On January 17, 2020, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare acknowledged the emergence of COVID-19 pandemic that was spreading across China. Tamil Nadu reported its first confirmed case of COVID-19 on March 7, 2020. As of April 28, the state has 1,937 confirmed cases of COVID-19 (seventh highest in the country). Of these, 1,101 have recovered (third highest rate of recovery in the country among states with 100 or more cases) and 24 have died. The state government has taken several actions to contain the spread and impact of COVID-19. In this blog, we look at the key measures taken by the Tamil Nadu government between January 19 and April 28, 2020.
Initial phase
The Tamil Nadu government came out with a series of responses between January 19 and February 1. These included: (i) readying Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) at state and district levels, (ii) setting up of a 24/7 control room, (iii) thermal scanning of air travellers from China, (iv) creating isolation wards in the General Hospitals of four major cities, and (v) running appropriate awareness campaigns.
Some of the other early measures are summarised below:
Health measures
On March 13, the Governor declared COVID-19 to be a notified disease in the state of Tamil Nadu, under the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939. Notifying a disease allows for incidences of the disease to be mandatorily reported to the government and in turn, helps authorities to respond with appropriate measures to prevent the spread of the disease.
On March 15, the government prescribed the Tamil Nadu COVID-19 Regulations, 2020. These regulations detail the responsibilities of hospitals and individuals, and the powers of officials in relation to the diagnosis, treatment, and containment of COVID-19. These include (i) creation of isolation wards in hospitals, (ii) containment measures in an area once positive cases are detected, and (iii) mandatory 14-day home isolation for asymptomatic air travellers from COVID-19 affected countries.
On March 15, the government also mandated a 14-day institutional isolation for all air travellers to prevent import of infections from other states. The state also initiated setting up of testing camps and conducting disinfectation drives in the border districts.
Travel and Movement
On March 15, the government notified a series of instructions that restricted the movement of people in the state. These include (i) shutting down of establishments, such as, educational institutions (up to Class 5), theatres, malls etc, and (ii) banning of inter-state travel for 15 days.
On March 16, the government announced additional restrictions till Mar 31, such as, closure of: (i) anganwadis and making alternate provision of dry ration for children at their homes, (ii) swimming pools, amusement parks, gyms, zoos, museums, bars, clubs etc, and (iii) all educational institutions, except the conduct of practical exams for class 10 and 12, and various entrance exams.
State borders were sealed off for road traffic, except for movement of essential commodities, from March 20 to March 31. Public transportation services, such as metro rail and inter-state private buses, were also suspended till March 31.
The Prime Minister asked the country to observe a Janta Curfew from 7 am to 9 pm on March 22,. The state government further extended this curfew to 5 am on March 23. Following this, the government immediately announced a state-wide lockdown from March 24 up to April 1.
On April 5, the government issued an advisory for the quarantine of migrant workers and the conduct of health camps for them.
Welfare Measures
On March 15, the government announced financial assistance of a total of Rs 60 crore to various departments, such as, health, transport etc, to take precautionary measures to combat COVID-19.
On March 24, the government announced the distribution of cash support of Rs 1,000 to all entitled family cardholders. Further, they were also eligible for free supply of essential commodities such as rice, dal, sugar, etc, during the month of April, through the Public Distribution System (PDS).
During the lockdown
A state-wide lockdown was announced from March 24 to April 1, followed by a nation-wide lockdown between March 25 and April 14. On April 13, the state-wide lockdown was extended up to April 30. This was followed by the extension of the nation-wide lockdown from April 15 to May 3. Under this, certain activities could be resumed after April 20.
Some of the key measures undertaken during the lockdown period are:
Travel and movement
Amidst the lockdown, on March 25, the government notified that establishments providing essential goods and services, which were allowed to operate. These included establishments such as (i) police forces, (ii) treasury, (iii) public utilities, (iv) banks, (v) media, (vi) telecommunications, and (vii) shops dealing with food, groceries etc. Further, on March 28, the government permitted a few agriculture-related establishments to operate, such as, Mandis, fertiliser shops, and agencies involved in procurement of agriculture products.
An Expert Committee formed by the state government to formulate guidelines for phased exit from lockdown after April 20, recommended the extension of the lockdown till May 3. Certain select activities were, however, permitted to resume operations from April 20 onwards. These include (i) MNREGA works related to irrigation and water conservation, (ii) rural construction projects on irrigation, dam safety, hospital buildings, roads and bridges, and (iii) state and central government offices at one-third capacity.
