No coercive action against citizens airing concern on social media, SC tells states

Satya Prakash

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, April 30

The Supreme Court on Friday said states can’t take coercive action against people sharing distressing information on social media to seek medical help for their dear ones during COVID-19 pandemic.

“I flag this issue at the outset… We want to make it very clear that if citizens communicate their grievances on social media and the Internet, then it can’t be said it’s wrong information. We don’t want any clampdown on information,” a Bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud said during hearing on a suo motu PIL on COVID-19 management.

“We will treat it as a contempt of court if such grievances are considered for action,” said the Bench which also included Justice LN Rao and Justice SR Bhat.

Terming the second wave of the pandemic as a “national crisis”, it said, “There should be free flow of information…we should hear voices of citizens.”

The UP government had reportedly ordered strict action UNDER the National Security Act against those allegedly creating panic by making false appeals for help for COVID-19 patients on social media.

However, the top court said, “Let a strong message go to all the states and their DGPs… clampdown on information is contrary to basic precepts.”

Noting that the government should not leave vaccine pricing and distribution to manufacturers, the Bench sought to know why the Centre was not buying 100 per cent of COVID19 vaccine doses as it was better placed to determine equity and disburse. “Why can’t the Centre follow the national immunisation program policy with respect to COVID9 vaccines?” It asked.

The top court – which had last week taken suo motu cognisance of the COVID19 management and asked the Centre to present a national plan to deal with the health crisis with regard to supply of oxygen and essential drugs, method of vaccination and lockdown – would formally issue its order on Saturday.

It said the vaccine manufacturers were publicly funded and hence vaccines became ‘public goods’, it wondered why the Centre can’t buy full doses of COVID19 vaccines.

“Why shouldn’t the court issue directions under Section 100 and Section 92 of the Patents Act to enable generics to manufacture COVID-19 drugs without the fear of legal action?” it asked.