Tag: #Article14

Analysis of the Pegasus case

Posted on

Introduction

Spyware has always been a murky subject in terms of spying between governments. Spyware has been viewed as a critical component since it is thought critically to monitor and identify individuals who may be involved in illegal or terrorist activities. On the other hand, it is hugely controversial because, while ostensibly targeting criminal activity, such organizations or businesses may attack civil citizens or protestors in any region. This is an important point to remember since such meddling might result in a cyberwar or cyberattack, which could affect the political system of a country like Estonia. The Pegasus case has served as a forewarning of forthcoming cybersecurity concerns and the legislation that is required to address them.

Facts

  • NSO group technologies is an Israeli firm that specializes in the investigation. This firm developed the spyware known as ‘Pegasus.’ It is a commercial company that monitors terrorists, drug traffickers, and other criminals, supporting government intelligence and law enforcement in overcoming encryption and technical hurdles.
  • WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook Inc., filed a lawsuit against NSO Group Technologies in California court on October 29th, 2019.
  • According to WhatsApp, the malware ‘Pegasus’ deployed by the corporation compromised the phone systems of 1,400 users from all over the world. Users included civil society members, journalists, and Human Rights defenders from nearly twenty nations, according to the report.
  • Because NSO Group was unable to respond or attend in court, the court issued a notice of default.
  • It was claimed that the corporation used computer infrastructure and remote monitoring to insert spyware into customers’ devices via WhatsApp, causing a dangerous code to establish a connection between the users and the company without the consumers’ knowledge.
  • NSO groups claimed that they were not properly served with notice of the action in a timely manner, in violation of international law.
  • According to WhatsApp, multiple attempts were made to serve the notification on the firm.
  • On March 6, 2020, NSO filed an application with a California court to have the previous decision overturned because the notice was not served on time, which is a violation of The Hague Convention due to WhatsApp’s incomplete service.
  • NSO filed a separate case against WhatsApp in Israel on November 26th, stating that Facebook had disabled their private accounts. Facebook responded by stating that they had done so for security concerns.

Argument and Decision

NSO stated that the petitioner had breached international law by failing to provide legal notice of the action filed in a California court of law. They further claimed that they were just targeting the customer’s database provided to them and that they had no intention of targeting WhatsApp users. Furthermore, they asserted that the company’s customers are foreign sovereigns and that as a private agent for such users and of a foreign state, they are entitled to immunity under US law. It was also maintained that because they were acting as a supplier and were following the orders of their customers or the government, they could not be held accountable. WhatsApp contended that the NSO’s action was purposeful and intended to spy on those involved in social causes or other civil society members. It requested a permanent order from the court to prevent NSO from interfering with WhatsApp and Facebook’s computer systems. It claimed that NSO had broken the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act and had trespassed on WhatsApp’s premises without permission. The District Court of California ruled in favor of WhatsApp in July 2020, and the litigation will move forward.

What is Pegasus

NSO, an Israeli cyber arms outfit, developed spyware to track a user’s mobile device. A link is provided to the user or targeted person in this spyware, and as soon as the targeted person opens the link, malware is injected into the device, allowing surveillance of the target. A new version of the same is said to be more powerful and destructive, and it doesn’t even need the user’s help. This spyware was produced by the organization to keep an eye on terrorists and
other criminals. To carry out such actions, the NSO collaborates with other governments and law enforcement agencies.

Effects

The charges stated by WhatsApp in its court application are extremely serious. According to WhatsApp, once this malware has been downloaded to a user’s smartphone, it can access emails, SMSs, passwords, location, network information, browser history, and device settings. The Citizen Lab claims that in addition to contact lists and emails, it has access to the device’s camera and microphone, allowing it to record all calls and messages. Pegasus has also allegedly used WhatsApp’s video and voice call functions, allowing the spyware to infiltrate the smartphone without the user’s knowledge.