In view of rising number of cases, on April 24, stringent curfew orders were passed in the districts of (i) Chengalpattu, (ii) Kancheepuram, and (iii) Thiruvallur. The curfew will be imposed between April 26 and April 29, from 6 am to 9 pm, and with more stringent restrictions than under the ongoing nation-wide lockdown, such as, (i) petrol bunks to operate only between 8 am and 12 noon, and (ii) supermarkets and shops to remain shut.
Curfew orders were passed in 5 more districts. In Chennai, Coimbatore and Madurai, curfew is imposed between 6 am and 9 pm from April 26 to April 29. In Salem and Tiruppur, curfew was imposed from April 26 to April 28.
Welfare Measures
On March 30, the government announced a cash assistance of Rs 1,500 per month to be credited into the bank accounts of differently-abled persons. It also announced that transgenders without ration cards, were eligible to receive 12kg of rice, 1kg of dal, and 1 litre of cooking oil, from fair price shops (FPS).
Further, a cash assistance of Rs 1,000 was announced for (i) all ration card holders through FPS, (ii) registered auto drivers and construction workers, (iii) members of TN Cine Welfare Board, and (iv) match factory workers.
On April 2, the government announced a concession package to manufacturers of COVID-19 related medical equipment, who will commence production before July 31, 2020. The package applied to both MSMEs and large manufacturers of equipment, such as, ventilators, Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) kits and medicines. Some of the concessions include: (i) 30% capital subsidy, upto Rs 20 crore, (ii) 100% stamp duty waiver, (iii) 6% interest subvention for capital loans for two quarters, (iv) commencement of manufacturing without prior approval, and (v) provision of necessary land on priority basis for short-term/long-term leases, etc.
Rs 50 lakh grant was announced to the families of frontline workers in the event of their unfortunate demise. If infected by COVID-19, they are eligible for Rs 2 lakh assistance towards treatment costs. In certain cases, if eligible, their kin would also receive a government job offer.
On April 7, the government announced that MLALAD funds could be utilised for COVID-19 prevention and containment activities. A total of Rs 1.25 crore can be utilised towards prevention, containment, treatment, and purchase of medical equipment, PPEs etc.
Health Measures
On April 2, the government released a list of designated COVID-19 hospitals in the state. Instructions were issued to refer all COVID-19 positive cases exclusively to these designated hospitals. However, willing citizens were also permitted to approach private hospitals, at their own cost. Private hospitals were further instructed to establish dedicated fever clinics to cope with the increasing load of flu and fever cases.
Amidst a rise in the number of cases, on April 4, the government issued instructions to: (i) avoid all kinds of religious gatherings, (ii) hospitals to not show religious bias in treating patients, and (iii) doctors to coordinate with the government and check in on the mental health of quarantined patients via video conferencing facilities such as Skype.
On April 5, the government issued cluster containment measures to stop the transmission, morbidity, and mortality associated with the further spread of COVID-19. This was in response to the large number of imported infections from the attendees of the Nizamuddin conference in Delhi.
Various guidelines were issued towards (i) treatment protocol of COVID-19 positive patients, (ii) appropriate management of suspect cases of COVID-19, (iii) dead body management, (iv) criteria for classification of hotspots, and (v) protocol for use of Rapid Antibody Tests in hotspot areas.
Resource Management: On March 27, the Chief Minister announced an additional COVID-19 related recruitment of doctors and lab technicians. The recruited members were to join within three days of the notification. On April 25, an additional 1,323 nurses were also recruited.
A two-month extension was announced to the tenures of medical professionals retiring on March 31 and April 30.
The government also instructed District Authorities to ensure the protection of doctors and other hospital staff who are being forcefully evicted from their houses by landlords. As a measure to develop immunity against COVID-19, the government, on April 25, also recommended providing Zinc and Vitamin tablets, and herbal powder to all personnel on frontline duty in containment areas.
Other Measures
Administrative: Eleven committees have been formed to coordinate implementation of various welfare programmes. In all districts, Crisis Management Committees have been formed under the district collector.
Education: The conduct of semester examinations in universities and colleges is postponed to the beginning of the next academic year, as and when the institutions reopen. Private colleges and schools were also instructed to not compel students/parents to pay pending dues for 2019-20 or advance fees for 2020-21.
Industry: On April 22, the government released a list of industries classified as continuous process industries. These are companies where the production lines are functioning 24/7. The list includes (i) refineries, (ii) large steel plants, (iii) large cement plants, (iv) sugar mills, (v) large paper mills, (vi) tyre manufacturers etc.
