Supreme Court lawyers’ demand for vaccine priority needs consideration

GENERAL OVERVIEW

• The Supreme Court on Thursday orally saw that the worries of the lawyers with respect to need for COVID-19 vaccine were genuine and require consideration.
• “Advocates can earn livelihood only if they come into contact with people. They need assurance that they will not die if they come in contact with people,” SA Bobde, Chief Justice of India told Tushar Mehta, the Solicitor General.
• Considerations were also taken by the bench including Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian to transfer petitions filed by Bharat Biotech and Serum Institute of India to withdraw to the Supreme Court the suo-moto case taken by the Delhi High Court on vaccine priority to the lawyers.

FURTHER DETAILS

• Senior advocates, Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Bharat biotech and Harish Salve for SII took exception to the High Court asking the company to reveal their production capacities.
• However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta supported the plea of the companies that said there are many other categories of people that earn their livelihood by coming in contact with others. He further stated that his colleague can’t be distinguished with a vegetable vendor who does the same hard work and like so there are many other professions as well. He also said that similarly the journalists might demand the same thing as they come in contact with people more than the lawyers to whom the CJI said, “We don’t know how the journalists work. But we don’t think a journalist has to come into contact with people. Advocates find it difficult not to meet people”.
• The SG retorted that the vaccination criteria on vulnerability and averting mortality and as per global norms priority is given to health workers, then to frontline workers and then for those aged above 60 years and people between 45-60, identified to mortality risk. The CJI added to this, “A government always has to deal with sections of people. We are asking the government to deal with this section of people and see what it can do.”
• The SG took instructions from the Union Health Ministry and agreed with placing of representations concerning the legal fraternity before the expert committee which will respond in 3-4 days. The court fixed the matter for a hearing next week.
• The bench further issued notice on the transfer petitions of pharma companies and stayed the suo-moto proceedings in the Delhi HC. The top court also issued a notice to the centre on a plea by former president of Indian Medical Association (IMA), KK. Aggarwal for the inclusion of people younger than 45 years but with indentified diseases that increase their vulnerability to COVID-19.

Should the lawyers be given priority for COVID vaccination? Or will this raise conflicts between other professions not taken into consideration as of now? What do you think?
Let us know your views in the comments below!