The Union Government is embroiled in an avoidable controversy at a time when all focus should be on vaccinating the citizenry of the country. Though much of its own making, the current imbroglio has left the Centre fending off not just an assertive judiciary, but indeed a determined pushback from the States as well. If the former brings the judiciary to contend with the executive, the latter is an intra-executive affair. The judiciary-executive confrontation was something expected ever since Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court what the Government thought of the judiciary’s questioning of the vaccination policy, that the judicial intervention was “overzealous” and bereft of “expert advice or administrative experience” that leaves the executive with “little room to explore innovative solutions”. The response took time coming, but was powerful when it finally did, saying the courts cannot be “silent spectators when constitutional rights of citizens are infringed by executive policies”. For the first time in recent times, we have a recipe for a contretemps as two pillars of democracy square it off over the gamut of COVID-19 vaccine policies — availability, choice, age groups, price, procurement, transportation, distribution and time frame. It is not the issue whether the Supreme Court is right or the Union Government. It certainly is not a contest of wills or a clash of egos even if interested parties would try to picturise it so. It simply is a matter of trust, rather the lack of it between the two institutions over an issue of equal concern to both. The Supreme Court is vexed with hearing about pandemic spread and deaths and lack of vaccine and long queues of people and the haggling between the Centre and the States over distribution and pricing.

The Centre has defended its policies without even once stopping to wonder how can it continue to promote a national policy when the states are being made to procure vaccines and determine pricing. That the linen is having to be washed in public does not help either the cause of the people or the involved parties. The Centre, on the other hand, is facing, for the first time, what is called a “pushback” from the States which feel they are pushed into a corner by the vaccine policies. States like Maharashtra, West Bengal and Kerala, run by non-BJP Governments, have been at the forefront of the critics group. States like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, run by the BJP Governments, have been countering the criticism on behalf of the Centre. What tilted the balance is Odisha, the state with an NDA-friendly Government, its chief minister clearly insisting on centralised procurement of vaccines by the Centre. This is the first occasion when an unusually ‘silent’ State has raised its voice over the pandemic management policies. Whether other ‘silent’ States will join the chorus is not the matter; that every State is finally beginning to realise the impossible situation it finds itself in. 

(Courtesy: The Pioneer)

The Union Government is embroiled in an avoidable controversy at a time when all focus should be on vaccinating the citizenry of the country. Though much of its own making, the current imbroglio has left the Centre fending off not just an assertive judiciary, but indeed a determined pushback from the States as well. If the former brings the judiciary to contend with the executive, the latter is an intra-executive affair. The judiciary-executive confrontation was something expected ever since Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court what the Government thought of the judiciary’s questioning of the vaccination policy, that the judicial intervention was “overzealous” and bereft of “expert advice or administrative experience” that leaves the executive with “little room to explore innovative solutions”. The response took time coming, but was powerful when it finally did, saying the courts cannot be “silent spectators when constitutional rights of citizens are infringed by executive policies”. For the first time in recent times, we have a recipe for a contretemps as two pillars of democracy square it off over the gamut of COVID-19 vaccine policies — availability, choice, age groups, price, procurement, transportation, distribution and time frame. It is not the issue whether the Supreme Court is right or the Union Government. It certainly is not a contest of wills or a clash of egos even if interested parties would try to picturise it so. It simply is a matter of trust, rather the lack of it between the two institutions over an issue of equal concern to both. The Supreme Court is vexed with hearing about pandemic spread and deaths and lack of vaccine and long queues of people and the haggling between the Centre and the States over distribution and pricing.

The Centre has defended its policies without even once stopping to wonder how can it continue to promote a national policy when the states are being made to procure vaccines and determine pricing. That the linen is having to be washed in public does not help either the cause of the people or the involved parties. The Centre, on the other hand, is facing, for the first time, what is called a “pushback” from the States which feel they are pushed into a corner by the vaccine policies. States like Maharashtra, West Bengal and Kerala, run by non-BJP Governments, have been at the forefront of the critics group. States like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, run by the BJP Governments, have been countering the criticism on behalf of the Centre. What tilted the balance is Odisha, the state with an NDA-friendly Government, its chief minister clearly insisting on centralised procurement of vaccines by the Centre. This is the first occasion when an unusually ‘silent’ State has raised its voice over the pandemic management policies. Whether other ‘silent’ States will join the chorus is not the matter; that every State is finally beginning to realise the impossible situation it finds itself in. 

(Courtesy: The Pioneer)