The Cornea Transplant Controversy in Libya -Medical Service or Political Scandal?

Introduction: Who Sparked the Controversy?

The Libyan political activist Husam El-Gomati ignited a national controversy after publishing a series of official documents that allegedly exposed financial and medical violations in Libya’s cornea transplant program.

The issue escalated when a medical team from the Government of National Unity, led by Abdulhamid Dbeibah, arrived at Tobruk Airport, an area controlled by the Libyan government under Osama Hammad. The medical team was reportedly denied entry and prevented from conducting cornea transplant surgeries, triggering public outrage and a wave of conflicting narratives.

In response, the Ministry of Health under the Hammad government issued an official statement explaining its reasons for blocking the procedures at Tobruk Medical Center.

This investigative report examines official documents, contracts, financial records, and governmental statements to uncover the underlying facts in this case.

Part One: The Ministry of Health’s Official Statement

Following the controversy, the Ministry of Health under the Hammad government released a statement on February 15, 2025, justifying its decision to reject the cornea transplant operations at Tobruk Medical Center.

Key Points from the Statement

1. Compliance with International Medical Standards: The ministry insisted that all corneas must be imported from an officially accredited eye bank in the United States, specifically one registered under the Eye Bank Association of America (EBAA).

2. Concerns Over Cornea Sources: A national medical review determined that eight out of seventeen corneas were sourced from CorneaGen Seattle, an American eye bank that is not a primary registered member of the EBAA. This raised concerns about the inability to verify the quality of the corneas.

3. Unverified Corneas: The remaining nine corneas lacked proper documentation certifying their suitability for transplantation, prompting the ministry to prohibit their use in surgical procedures.

4. Concerns About the Lead Surgeon’s Credentials: The medical review also questioned whether the lead surgeon was certified as a specialist in corneal transplantation, casting doubt on the medical legitimacy of the planned procedures.

Response from the Government of National Unity

While the Government of National Unity’s Ministry of Health did not issue an official rebuttal, sources within the ministry described the decision as politically motivated rather than based on legitimate medical or ethical concerns.

Part Two: The Conflict Between Contracts and Medical Standards

• In 2024, the Libyan Ministry of Health signed a contract worth 17.9 million Libyan dinars with Al-Aham Medical Services to import corneas.

• The Libyan Audit Bureau rejected the contract, citing inflated pricing and a lack of quality assurances.

• Medical reports later indicated that some of the imported corneas failed to meet international medical standards, leading to complications in previous transplant patients.

Were the Imported Corneas Safe for Transplantation?

• Documents published by Husam El-Gomati indicate that some of the corneas were not tested according to EBAA standards.

• The Libyan Audit Bureau flagged the procurement process for a lack of financial and medical transparency.

Part Three: The Patients Caught in the Crossfire

While officials debate the legality of contracts and medical qualifications, patients remain the primary victims.

• Previous corneal transplant patients in Libya reported severe complications, including rapid immune rejection.

• Libya lacks a national database to track transplant success rates, making medical oversight difficult.

With these facts in mind, the key question is whether these cornea transplant procedures were driven by patient well-being or financial gain.

Part Four: Unanswered Questions

1. Who authorized the contracts with non-certified suppliers?

2. Why were the results of previous corneal transplants in Libya not disclosed?

3. Were political factions exploiting this case for their own interests?

4. What happens to the patients who were awaiting surgery?

Recommendations for Transparency and Accountability

• An independent medical audit should be conducted on all imported corneas to verify compliance with international standards.

• A transparent investigation should be launched into the financial dealings of the Ministry of Health.

• A national tracking system should be established to monitor corneal transplant outcomes.

• The issue must be depoliticized to ensure patient safety is prioritized over political disputes.

Conclusion: Will the Truth Be Uncovered?

This case is no longer just about medical ethics; it has become a corruption scandal and a political power struggle between two rival governments.

The next steps must include a full and transparent investigation into financial mismanagement and the medical risks posed to patients.

The key question remains: Will accountability be enforced, or will this case become another unresolved political controversy at the expense of Libyan citizens?

This investigation remains open, and further developments will be reported as they emerge.