10 observations Supreme Court made on COVID-19 vaccine policy on May 31
The Supreme Court on Monday slammed the Centre on the COVID-19 vaccine procurement and differential pricing for itself and states (Image: Reuters)“We saw a picture of a body being thrown in river. I do not know whether a sedition case has been filed against the news channel for showing that,” quipped Justice D Y Chandrachud when the issue of dignified handling of bodies of victims of the deadly virus was raised before a bench headed by him. (Image: Reuters)“The ability to recognise that I am wrong is not a sign of weakness, but that of strength,” Justice Chandrachud orally addressed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. (Image: Reuters)“The Central government has wide powers to fix rates under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act? Why to leave it to the vaccine manufacturers to fix different pricing?” the court said. (Image: AP)In the 18-44 group, 59 crore is the population, however, under the government formula, 50 percent of vaccines will be allocated to private hospitals but will half of 59 crore be able to afford private hospitals,” the apex court said. (Image: AP)The court also hit out at the government for mandatory CoWin registration for the rural population and asked it to wake up and “smell the coffee” on the digital divide. (Image: Reuters)“Policymakers must have some flexibility. Our arms are strong enough to come down if we see there is non-compliance,” said the Supreme Court (Image: Reuters)“Article 1 (1) says that India is a union of states, if we are a union of states, the government of India needs to procure vaccines for the entire country. It can’t be left to individual states, municipal corporations, they will be left in the lurch, ” observed the top court. (Image: Reuters)“Centre’s affidavit provides for 25% of vaccines for private hospitals, there are no private hospitals in rural areas. Centre’s current policy seems to be exclusionary to rural areas,” the court said. (Image: Reuters)“Give us a policy document of the government of India, not simply an affidavit We can’t simply have an affidavit authorized by a Joint Secy level officers,” said the court. (Image: Reuters)
