Shocking visuals have emerged from Theni K Vilakku Government Hospital in Tamil Nadu where bodies of Covid-19 victims were left piled up in a room and relatives were asked to enter the mortuary and collect the bodies of their family members.
Several patient families have claimed that the hospital staff told them to enter the mortuary, search and take the bodies of their relatives.
The incident came to light when relatives of a 47-year-old man from Theni died of Covid-19 and his relatives went to claim the body. The family was directed by the mortuary staff to enter on their own and search for the body and take it.
The relatives were shocked when they saw several bodies covered in blue plastic bags and left in a pile. They then had to go and look for the bodies of their family members.
Later, pictures and visuals of the incident surfaced on social media. Reacting to the charges, Theni Government Hospital Dean Balaji Nathan stated that three officials have been found to be involved in the incident.
One contract worker has been recommended for dismissal while show-cause notice has been issued against two government officials, pending departmental action.
"For Covid, we have two rooms. The room sizes are small. The Covid bodies have been separated from non-Covid bodies that require postmortem. These were normal rooms where only three bodies can be kept, but at times 15 bodies are accumulated overnight," he stated.
Balaji Nathan also stated that the protocol was not followed by the staff and the bodies had piled up during the night and as the room allotted for storing Covid-19 bodies was small in size, it was stacked in such a way.
The dean further stated that within two days a larger facility would be created to keep the bodies as per the procedure.
"Truth is that there was a security lapse in which relatives were allowed inside the mortuary, which is against the norms. Only one attendant is allowed and is accompanied by our staff for identification of the body. But the security and our government staff failed to follow that procedure," said Dean Balaji Nathan.
When asked about the bodies being piled up, the hospital dean said that the bodies were kept in a small room.
Live TV
ndian authorities have green-lighted the two vaccine candidates for restricted use in emergency situation “subject to certain regulatory conditions”, sparking a debate over more transparency from the government and demand for indemnity from the vaccine manufacturers.
The vaccine manufacturers have earlier written to the government, seeking protection from the lawsuits during the pandemic period.
On the other hand, the approval given to Bharat Biotech’s vaccine has drawn flak due to absence of its phase three clinical trial data.
India’s Covid-19 vaccination programme has multiple ethical, legal and transparency-related blind spots, which need fixing in order to inspire confidence in the society during a public health crisis.
Legal Blind Spots
The Vaccine Manufacturers Association of India has written to the Indian government seeking indemnity from lawsuits during the pandemic period. They have sought the example of the United States laws where the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act 2005 (PREP Act) authorises the government to limit legal liability during a public health crisis.
The US Secretary of Health and Human Services invoked the PREP Act effective February 4, 2020 declaring Covid-19 such public health emergency. Both Pfizer and Moderna are protected under this act in the US.
However, this law doesn’t protect the pharma companies or health care providers in cases of negligence, malpractice and lack of care. In general, the US legal system allows for substantial claims including punitive damages which resulted in a huge number of legal cases related to On the other hand, the approval given to Bharat Biotech’s vaccine has drawn flak due to absence of its phase three clinical trial data.
India’s Covid-19 vaccination programme has multiple ethical, legal and transparency-related blind spots, which need fixing in order to inspire confidence in the society during a public health crisis.
Legal Blind Spots
The Vaccine Manufacturers Association of India has written to the Indian government seeking indemnity from lawsuits during the pandemic period. They have sought the example of the United States laws where the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act 2005 (PREP Act) authorises the government to limit legal liability during a public health crisis.
The US Secretary of Health and Human Services invoked the PREP Act effective February 4, 2020 declaring Covid-19 such public health emergency. Both Pfizer and Moderna are protected under this act in the US.
However, this law doesn’t protect the pharma companies or health care providers in cases of negligence, malpractice and lack of care. In general, the US legal system allows for substantial claims including punitive damages which resulted in a huge number of legal cases related to But in India, the problem is more complicated than in the West. Legal experts point out the absence of express Indian law governing vaccine production, distribution and usage.
“The consumers may pursue legal remedies under the product liability clause of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, apart from remedies under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1954; which is a time and cost-intensive exercise. Also the Vaccination Act, 1880 doesn’t provide for accountability of manufacturers and only made vaccination mandatory in children. Therefore, the onus is on the government to provide a clear legal framework governing manufacturing, distribution and usage of vaccines along with express liabilities for violation of the same,” says Vikrant Negi, partner at Mumbai-based DSK legal.
“Once this framework is in place, a possible exemption (due to the present public health crises) on the lines of PREP Act of the US can be explored. At present, the existing legal framework is not robust enough for any exemptions," Negi added.
Even the revised Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) Act, 2019, doesn’t explicitly use the phrase - emergency use authorisation, however, the law mentions an “accelerated approval process” which may be allowed for a disease or condition, “taking into account its severity, rarity, or prevalence and the availability or lack of alternative treatments, provided that there is a prima facie case of the product being of meaningful therapeutic benefit over the existing treatment”. Under the amended CDSCO act, the compensation rules are defined for the clinical trial phase only, where the sponsor (company or institution) is mandated to provide financial compensation for the clinical trial-related injury or death.
Meanwhile, the manufacturers stress the need for providing indemnification under extraordinary situation. “Can you imagine if there is an injunction from a court to stop an immunisation campaign where millions of people will not be protected by a vaccine pending further inquiry? These are all the risks which have been assessed, weighed and concluded that there has to be indemnification only during the period of the pandemic,” Serum Institute’s CEO Adar Poonawala told India Today TV’s Rahul Kanwal on Sunday. He further confirmed that the Government of India has not yet responde