Indian Laws governing Spyware Attacks

In India, the Pegasus case served as a wake-up call. Many Indian activists and civil society members were allegedly spied on by this spyware, according to WhatsApp. This calls into doubt India’s data protection and privacy laws. The ‘Right to Privacy’ was recognized as a fundamental right in the case of Justice Puttaswamy v. Union of India, and like any other fundamental right, it is subject to some limitations. There are four tests that can be utilized in privacy cases, according to Justice Chelameshwar:
Under Article 14, arbitrary state action may be subject to a reasonableness inquiry. The verdict makes it apparent that privacy, as a basic right, is a private aspect of citizens’ lives that must be preserved as a right under Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. Even when certain limits are imposed for the sake of public order or national security, people’s fundamental rights should not be violated. The Pegasus case demonstrated how spyware can compromise a user’s privacy and personal information. As a result, it is critical to analyze and implement a solid data privacy policy.

Conclusion

Spyware incidents like Pegasus represent the beginning of a new era of digital warfare. Such situations are likely to become more common as technology advances. It is critical that there are strict rules in place in the event of foreign unauthorised access to devices and spyware control limitations. The Pegasus case also emphasized the necessity for spyware regulation, as the goal of targeting users who are criminals or suspicion of criminal activity might extend to spying on persons like activists and protestors, threatening democracy and individual privacy in the long run.

References–
1. The Pegasus case and the laws concerning spyware in India – iPleaders

This article is written by Vidushi Joshi student at UPES, Dehradun.

Overview on Religious Liberty and Women rights in India

Posted on

Women have always played an important role in our civilization’s growth. They are the ones who developed and are a large part of the societal norm. They shape entire generations. Any community’s lifeblood is its women. They are supposed to look after things with all of their hearts while expanding their proportions to assist society’s shared realm, whether at home, at work, or on vacation. In the anthropology group, they are believed to be the most trustworthy.
As a result, women have not been treated equally to men since ancient civilization till now. Men consider women as second-class citizens. They are in a bad situation.

They don’t even have access to constitutionally guaranteed fundamental human rights. Women themselves are terrified of speaking out about this issue for fear of being ostracised from society and denied access to food and other basic necessities if they do. The majority of the time, the issue comes out of a sense of fairness and freedom, when they are denied the opportunity to engage in activities that need independence and are traditionally reserved for males. Due to ill-intentioned and flawed cultural attitudes, Indian women have been prevented from going further and bringing out their personalities in a stronger way. When a woman goes out to look for work, she is regularly interrogated.

The freedom to govern religious issues is guaranteed by Article 26 of the Indian constitution. Every religious denomination or segment thereof, subject to public order, morals, and health shall have the right-To create and maintain religious and philanthropic institutions; to govern its own religious affairs; to own and acquire movable and immovable property and to administer such property in conformity with the law. These guarantees, however, are exclusively available to Indian nationals and not to foreigners.

These, on the other hand, are constitutional provisions that are generally thought to apply to men. Despite Indian constitutions assuring, women in India still do not enjoy the same freedom to participate in, maintain, and oversee religious institutions.

Equality of Opportunity

The right to equality is protected under Articles 14 to 18 of the Indian constitution, and it is widely recognized. “The state shall not refuse to any individual within the territory of India equality before the law or equal protection of the laws,” reads Article 14.

“The state shall not discriminate against any citizen solely on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them,” as per Art15.

In matters of public employment, Article 16 provides equal opportunity.

“Untouchability is abolished, and its practice in any form is prohibited,” according to Article 17. Except for military or intellectual differences, Article 18 prohibits the use of titles. It is unlawful to admit titles from different countries, such as knighthood.

Conflicts between religions over women

In all religious customs, rituals, and traditions women are always considered second-class citizens. Superstitions are still being followed till today, those superstitions which were believed back in the past. The condition of Indian women has always been a source of controversy.

Various factors, including religious fundamentalism and irrational concerns arising from the minds of conservative elements of society, have been mentioned for these restrictions. It prevents women from exercising their religious rights and excludes them from religious areas. For example, some elements of the temple’s management do not let women enter and worship deities because they believe that women were not allowed even 1500 years ago and that if they do so, the temple will be destroyed.

Because they are in their reproductive phase, women between the ages of 10 and 50 are impure. Menstruating women are not permitted to enter the shrine. These irrational beliefs ignore the genuine biological phenomena of menstruation, which assists women in becoming mothers.

