SC questions govt on its vaccination policy
The Supreme Court on Monday asked the central government to “smell the coffee” and modify its policy that requires states to pay more for Covid-19 vaccines, besides ensuring that the marginalised and rural population are not left out of the vaccination drive due to India’s digital divide.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, said the entire eligible population of the country would be vaccinated by the year-end.
Resuming its hearing of the suo motu (on its own motion) case on handling of the second Covid-19 wave, the top court was emphatic that the Union government’s policy lacked a “vision” and it did not take into account several crucial aspects to tackle issues at present and in future.
The bench, led by justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, remarked that “policy makers must have their ears to the ground” as it flagged several areas of concern, asking why states had to pay more than the Centre for the vaccine, and how the Centre planned to ensure people in rural areas could get the vaccine when registration on the COWIN digital platform was mandatory. Appearing for the Centre, solicitor general Tushar Mehta informed the court that the Centre expected to vaccinate the entire population of the country by the end of this year, as he also sought to justify the dual pricing of vaccines. About mandatory registration on Cowin, the SG said it was done in view of limited health infrastructure and to avoid overcrowding at centres.
But the bench, which included justices L Nageswara Rao and S Ravindra Bhat, remained unimpressed with the submissions and regretted that the Centre did not seem to have paid heed to suggestions mooted by the court in its April 30 order on vaccine pricing and rural health care.
“You smell the coffee and see what’s happening across the country and change your policies. It cannot be a day-to-day ad hoc response to as and when problems occur. Absent guidelines and absent policy, you will have ad hoc decisions. There has to be a clear-cut policy of decision making and a vision for the present and for the future, which is perhaps lacking today. We will like your policy to be amended,” it said. Asking the government to show a “little bit of flexibility”, the court said that it was not enough for the Centre to claim only it knew what was best for the people and that they must also remember that “our arms are strong enough to come down” if there was continued resistance to consider changes.