires substantial upfront investment in legal and institutional frameworks, international evidence demonstrates long-term cost savings through reduced implementation failures.
This phased approach reflects successful international practices, particularly Taiwan’s UHC deployment that established juridical clarity and monetary prerequisites before system-wide execution. Such a systematic approach demonstrates that constitutional frameworks and fiscal sustainability represent prerequisites rather than outcomes of effective UHC implementation.
Evidence-based policy development
Moving beyond systemic reform requirements, sustainable NHI success demands evidence-driven approaches. We advocate evidence-based development acknowledging organisational limitations, rather than assuming resolution through execution.
While proponents suggest that difficulties can be overcome through incremental adjustments, the persistent departmental silos, regulatory gaps and fiscal unsustainability indicate that comprehensive organisational reform is necessary, rather than symptomatic interventions.
Existing strategies perpetuate rather than resolve systemic impediments to successful UHC. International experiences demonstrate that countries achieving sustainable UHC invested significantly in preparatory phases, contrasting sharply with SA’s implementation-first approach.
Conclusion: a call for systemic reform
Our perspective presents a necessary critique to existing NHI methodologies while supporting the UHC vision. Good intentions cannot overcome the organisational misalignment, legal barriers and monetary restrictions that characterise present frameworks.
Evidence of constitutional violations, co-ordination failures and sustainability obstacles suggests that existing strategies will perpetuate rather than resolve systemic impediments. SA’s path demands governance architecture, a juridical framework and fiscal policy transformation as deployment prerequisites.
While NHI advocates argue for patience and adaptive management, international evidence from successful UHC systems demonstrates that legal clarity, financial sustainability and co-ordinated governance represent prerequisites rather than outcomes of effective deployment.
The choice facing policy-makers is clear: pursue comprehensive organisational reform encompassing constitutional, monetary and governance dimensions before NHI execution, or accept continued policy failure while health inequities persist.
Without addressing fundamental barriers, the NHI risks becoming another well-intentioned policy that fails to achieve transformative potential.
N Mofolo,¹ MFamMed, DBA (Higher Education Management); C Heunis,² PhD (Sociology)
¹ Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria; ² Centre for Health Systems Research and Development, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein.
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
NHI setbacks delay implementation further
NHI must pivot from extractive model towards value-based care
Other options than NHI for quality UHC
ANC says NHI Bill is next best thing to the Cuban solution