These irrational and radical pessimistic ideas depict a patriarchal society in which men consider women to be adjutants to themselves. However, thanks to the efforts of Bhoomata brigade leader Tirupati Desai, prohibitions on women entering the temple have been eased in Shani Shingnapur and Haji Ali. This is a significant achievement made possible by women activists, and it has shed light on modern women’s inner strength, which had previously been hidden.

Conservatives still believe in superstitions and myths that were once believed. These fallacies continue to be scrutinized before women’s rights and respect. The priests believe that if the customs are modified, God will become enraged and the cosmos will fall apart as a result of God’s vengeance. Women’s boundaries are being pushed back by these pitiful notions, forcing them to live a life that is pointless. Inside temples and religious institutions, which are virtually entirely ruled by men, there is a great deal of corruption. The authorities believe that including women will have an impact on their unlawful money-making activities, and they will take harsh measures against them. In political drama, many political parties do not support women, believing that doing so would grant women the same status as men and would be completely antagonistic to the culture. Some male political leaders molest women, and they are afraid that if a female leader comes to power, she will expose their crimes and harm their so-called reputation. As a result, in order to overcome such serious issues that exist in society against women, we must enlighten male members of society and convince them that women, too, should have equal standing in all spheres and that there should be no discrimination based on gender. Even at home, we must empower them and instill a desire for women’s education.

References

  1. Essay on Religious Liberty and Women Rights (upscbuddy.com)

This article is written by Vidushi Joshi student at UPES, Dehradun.

Case Analysis: Anmol Kumar Tiwari & Ors. V. State of Jharkhand & Ors.

Posted on

Case Number

Civil Appeal Nos. 429-430 of 2021.

Equivalent Citation

LL 2021 SC 102.

Bench

L. Nageswara Rao & Indira Banerjee.

Decided on

18 February 2021.

Relevant Act/ Section

Article 14 and 16 of the Indian Constitution.

Brief Facts and Procedural History

In 2008, the Home Department of Jharkhand govt. published an advertisement regarding Sub-Inspector’s post. After the written exam and interview were completed, the final list of selected candidates was published. But afterward, it was found that some irregularities had taken place in the selection process. So the Govt. formed a High- Level State Committee to check if the irregularities had taken place or not. The Deputy Inspector General of Police of Jharkhand submitted a report claiming that the list was wrongly prepared and the candidates who scored more were not appointed but the candidates who scored less than were appointed. Then a revised list was published in which they terminated the candidates with low marks and appointed the candidates with high marks. The candidates who were terminated challenged this list in the High Court saying that it is not their mistake rather it is the government’s mistake that they made the wrong list and so why should they bear the consequences. The Hon’ble High Court dismissed their writ petition, so the candidates (whose services were terminated) approached to Supreme Court.

Issues Before the Court

The main issue was related to the claim of the intervenors in the Writ Petitions for an appointment.

Ratio of the Case

In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court said that appointing candidates with lesser merit would be in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Indian Constitution of those candidates who scored more marks. 

Decision of the Court

The Hon’ble Supreme Court gave an important judgment which said that there should be no doubt that the selections for public employments will only be made on the basis of merit. So, appointing candidates with lesser merit would be in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Indian Constitution of those candidates who scored more marks. 

This case analysis is written by Priyanka Choudhary, currently pursuing BALLB from Mody University of Science and Technology, Lakshmangarh, Rajasthan.

This case analysis is edited by Shreya Litoria, currently pursuing B.Com LLB from Banasthali Vidyapith University, Jaipur.

LATEST POSTS

ARCHIVES

Secularism in India and the Indian Constitution

Posted on

Introduction

The word ‘Secular’ means that a person is separate from religion and has no religious basis. Secularism means that religion is kept unconnected with the social, political, cultural, and economic spheres of life. Religion is open to everyone and gives an individual his personal choice to accept and follow any religion without any discrimination.

Philosophy of Indian Secularism

The term ‘secularism’ is like the Vedic concept of ‘Dharma nirapekshata’ which means the State’s indifference to religion. It has two principles: 

1) Religion should not interfere in the administration and policy-making of the state. 

