News Desk, AnyTV, New Delhi
Published by: Abhishek Dixit
Updated Wed, 02 Mar 2022 10:16 PM IST
Summary
The bench said that we are not experts in the medical field. Don’t get us into the depths of scientific issues. Bhushan said people are being forced to take vaccines for which Phase III trial data is not available and material submitted to the Drug Control Authority has also not been presented to the public.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it cannot go deep into the area of efficacy of the
COVID-19 vaccine and its impact on people, as it is a matter of experts. A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai said that so many people are suffering from co-morbidities, why should we go into this? The question is whether punitive action or a vaccine can be a mandate.
The apex court made these observations after advocate Prashant Bhushan claimed that the Indian government has not shown seriousness in recording the adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines. He questioned the linking of vaccines with benefits by various state governments and other organizations. Bhushan was debating a petition filed by Jacob Pulliel, a former member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization Against Vaccine mandate. The petition has also sought a direction to disclose vaccination data including adverse events.
Bhushan argued that the government cannot abridge the fundamental rights of citizens who are not vaccinated by merely saying that a person who does not get vaccinated would clearly pose a threat to public health. Bhushan said that I had COVID, but I have not taken the vaccine. I have decided not to get the vaccine no matter what happens. He said that the adverse effects of the COVID vaccination are not known. He questioned why the government was issuing a vaccine mandate to prevent people from entering public places by making vaccination mandatory.
He said that if a person was infected with COVID and recovered then that person gets better natural immunity against the infection. To this the bench asked him whether we can go to this area? We do not have basic knowledge. The bench told Bhushan that science is a matter of opinion and you may have presented an opinion but it can be opposed.
The bench said that we are not experts in the medical field. Don’t get us into the depths of scientific issues. Bhushan said people are being forced to take vaccines for which Phase III trial data is not available and material submitted to the Drug Control Authority has also not been presented to the public. He urged the court to quash such vaccine mandates. The next hearing will be on March 8.
Expansion
The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it cannot go deep into the area of efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine and its impact on people, as it is a matter of experts. A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai said that so many people are suffering from co-morbidities, why should we go into this? The question is whether punitive action or a vaccine can be a mandate.
The apex court made these observations after advocate Prashant Bhushan claimed that the Indian government has not shown seriousness in recording the adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines. He questioned the linking of vaccines with benefits by various state governments and other organizations. Bhushan was debating a petition filed by Jacob Pulliel, a former member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization Against Vaccine mandate. The petition has also sought a direction to disclose vaccination data including adverse events.
Bhushan argued that the government cannot abridge the fundamental rights of citizens who are not vaccinated by merely saying that a person who does not get vaccinated would clearly pose a threat to public health. Bhushan said that I had COVID, but I have not taken the vaccine. I have decided not to get the vaccine no matter what happens. He said that the adverse effects of the COVID vaccination are not known. He questioned why the government was issuing a vaccine mandate to prevent people from entering public places by making vaccination mandatory.
He said that if a person was infected with COVID and recovered then that person gets better natural immunity against the infection. To this the bench asked him whether we can go to this area? We do not have basic knowledge. The bench told Bhushan that science is a matter of opinion and you may have presented an opinion but it can be opposed.
The bench said that we are not experts in the medical field. Don’t get us into the depths of scientific issues. Bhushan said people are being forced to take vaccines for which Phase III trial data is not available and material submitted to the Drug Control Authority has also not been presented to the public. He urged the court to quash such vaccine mandates. The next hearing will be on March 8.