Washington can ask Nigeria for health specimens and the data attached to them. The agreement Nigeria signed sets a five-day window to start sending.

The window sits in a specimen-sharing agreement signed in Abuja on 19 December 2025, which took effect on 18 January. Nigeria "agrees to initiate sharing specimen(s) and related data" within five days of receiving a US request, or on another timeline both sides agree case by case. The five days apply to starting the sharing, not to completing every transfer. If Washington asks, Nigeria can also send sequencing data through a public database instead of, or alongside, the specimens.

Nigeria also consents to Washington passing the specimens, and the related data, to US entities outside government. Each must be able to help develop diagnostics or medical countermeasures. Washington owes Nigeria written notice when it does.

The US is asking country by country. After leaving the World Health Organization, it is trying to collect outbreak information through a patchwork of deals with individual countries, ProPublica reported in June. KFF's tracker counts 35 countries that have signed health MOUs with Washington. Countries that sign those MOUs also sign separate specimen and data agreements, according to Public Citizen.

ProPublica reviewed six of the specimen agreements and describes them as covering pathogens that can cause pandemics. Five of the six say that when a medical product is developed mainly from one country's specimens, Washington puts that country's request behind American needs. Nigeria's is the exception. It commits Washington to facilitate priority access to any medical product developed from the specimens, and its donation. That is a commitment to facilitate access. It isn't a guarantee of supply.

ProPublica set that beside a recent precedent. Some countries hosted COVID-19 vaccine trials and later struggled to access the shots.

The specimen agreement was signed on the same day as a bigger one. Washington said it intends to commit nearly $2.1 billion under a five-year health MOU with Nigeria, with Nigeria adding nearly $3 billion in new health spending. The State Department added that the MOU was negotiated in connection with reforms Nigeria's government has made to protect Christian communities from violence.

Specimens and data are different things, and the assurances cover only one of them. State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott told ProPublica the agreements share only aggregated, de-identified data, consistent with each country's laws, and that no personally identifiable information reaches the US government. That is a government assurance about data. It doesn't say what the agreement counts as a specimen, or what related data includes.

Nigeria's own account is shorter. The Federal Ministry of Health describes the MOU as covering disease surveillance, health data systems and procedures involving pathogen samples. A summary of the MOU circulated in January. Nigeria Health Watch quoted it saying both countries "intend to negotiate a regulated data sharing arrangement" in line with data protection and privacy laws. That line concerns information on how the MOU performs over time. It describes wider cooperation and comes from a summary, not from the specimen agreement.

Bernard Okpi, a Nigerian lawyer, went to court over the MOU. His suit was filed on 16 March. It names the President, the Attorney General and the Federal Ministry of Health among the defendants. It asks the court to decide whether the MOU breaches the constitutional right to privacy and Nigeria's data protection laws. Those are his claims. No court has ruled on them. ProPublica reported in June that the case was pending and that the government hadn't answered its questions. "Why are they hiding the agreement if they think the terms are OK?" Okpi asked ProPublica.

On Tuesday, Atiku Abubakar, the ADC's presidential candidate, called on the government to publish the full MOU and every annex, including data-sharing and specimen-sharing arrangements. The specimen agreement itself is already online, on the State Department's website. His list is longer than that one document.

The agreement sets out a timeline for sharing. Okpi's case asks a court to decide whether the MOU breaches the constitutional right to privacy.