2) People of all religions are equal before the law, constitution, and government policy.

This model of secularism is adopted by some western societies where the govt. is completely unconnected with religion.

Indian philosophy of secularism is connected to “Sarva Dharma Sambhava” (it means to treat all the religions with the same emotions, same zeal and zest irrespective of the religion a person follows and more than that it gives the idea of mankind and humanity) which suggests the same context for all religions. 

This concept was embraced and promoted by great personalities like Swami Vivekananda and Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and they called it ‘Positive secularism’ that reflects the dominant ethos of Indian culture.

India has no official state religion. However, different personal laws are there on matters like marriage, divorce, inheritance, alimony, etc. which vary with a person’s religion.

Indian secularism isn’t an end in itself but a way to deal with religious plurality and to achieve the peaceful coexistence of various religions.

Secularism and the Indian Constitution

The core ethos of India has been a synthesis of fundamental unity, tolerance, and even faith. It’s an undebatable fact that thousands of Indians belonging to diverse religions lived together through the ages, marred through sometimes by religious revolts, economic exploitation, and social suppression being often at the rock bottom of it all.

India is the birthplace of 4 major world religions: Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism. Yet, India is one among the foremost diverse nation in terms of faith and religion. India is a country that is built on the foundations of a civilization that’s fundamentally non-religious.

The purpose of the Preamble of the Indian Constitution is to make India a Sovereign, Socialist, Democratic Republic. The 42nd Amendment Act of the constitution added the terms such as socialist and secular. The entire constitution is summarized within the preamble. This mirrors the spirit of the Constitution. The arrangement of words in the preamble is also very important. Indian society is a multi-religious society, it is having different caste, religions alongside several religious diversifications. So, all of these are divisive features somehow and if not handled carefully then it can cause a threat to the unity and integrity of the state.

All the basic principles of secularism are included in the various provisions of the Constitution. The word ‘Secular’ was added to the preamble by the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act of 1976. The Constitution emphasizes the fact that constitutionally, India is a secular country with no state religion and that the State shall recognize and accept all religions, shall not favor or protect any particular religion.

  • Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws to everyone, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
  • Article 16 (1) guarantees equality of opportunity to all citizens in matters of public employment and appointment and that there would be no discrimination on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth and residence.
  • Article 25 gives freedom of conscience and of practicing any profession or religion.
  • Article 26 gives every religious group or individual the right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes and to manage its own affairs in matters of religion.
  • Article 27 says that no citizen shall be compelled by the state to pay any kind of taxes for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious institution.
  • Article 28 allows educational institutions maintained by different religious groups to impart religious instruction.
  • Article 29 talks about the protection of minorities’ interests. 
  • Article 30 provides rights to minorities to administer and establish educational institutions.
  • Article 51A talks about Fundamental Duties that obliges all the citizens of India to abide by the constitution and respect its institutions, ideals, national anthem and the national flag and to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood and therefore to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture.

Threats to Secularism

Even though the Indian Constitution declares India to be absolutely neutral to all religions, our society is submerged in religion.

The union of religion and politics has threatened Indian secularism, which seeks to mobilize voters on the basis of fundamental identities such as religion, caste, and ethnicity.

Communal politics operates through the communalization of social space by spreading myths and stereotypes against minorities, attacking rational values, and practicing divisive ideological propaganda and politics.

The politicization of any one religious group leads to the competitive politicization of other groups, thereby leading to inter-religious conflict.

One of the manifestations of communalism is communal riots. In recent times also, communalism has proved to be a major threat to the secular fabric of Indian politics.

The rise of Hindu nationalism in recent years has resulted in mob lynchings simply because they suspect people of killing cows and eating beef.

In addition, forced closure of slaughterhouses, campaigns against ‘love jihad’, conversions or Ghar-wapsi (forcing Muslims to convert to Hinduism), etc. reinforces the communal tendency in the society.

Islamic fundamentalism or revivalism emphasizes the establishment of an Islamic State based on Sharia law which directly contradicts the notions of a secular and democratic state.

In recent years there have been sporadic incidents of Muslim youth being inspired and radicalized by groups like ISIS which is very unfortunate for both India and the world.