Technology: The government launched a Whatsapp Chat Bot for providing latest information and guidance related to COVID-19 in both Tamil & English.
For more information on the spread of COVID-19 and the central and state government response to the pandemic, please see here.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court delivered its first verdict in a series of legal challenges that have been made against the Aadhaar project.[1] In the present matter, the court was examining whether a provision of the Finance Act, 2017 that made Aadhaar mandatory for filing of income tax returns and applying for Permanent Account Number (PAN) cards was constitutionally valid. The court has upheld the validity of this provision, subject to a few qualifications. Below, we discuss the background of the Aadhaar project, why the courts have stepped in to examine its legality, and some aspects of the recent judgement.
What is Aadhaar about, and how is it being used?
Earlier, various identity proofs were required for access to governments benefits, subsidies and services, such as a ration card, driving license or voter id. However, as these proofs could be easily duplicated or forged, there was leakage of benefits and subsidies to ineligible beneficiaries. The Aadhaar project was initiated in 2009 to address these problems. It was envisaged as a biometric-based unique identity number that could help identify eligible persons. It was thought to be a more reliable identity proof, because it sought to authenticate a person’s identity based on their unique biometrics, like fingerprints and iris scans.1
In 2016, Parliament enacted the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 to provide legislative backing to the project. This Act allowed Aadhaar to be used for authentication purposes by the central and state government, as well as by private bodies and persons.[2]
Under its provisions, government has been issuing various notifications making Aadhaar mandatory for government projects, such as LPG subsidies and Mid-Day Meal scheme.[3] In addition, in 2017, Parliament passed the Finance Act to amend the Income Tax Act, 1961, and made Aadhaar mandatory for filing of income tax returns, and applying for PAN.[4]
What is the information collected under Aadhaar?
To obtain an Aadhaar number, a person is required to submit their : (i) biometric information (photograph, 10 fingerprints, scans of both irises), and (ii) demographic information (name, date of birth, gender, residential address) to the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).[5] The Aadhaar number, the demographic and biometric information (called identity information) is together stored in the Central Identities Data Repository. In addition, every time a person’s identity is authenticated using Aadhaar, information related to the authentication request is recorded as well.
How is this information protected?
While India does not have a comprehensive law on privacy and data security, the Aadhaar Act, 2016 has some protections. For example, it prohibits UIDAI and its officers from sharing a person’s identity information and authentication records with anyone. It also forbids a person authenticating another person’s identity from collecting or using their information without their consent. Other protections include prohibitions against publicly displaying a person’s Aadhaar number and sharing of a person’s fingerprints and iris scans with anyone. Note that there are penalties prescribed for violation of these provisions as well.[6]
However, the Act permits information be disclosed in the interest of national security and on the order of a court.[7]
The UIDAI authority has been made responsible for the operation and maintenance of the Aadhaar database, and for laying down the security protocols for its protection.[8]
Why did the courts step in?
Even as Aadhaar is being rolled out, with about 111 crore of the 125 crore population already on the database, there are several important constitutional and legal questions around the unique identity project.[9][10] While yesterday’s judgement addresses one of these issues, other questions remain unresolved. A description of the key legal questions is provided below.
Privacy: It has been argued that the collection of identity data without adequate safeguards interferes with the fundamental right to privacy protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 guarantees right to life and personal liberty. In August 2015, a three judge bench of the Supreme Court passed an order stating that a larger bench must be formed to decide the questions of: (i) whether right to privacy is a fundamental right, and (ii) whether Aadhaar violates this right.[11] However, the court has not set up a larger bench to hear these petitions till June 2017.[12]
Mandatory vs voluntary: Another question before the court is whether Aadhaar can be made mandatory for those government benefits and services, that citizens are entitled to under law. In 2015, the Supreme Court passed some interim orders stating that: (i) Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory for providing citizens with benefits and entitlements, and (ii) it can only be used for seven schemes including PDS distribution of foodgrains and kerosene, LPG distribution scheme, MGNREGA wage payments, and Prime Minister’s Jan Dhan Yojana.11
Subsequently, Parliament enacted the Aadhaar Act, 2016, and the government has been issuing notifications under it to make Aadhaar mandatory for various schemes.3 In light of this, more petitions have been filed challenging these notifications.[13] Judgements on these petitions are awaited as well.
