Inadequacy of Indian laws to deal with a pandemic

https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS4.9769

Authors

Keywords:

pandemic, COVID-19, framework, act

Abstract

While the pandemic diseases have progressed and taken brutal shape and forms, the Indian state is equipped with a pre-colonial Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 to deal with the vast challenges put forth by a pandemic. The country banked on age old techniques of quarantine, physical separation (incorrectly calling it social distancing) and a general practice of several trial and hit methods. This article examines the adequacy of the law in dealing with a pandemic in modern times that is riddled with complex economic relations, need for personal freedom and a huge amount of pressure on limited resources to deliver public health and safety in a self - acclaimed welfare state. It delves into various aspects of working through a pandemic where the law was found wanting or not actively assisting or supporting the efforts of the state and its enforcement agencies in curbing the pandemic.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Salunkhe, Subhas et al., Approach Paper on Public Health Act, National Health Systems Resource Centre, (2012).

Peters, D. H. et al., Lumping and splitting: the health policy agenda in India. Health policy and planning, 18(3), 249-260, (2003).

World Health Organization, International public health hazards: Indian legislative provisions, World Health Organization, (2015).

Polu, S. L. Plague and Cholera-The Epidemic versus the Endemic, Infectious Disease in India, 1892-1940 (pp. 50-81). Palgrave Macmillan, London, (2012).

Arnold, D., Science, technology and medicine in colonial India (Vol. 5). Cambridge University Press, (2000).

Rakesh, P. S., The Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897: public health relevance in the current scenario. Indian journal of medical ethics, 1(3), (2016).

Supreme Court of India, Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India and Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1031 of 2019.

World Health Organization. Ethical considerations in developing a public health response to pandemic influenza (No. WHO/CDS/EPR/GIP/2007.2). Geneva: World Health Organization, (2007).

Supreme Court of India, Justice K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012, decided on 26 September, 2018.

Sivaramakrishnan, K. The return of epidemics and the politics of global-Local health. American journal of public health, 101(6), 1032-1041, (2011).

Gujarat High Court, Devarshi Pragneshbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat, Writ Petition no. 33 of 2015, order dated 26 February, 2015.

Orissa High Court, Gandharva Jena v. State, Criminal Revision no. 233 of 1965, decided on 18 November, 1965.

Calcutta High Court, Ram Lall Mistry v. RT Greer,(1904) ILR 31 Cal 829, decided on 13 June, 1904.

Shah, A et al. Financing common goods for health: a public administration perspective from India. Health Systems & Reform, 1-6, (2019).

Suryasa, I. W., Rodríguez-Gámez, M., & Koldoris, T. (2021). The COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Health Sciences, 5(2), vi-ix. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v5n2.2937

Suryasa, I. W., Rodríguez-Gámez, M., & Koldoris, T. (2022). Post-pandemic health and its sustainability: Educational situation. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(1), i-v. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6n1.5949

Gandamayu, I. B. M., Antari, N. W. S., & Strisanti, I. A. S. (2022). The level of community compliance in implementing health protocols to prevent the spread of COVID-19. International Journal of Health & Medical Sciences, 5(2), 177-182. https://doi.org/10.21744/ijhms.v5n2.1897

Published

26-06-2022

How to Cite

Digvijay, D. (2022). Inadequacy of Indian laws to deal with a pandemic. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(S4), 3948–3953. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS4.9769

Issue

Section

Peer Review Articles