Conclusion

It needs to be understood that just by writing the term ‘secularism’ in the books, any state cannot be truly secular. Thus, the whole ideology should be recognized with grace and should be applied equally to all people. And there should be a check on the governmental bodies for propagating any unfair practice of religious groups to acquire power.

Bibliography

  1. Dr. J. N. Pandey, Constitutional Law of India.
  2. Secularism, https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/secularism/.
  3. Secularism and Constitution of India: Unity in Diversity, http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1964/Secularism-and-Constitution-of-India.html. 
  4. Secularism, https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/paper1/secularism-1.
  5. What is secularism, https://www.secularism.org.uk/what-is-secularism.html.

This article is written by Priyanka Choudhary, currently pursuing BALLB from Mody University of Science and Technology, Lakshmangarh, Rajasthan.

LATEST POSTS

ARCHIVES

Article 14 of the Indian Constitution

Posted on

Article 14 of the Indian Constitution ensures equality before the law, it states that “the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.” 

Article 14 deals with the principles of equality before the law and equal protection of the law, both of which aim to provide equal status to all the citizens of the country. It is important to understand these two principles in order to understand Article 14. The principle of equality before the law means that everyone would be treated equally under the law and no one would be given any special privileges on the basis of their religion, caste, gender, etc. On the other hand, the principle of equal protection of law aims to provide equal treatment in all circumstances, that is, whether the person is a prime minister or ordinary man, both of them should be treated equally under the ordinary law.

The essence of the Article lies in the doctrine of Rule of Law. Rule of law guarantees the principle of equality before the law, it means that no person is above the law, what so ever his post is, he is bound to the jurisdiction of the courts and law. It also states that no person shall be harassed or discriminated against and shall be treated equally before the law. There are three meanings to rule of law:

  • Absence of supremacy of law

This is means that no absolute power is given to the law. A person can only be punished for not adhering to or violating the law but not in any other circumstances. 

  • Equality before law

Every individual is to be treated equally and protected equally under the law and is bound to the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts.

  • Individual liberty

Even though there is mention of individual liberty in the fundamental rights, like in Article 21 which ensures personal liberty, and Article 19 which rights to freedom, this meaning of personal liberty is not applicable in the Indian context (the third meaning of rule of law given by Dicey is however applied in other countries like the United Kingdom). This is because the source to the right of individuals is the Constitution of Indian and then Constitution is the law of the land. 

But, the concept of equality under rule of law is not absolute, there are few exceptions to the principle of rule of law, 

  • The public officials and an ordinary man are not on the same level having the same power. A police officer for example, has the power to arrest an ordinary man for breach of law, whereas an ordinary man does not have the power to arrest another ordinary man or a police officer for the breach of law. 
  • Rule of law does not mean that every class of individuals would be bound to the same set of rules. There are special rules for people of a certain class. For example, the individuals in the armed forces are bound to the military rules. 

Now that we have understood the main doctrines behind Article 14, we shall now look into the underlying principle of the Article. Equality before law or equal protection under the law does not amount to equal treatment to everyone. Because no two individuals can be equal or the same in all aspects, and so treating them both equally in all aspects would not amount to a fair trial. For example, an adult and a child are two individuals in a society, but can both of them be treated equally in all aspects? In the aspect of crimes committed, is it fair that the child is given the same amount of punishment as to what would be given to any adult? No. That is why the system of punishment is different for both children and adults under the IPC. Hence, it is important to note that ‘equal treatment’ should be justifiable and fair. Therefore, the meaning of equality under the Article does not mean uniform treatment to all, it means to provide the same treatment in aspects where the individuals are similar and different treatment in the aspects where the individuals are different. In order to differentiate between the equals and the unequal’s, the doctrine of reasonable classification is applied. 

Article 14 is applicable when there are two equal individuals treated differently, then the equality before the law comes inapplicable. But, in the case where an equal and an unequal individual is treated differently, the Article is not applicable. Class legislation is that which makes improper discrimination by providing privileges for certain classes. However, Article 14 is forbidden Class legislation and promotes reasonable classification. 