Linking Aadhaar with PAN: In 2017, after Parliament made Aadhaar mandatory for filing of tax returns and applying for PAN under the Income Tax Act, 1961, fresh petitions were filed in the Supreme Court. The new provision stated that if a person failed to link their PAN with the Aadhaar number by a date notified by the central government, their PAN will be invalidated. The government said this will decrease the problem of multiple PAN cards obtained under fictitious names and consequent tax fraud and tax evasion, because Aadhaar will ensure proper identification.1,[14] However, the petitioners argued that this may interfere with a person’s fundamental rights, such as their right to practice any profession, trade or business and right to equality. It is this question that has been addressed in the new judgement.1
Money Bill: The fourth question is related to the manner in which the Aadhaar Act, 2016 was passed by Parliament. The Act was passed as a Money Bill. A Money Bill only needs to be passed by Lok Sabha, while Rajya Sabha may make non-binding recommendations on it. In case of the Aadhaar Act, Rajya Sabha made some recommendations that were rejected by Lok Sabha. It has been argued before the courts that the Aadhaar Act does not qualify as a Money Bill because it contains provisions unrelated to government taxation and expenditure.13,[15]
What has the judgement held?
The Supreme Court has held that the new provision of the Income Tax Act that makes Aadhaar mandatory for income tax assessees is not in violation of the fundamental right to equality, or the fundamental right to practice one’s profession or trade. The petitioners had argued that the new provision discriminates between individual and non-individual assessees (e.g. companies or firms), because it only seeks to address tax fraud by individuals. They had also contended that Aadhaar could not address the problem of tax fraud through duplicate PANs because there was evidence to show that people had multiple Aadhaar numbers as well. The court rejected these arguments (as well as arguments related to freedom to carry on business), stating that Aadhaar is perceived as the best method of eliminating duplicate PANs, and therefore there is reasonable rationale behind linking the PAN database with Aadhaar.1
The court decided not to examine questions related to human dignity and privacy, on the ground that issues affecting Article 21 will be examined by a larger bench to be set up by the court. However, it granted relief to people, who have not enrolled for Aadhaar, by stating that their PAN cards cannot be invalidated till the time when the matter is finally decided by such a bench.
This, in effect, means that the debate around constitutionality and legality of the Aadhaar project will remain ongoing till a judgement is finally pronounced on whether Aadhaar is in violation of right to privacy under Article 21.
[1] Binoy Viswam vs Union of India, Supreme Court, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 247 of 2017, http://www.sci.gov.in/pdf/jud/wc24717_Sign.pdf.
[2] Sections 7, 8 and 57, Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.
[3] Unstarred Question No. 4126, Lok Sabha, March 27, 2017; Unstarred Question No. 1209, Lok Sabha, February 9, 2017; S.O. 371 (E), Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, February 8, 2017, http://dfpd.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/Magazine/Document/1_211_1_aadhaar-notification.pdf; S.O. 369 (E), Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, February 8, 2017, http://www.egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2017/174076.pdf.
[4] The Finance Bill, 2017, http://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/the-finance-bill-2017-4681/.
[5] Regulations 3 and 4, Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016.
[6] Sections 28-47, Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.
[7] Section 33, Section 23, Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.
[8] Section 23, Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.
[9] “UIDAI achieves 111 crore mark on Aadhaar generation; Unique identity covers over 99 percent adult residents of India”, Press Information Bureau, January 27, 2017.
[10] Justice K. Puttaswamy (Retd) and Another vs Union of India and Others, Supreme Court, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012; Jairam Ramesh vs Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) 231 of 2016; S.G. Vombatkere and Another vs Union of India and Others, Supreme Court, Writ Petition (Civil) 797/ 2016; “Aadhaar: What are the pending cases before the Supreme Court”, Indian Express, May 31, 2017, http://indianexpress.com/article/india/aadhaar-what-are-the-pending-cases-before-the-supreme-court/.
[11] Justice K. Puttaswamy (Retd) and Another vs Union of India and Others, Supreme Court, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012, September 23, 2013, August 11, 2015, October 15, 2015.
[12] “The Aadhaar/ PAN Judgement”, Indian Constitutional Law and Philosophy Blog, https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/the-aadhaarpan-judgment/.
[13] “Aadhaar: What are the pending cases before the Supreme Court”, Indian Express, May 31, 2017, http://indianexpress.com/article/india/aadhaar-what-are-the-pending-cases-before-the-supreme-court/.
[14] Uncorrected Lok Sabha Debates, March 22, 2017, Pg. 240, http://164.100.47.193/newdebate/16/11/22032017/Fullday.pdf.
