No One Can Be Forced To Get
Vaccinated : Says Supreme Court
Covid-19 Vaccination: Restrictions
imposed on individuals through vaccine mandates cannot be called to be
proportionate, the court said.
New Delhi, 3rd May,
Tuesday
No one can be forced to take
the vaccine, the Supreme Court said today in a landmark decision on India's
Covid vaccine policy, also directing the central government to publish reports
on the adverse effects of vaccination.
"Bodily integrity is
protected under the law and nobody can be forced to be vaccinated," the
Supreme Court said. The court asserted, however, that "certain limitations
on individual rights" could be imposed in the interest of community
health.
"Barring
Covid-appropriate behaviour, we suggest no curbs on unvaccinated individuals in
access to public places, services and resources if cases are low," the
Supreme Court said.
Restrictions imposed on
individuals through vaccine mandates cannot be called to be proportionate, the
court said - a refence to many states making it essential for people to get the
Covid shot to access public places. "Till infection numbers are low we
suggest that no restriction is imposed on individuals on access to public
places, services and resources. Recall the same if already done," the
Supreme Court ordered.
Supreme Court Justices LN Rao
and BR Gavai added that their directives did not extend to Covid-appropriate
behaviour, but was limited to vaccines in the "rapidly evolving
situation".
The Supreme Court also
directed the Centre to publish reports on adverse events of vaccines from
people and doctors on a publicly accessible system, without compromising the
details of the individuals reporting them.
"Regarding segregation of
vaccine trial data, subject to the privacy of individuals, all trials already
conducted and to be subsequently conducted, all data must be made available to
the public without further delay," the court said.
"Regarding vaccine for
children, it is not possible for us to second guess the opinion of experts and
the vaccination indeed follows the global standards and practices. However,
data of adverse reactions should be published at the earliest."
A petition by Jacob Puliyel, a
former member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (NTAGI),
had argued that states mandating vaccination for accessing benefits or services
is a violation of citizens' rights, and therefore, unconstitutional. Many
states, said the petition, had made vaccines necessary for state government
employees, for travel in public transport and to access subsidised food grains.
The petition called for
clinical trial data of Covid vaccines to be made public and alleged that
vaccines being administered had not been adequately tested for safety or
efficacy and were licensed under emergency use authorisation without trial data
being disclosed to the public.
The Centre had argued in court
that the petition was "against national interest" and would create
vaccine hesitancy. It had also said vaccination is voluntary but states had
enforced mandates "based on potential hazards".
Vaccine makers like Adar
Poonwalla's Serum Institute of India and Bharat Biotech had told the court that
all trial data was already in the public domain. Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and
Madhya Pradesh defended their vaccine mandates, calling them essential for the
safety of every person, especially those using public spaces and transport.