The reasonable classification should be on real and substantial difference, bound to a reasonable relation. Hence, there are tests to reasonable classification, 

  • The classification should be intelligible differentia. That is, it has to be able to distinguish people from a group to those who aren’t part of the group. 
  • There should be a rational relation between the objects.

Now, we will look into the points that hold a valid classification under Article 14. In the case of Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Tendolkar, the court explained the true meaning of Article 14 as follows,

  • If there are some special reasons or circumstances that apply to an individual, which is not applicable other individuals, then that person can be considered as a class.
  • There is always an assumed favour constitutionally on an individual and the burden is on the one who attacks this to show that there has been a transgression of the principles of constitution. 
  • This assumption can be taken away by showing that there is no difference or to a particular class.
  • It has to be assumed the law or the legislature will only do things for the need of the people and no discrimination to take place.
  • To keep the constitutional presumption, the court may consider the common knowledge, the history, the reports on the same, etc.
  • The legislation has the power to identify harms and also put restrictions to those case. 
  • The legislation is presumed to work on good knowledge and a good faith. 
  • The classification can be made on any basis, individual, geographic, etc.
  • The classification made does not have to be logically perfect or equality perfect.
  • Discrimination can be there in substantial and procedural law and the Article applies to both of these. 

In the case of Madhu Limaye v. Supdt. Tihar Jail Delhi, the Indian and European prisoners were not treated equally. The court held this is to be a case of discrimination and applied the principle of Article 14 to provide equal treatment for both the prisoners. In the case of D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, there was a memorandum given by the government, where the pension for retired officials was divided into two classes depending on their retirement date. The court held that this classification was not rational, as the classification of the retirement dates was in the difference of just two days. These cases show how the application of the principle of Article 14 and also on the legislature who analyses the application of the Article. 

Therefore, Article 14 aims to have equal treatment, that is fair and justifiable to all individuals and to remove any kind of discrimination. It gives fair treatment between the equals and unequal. 

References

  • Constitution of India, V.N Shukla
  • Indian Kanoon
  • Jstor
  • Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Tendolkar.
  • Madhu Limaye v. Supdt. Tihar Jail Delhi
  • D.S. Nakara v. Union of India

This article is written by Hiranmayi Rajeev, a 2nd-year law student at Alliance University Bangalore.

LATEST POSTS

ARCHIVES

Distribution of Essential Supplies and Services During Pandemic

Posted on

-Report by Manaswa Sharma

Introduction

Proceedings withinside the present suo motu writ petition had been initiated on 22 April 2021, while this Court took consciousness of the control of the COVID-19 pandemic at some stage in the second wave. Subsequently, hearings had been performed on 23 April 2021, 27 April 2021, and 30 April 2021 while submissions had been heard on behalf of the Union of India, States/Union Territories, found out Amici appointed through this Court and a number of the intervenors

Since the remaining listening to on this matter, the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic has begun out receding throughout the state and the scenario seems to have come to be extra manageable. Hence, a number of the problems mentioned withinside the preceding orders can watch for similar deliberation. However, the problem of vaccination is surely crucial, because fitness professionals globally agree that vaccination of the state’s complete eligible populace is the singular maximum critical project inefficaciously preventing the COVID-19 pandemic withinside the lengthy run. Hence, at some stage in the direction of the court cases on 31 May 2021, this Court has restricted itself to listening to submissions at the UoI’s vaccination coverage and its roadmap for the future. By manner of plentiful clarification, we observe that every one of the problems contained on this Court’s preceding orders nonetheless holds their universal importance, and this Court shall keep to screen them along with the National Task Force and intrude each time necessary.

Submission by Counsel

Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, based on the affidavit of the UoI dated May 9, 2021, has filed the following additions in the light of recent updates:

  • The vaccination campaign will be completed by the end of December 2021, and the central government is leading at the highest political and level Active diplomatic talks with foreign vaccine manufacturers to ensure sufficient vaccine supplies;
  • It would be wrong to suggest that one consequence of the updated UoI directive on vaccinating 18-44-year-olds is that there will be competition between states / UT; and
  • Anyone over 45 can continue to be vaccinated at a center by registering on-site without pre-booking an appointment through CoWIN.

Mr. Jaideep Gupta and Ms. Meenakshi Arora, discovered Senior suggests and Amici, have raised the subsequent troubles referring to vaccination distribution, augmentation of vaccine manufacturing and differential pricing of vaccines, and the destiny preparedness for handling the COVID-19 pandemic:

  • With admire to the procurement of vaccines, reviews endorse that overseas vaccine producer are commonly now no longer receptive or open to a speak with State/UT Governments on the premise that, as a rely upon company coverage, they handiest cope with federal governments of various countries;
  • The UIP has been changed through the Liberalized Pricing and Accelerated National COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy from 1 May 2021 in segment three of the vaccination force.

National Vaccination Policy

Phase 1 of the National COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy become released on sixteen January 2021 and 1 February 2021 and become centered closer to shielding HCWs and FLWs. Phase 2 become initiated on 1 March 2021 and 1 April 2021, and become directed closer to shielding the maximum susceptible populace withinside the age organization of men and women above forty-five years of age. In sections 1 and 2, the UoI become buying the vaccines and dispensing them to the States/UTs freed from fee for disbursal thru authorities and personal COVID-19 vaccination centers. The personal centers had been now no longer allowed to price a sum above Rs 250 in step with an individual in step with dose (Rs a hundred and fifty for vaccines and Rs a hundred as operational charges) from a beneficiary.

Separation of Powers

First, we try to clarify the nature of the court’s jurisdiction over the administration of the COVID-19 pandemic in India.​​​ The affidavit dated May 9, 2021, listed the following points:

  • The current vaccination policy is in line with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and does not require court intervention, because the administrative department has “room for maneuver” in the face of such a large-scale epidemic;
  • Continue to take measures to deal with the imminent crisis, In the long run, this may be reckless; however, they should be fully evaluated in the short term;
  • Judicial review of administrative guidelines is only allowed in completely arbitrary circumstances. When executives need expert medical and scientific advice to solve a medical crisis, procedures need to be adopted;
  • In the absence of professional advice or management experience, any excessive, albeit in good faith, judicial intervention may lead to undesirable situations. There is almost no room for managers to find innovative solutions.

Issues with the Liberalized Vaccination Policy

1.Vaccine Logistics

We have already stated that attributable to the Liberalized Vaccination Policy, the obligation for the vaccination in segment three is being divided among the Central Government (for the ones above forty-five years of age, HCWs and FLWs) and the State/UT Government together with the non-public hospitals (for the age institution of 18-forty four years). This could suggest that the constrained vaccine logistics to be had in a State/UT could be shared among the State/UT Government and the Central Government. This isn’t the same as the state of affairs beneath neath the UIP, wherein the Central Government buys and allocates vaccines to States/UTs, as a way to make certain that their bloodless garage centers aren’t overwhelmed. Hence, we direct the UoI to offer the subsequent clarifications:

  • The way wherein bloodless garage gadget capability is being balanced among the Central and State/UT Governments. The way wherein the States/UTs are dealing with the logistical burden for vaccinating men and women elderly among 18-forty four years, together with men and women elderly over forty-five years.
  • Whether bloodless garage centers in India have improved for the COVID-19 vaccination drive; the prevailing numbers, and evaluation with the numbers previous to March 2020;
  • Whether the bloodless garage gadget is indigenously synthetic or is imported. If it’s far imported, the stairs that have been taken to begin indigenous manufacturing.

3.Digital Divide

In our order dated 30 April 2021, we had highlighted the issues regarding the cap potential of the marginalized participants of society to avail of vaccination, completely via a virtual portal within side the face of a virtual divide. The UoI’s affidavit made the subsequent submissions in terms of the accessibility of the CoWIN portal:

  • The CoWIN portal allows one individual to sign in four folks the usage of the equal cellular wide variety;
  • Walk-ins can not be accredited because of the shortage of vaccines and fears of overcrowding at centers. The online registration requirement counters this worry and additionally efficaciously video display units the management of the second dose. The coverage can be re-taken into consideration in the end whilst extra vaccines are to be had.

It has been delivered to our be aware that the CoWIN platform isn’t handy to folks with visible disabilities. The internet site suffers from positive accessibility obstacles which have to be addressed. These encompass:

  • Audio or textual content captcha isn’t to be had;
  • The seven filters, which inter alia, encompass age group, call of vaccine, and whether or not the vaccine is paid or free, aren’t designed accessibly. This problem may be addressed with the aid of using the introduction of a drop-down list;
  • While visually challenged folks can decide the wide variety of to be had vaccine slots, one can not discover the day the ones slots correspond to. This may be resolved with the aid of using making sure that desk headers correspond to related cells.

Conclusion

We direct the UoI to report a testimony, which shall cope with the troubles and questions raised in Section E, in which it shall make certain that every problem is answered to in my opinion and no problem is neglected out. We additionally direct that the affidavit ought to offer the subsequent information:

  • The records on the proportion of populace that has been vaccinated (with one dose and each dose), as towards eligible folks withinside the first 3 stages of the vaccination drive. This shall encompass records relating the proportion of rural populace in addition to the proportion of city populace so vaccinated;
  • The whole records at the Central Government’s buy records of all of the COVID-19 vaccines until date (Covaxin, Covishield, and Sputnik V). The records ought to make clear: (a) the dates of all procurement orders positioned via way of means of the Central Government for all three vaccines; (b) the number of vaccines ordered as on every date; and (c) the projected date of supply.

We additionally notice that UoI’s said to function in its affidavit dated nine May 2021 is that each State/UT Government shall offer vaccination freed from fee to its populace. Person State/UT Governments must confirm/deny this function earlier than this Court. Further, if they have determined to vaccinate their populace free of charge then, as a rely upon principle, it’s far critical that this coverage is annexed to their affidavit, so that the populace inside their territories may be confident in their proper to be vaccinated free of charge at a State vaccination center. Hence, we direct every of the State/UT Governments to additionally report a testimony within 2 weeks, wherein they shall make clear their function and place on file their policies.

……………………………………J. [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud]

……………………………………J. [L Nageswara Rao]

……………………………………J. [S Ravindra Bhat]

New Delhi.

Plea Filed Before the Supreme Court Concerning Violation of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution

Posted on

A plea has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking equality in the treatment of authorized journalists and unauthorized journalists for the needs of compensation and other benefits granted by the Central and state governments amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A few state governments have declared journalists as frontline workers; however, the Central government has still not proclaimed the thought. The intervention application (IA) assails the special drive under the Central government’s Journalist Welfare Scheme (JWS) because it doesn’t cover “non-accredited journalists”. Thus, it violates the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

The plea cited figures of journalists who gave up the ghost within the line of duty during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between April 1, 2020, and May 19, 2021, there are 253 verified deaths of journalists thanks to COVID-19 and 93 unverified deaths. The Centre had launched a special drive under the JWS to assist the immediate families of these media journalists who died due to Covid-19. According to the rules under the scheme, accreditation details of the journalist need to be provided. Point 3(ii) (a) and (b) of the guidelines state that “media personnel” will not include people who are at a managerial level or in a supervisory capacity. This leaves an outsized number of persons including unaccredited journalists, technical, managerial, and supervisory staff employed with media organizations alongside unaccredited freelance journalists and stringers who are bereft of any relief or benefits under the scheme.

As per Rule 6.1 of the rules, the eligibility conditions for correspondents/camera persons to avail of the scheme are “minimum 15 years professional experience as a full-time working journalist”. This leaves out an outsized number of journalists who are going to not tend to any benefits after dying within the line of duty due to COVID-19. The mere non-accreditation which is merely a recognition provided by the govt for purposes of access to sources of data, won’t be covered under the scheme. Thus, it’s no parity and is violative of Article-14 of the Constitution of India. The applicant stated that she surveyed 70 journalists/media persons who died of COVID-19 and located out that only 6 percent of them were accredited to the Press Information Bureau. 37 percent were accredited to the government and 57 percent were without accreditation. The difference between the authorized and unauthorized journalists/media person by both the central and therefore the state governments are violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The plea was settled by Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid and filed through advocate Lubna Naaz.

Report By- Sana Sheikh