Open Forum
New Delhi, 9 April
2020
Public Health Emergency
EXTRAORDINARY POWER VITAL
By Dr. S. Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)
The Supreme Court has
held that all restrictions imposed on people from entering, attending, or
taking part in court proceedings is lawful in the wake of the Covid-19
pandemic. These are considered to be in tune with best public health practices
to contain the contagion. The SC made it clear that public health takes
precedence over conventions.
When the WHO declared
a global health emergency on 31 January after exportation of coronavirus from
China to many other countries was noticed, all countries were required to be ready
for containment, including active surveillance, early detection, isolation,
contact tracing, case management and prevention of onward transmission of COVID-19
infection. India as an affected nation has to take strong emergency measures
necessary to control the spread of the epidemic.
Indian Constitution
originally provided for three kinds of emergencies -- external aggression,
internal disturbances, and financial emergency. The provision for declaring
emergency to deal with internal disturbance was removed in 1977 and was
replaced by the term “armed rebellion”. When emergency is in force, the executive
power of the Union extends to giving directions to any State as to the manner
in which its executive power should be exercised.
Under the Indian
Constitution, public health and sanitation, hospitals and dispensaries are in
the State List in the distribution of powers. However, prevention of extension
from one State to another of contagious diseases or pests affecting men,
animals, and plants are in the Concurrent List.
Article 21 of the
Constitution guarantees protection of life and personal liberty to every
citizen as a fundamental right. The Supreme Court has held that the right to
live with human dignity derives from the Directive Principles and includes
improvement of public health among the primary duties of the State. The right
to health is held to be integral to the right to life and the government has a
constitutional obligation to provide health facilities. The SC has upheld the
State’s obligation to maintain health services.
The law that gives
power to the State to take action in times of epidemics is the Epidemic
Diseases Act enacted in 1897 and is being used whenever required. Under this, Central
and State governments are empowered to take strong measures to control the spread
of coronavirus.
Whether there is any
provision to declare specific Health Emergency under the Constitution or not,
situation in our country today calls for vesting extraordinary powers with the
government to take stern action to control COVID-19 epidemic. As the virus has
imported itself from abroad, it amounts to an external aggression from
unidentified source – natural or human. The epidemic, because of its severity
and speed of transmission, requires strict restrictions on normal activities including
movements and contacts, production and distribution of goods and thousands of related
work.
Massive human
problems like return of migrants to their native places in panic are
unavoidable and the governments have to handle them in a humane manner while
keeping strong grip over the measures undertaken. Without some extraordinary
powers and their strict application, and without tightening rules and
procedures, it is not possible to fight epidemics and their pathological and
human friends.
The impact of all
this will adversely affect the nation’s financial state as in all other
countries and will demand strong financial regulations as emergency measures to
tide over the crisis and save our
economy. Hopefully, our strong informal economy and the unorganized sector will
keep the country going.
The principal
criteria in declaration of emergency in any democratic country appear to be
present in India today. They include an exigent situation that demands prompt
decisions accompanied with quick action; enormous actual and potential danger
to lives, and safety and health of the people; and a situation that could not
be controlled by normal laws, regulations and procedures.
Added to these, pandemics
occur without any warning and do not respond to normal action. They are invisible enemies. The entire
government machinery at the Central, State and local levels and various private
and voluntary agencies are fully engaged in fighting Covid-19 from various
angles – a situation that the country had never experienced even in war time.
There can be and should not be any opposition to granting extraordinary powers
to the government to quell the disease – no matter by what name it is
called.
Section 144 is
imposed in many places by state governments, but not strictly enforced. Even policemen
trying to disburse crowds are attacked. Governments have to take strong action
if advices do not work. That is the
compulsion of public health emergency.
The Madras High Court,
in the overall interest of the citizenry, imposed a blanket ban on all protests
including anti-CAA agitations till Covid-19 subsides. The protest at Shaheena
Bagh in Delhi continued long after the spread of the virus. Our democracy seems
to safeguard people’s right to protest as a sacred right to the utmost extent
at the cost of public health. Similarly, many religious events are still going
on permitting crowding putting religious faith and propagation as a priority before
public health.
If people do not and
are not willing to understand the seriousness of the situation and if there are
groups out to sabotage efforts to contain the epidemic and contribute to panic
and disturbances, there is no alternative to strict enforcement of public health
emergency measures by assuming extraordinary powers.
During health
emergencies, there has to be a national consensus to subordinate normal way of
life to health prescriptions. Any criticism of the lockdown as “ill-planned”
and movement of migrants as “alarming”, without offering constructive
suggestions, is cheap politics.
In Australia, state
and territory health authorities manage health emergencies. The National Health
Security Act 2007 is supported by the National Health Security Agreement between
the Australian Government and State Territory Governments which sets out a
framework for decision-making to support a national response to health
emergencies.
The British PM said
that all political parties have a duty to work together at a time of national
emergency. In the US, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services
under the Public Service Act determines the existence of a disease or disorder
or outbreak of an infectious disease or bio-terrorist attacks that poses a
health emergency. The declaration lasts for the duration of the emergency or 90
days, but may be extended.
State laws in the US
provide for health emergency powers to permit designated officials - Governors and top health officers - to take
extraordinary legal action to respond to serious health situations when
adherence to ordinary laws and procedures are not enough to save lives.
COVID-19 has brought
out the paramount importance of State action in emergencies, particularly the
role of the Union Government leadership. The significance of State-people cooperation
is also emerging as a potent weapon to fight the disease. Union-State
cooperative action and an unusual spirit of cooperation showing its presence between
different political parties are hopeful signs that the nation can work together
at least in emergencies. It is time to repose faith in governments and entrust
necessary powers to them foregoing even some of our personal liberty and
comfort.---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
New Delhi
7 April 2020
|