The Supreme Court on Monday declared that no individual can be forced to get the Covid-19 vaccine as bodily integrity and personal autonomy recognised under Article 21 of the Constitution encompassed the right to refuse any medical treatment in the individual sphere.
The top court, however, at the same time, said the government is entitled to regulate public health concerns by imposing certain limitations on individual rights which are open to scrutiny by courts.
A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai also held that the current Covid-19 vaccination policy of the Union government cannot be said to be unreasonable or manifestly arbitrary. The Centre had maintained its Covid-19 vaccine policy is voluntary but a few States and organisations made it mandatory for access to certain places or services.
Recognising the Centre's policy, the court noted, the near-unanimous views of experts on the benefits of vaccination in addressing severe diseases from the infection, reduction in oxygen requirement, hospital and ICU admissions, mortality and stopping new variants from emerging.
Acting on a plea by advocate Prashant Bhushan on behalf of Dr Jacob Puliyel, a former member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, the court pointed out no data has been placed by the Union government or the States, controverting the material placed in the form of emerging scientific opinion that the risk of transmission of the virus from unvaccinated individuals is almost on par with that from vaccinated persons.
So, the top court declared the restrictions on unvaccinated individuals imposed through various vaccine mandates by state governments or Union Territories cannot be said to be proportionate.
"Till the infection rate remains low and any new development or research finding emerges which provides due justification to impose reasonable and proportionate restrictions on the rights of unvaccinated individuals, we suggest that all authorities in this country, including private organisations and educational institutions, review the relevant orders and instructions imposing restrictions on unvaccinated individuals in terms of access to public places, services and resources, if not already recalled," the bench ordered.
The court, however, said its suggestion to review the vaccine mandates is limited to the present situation alone and is not to be construed as interfering with the lawful exercise of power by the executive.
It rejected a contention by the petitioner that restricted emergency use approvals had been granted to Covishield and Covaxin in haste, without a thorough review of the relevant data, relying upon the material placed by the Union government.
The court, however, said all relevant data required to be published under the extant statutory regime must be made available to the public without undue delay, subject to the protection of privacy of individuals. It also directed the Union government to facilitate reporting of suspected adverse events of the Covid-19 vaccine by individuals and private doctors on an accessible virtual platform.
While approving the decision by the Centre to vaccinate children, the court also directed the Union government to ensure that key findings and results of the relevant phases of clinical trials of vaccines already approved by the regulatory authorities for administration to children, must be made public at the earliest, if not already done.
Check out the latest DH videos here: