Time for public scrutiny

Dinesh C Sharma
Science Commentator

THE second wave of the coronavirus pandemic appears to be waning. The number of new cases reported from all over India daily is around 37,000 compared to the May peak that was over 10 times higher. Many cities are reporting new cases in two digits. The vaccination drive, as per the amended policy, is underway in most parts of the country. The process of unlocking is in full swing in several states with the resumption of commercial and industrial activity. It is an opportune time to take a critical look at India’s pandemic response till now and the road ahead. The virus is still circulating and future spikes can’t be ruled out. It is no time to celebrate but to use the present window of opportunity for undertaking a dispassionate review of the journey till now. This will help in drawing valuable lessons and chalk out a blueprint of action from now onward.

We have passed through two waves of the pandemic. In the first wave, which as we reckon now was comparatively milder, the response consisted of national lockdown and steps to prepare the health system for a likely surge. Efforts to develop and manufacture vaccines were also initiated. Vaccines became available in early 2021 but the rollout was sluggish. Meanwhile, the second wave hit the country, exposing gaping holes in the health system and its poor state of preparedness. Early and strategic vaccination, preventing political and religious gatherings, better genomic surveillance etc may have averted the tragedy of the second wave.

The government response to the pandemic in months and weeks preceding the second wave needs public scrutiny. Claims and counter-claims have been made in mainstream media and social media about what went wrong, but we have not had any systematic public review of the pandemic response in India — both at the national and state levels. The parliamentary committee on science and technology headed by Jairam Ramesh recently initiated a discussion on vaccines and genome sequencing but members belonging to the ruling party reportedly opposed it.

The pandemic-related policy response in India has so far been opaque, and key policies have appeared to be arbitrary and not driven by evidence despite claims to the contrary. For instance, the government’s position on vaccine procurement became clear only when the matter came before the Supreme Court. The court had to use a harsh term like ‘arbitrary’ to describe the vaccine policy. Following criticism in the court and outside, the government suddenly announced that all adult Indians would be vaccinated by December 31. Health Minister Harsh Vardhan announced that “between August and December 2021, India will have procured 216 crore vaccine doses.”

However, the second government affidavit filed in the court this week brought the figure down from 216 crore doses to 186 crore doses, which it said will suffice for all Indians above 18. For this, 51 crore doses will become available by July 31 and the rest 135 crore by December 31. Of this, 50 crore will be Covishield, 40 crore Covaxin and 10 crore Sputnik V. For the rest 35 crore, the government is banking on under-development vaccines of Biological E and Zydus Cadila. On production capacity too, conflicting figures are being advanced. In May 2021, the same government had informed the same court that the monthly production capacity of Covishield would reach 6.5 crore doses a month in July. It means SII will produce 39 crore doses by December 2021. In the June affidavit, the government has jacked up SII’s production capacity to 50 crore. In the same way, the number for Covaxin doses has been hiked from 33 crore to 40 crore in between the two affidavits.

The number of fully vaccinated Indians at the end of June is little over 4 per cent. It can’t reach 100 by the year-end even if all the vaccine doses materialise as claimed in the court. The vaccine doses will become available progressively over the next few months and there is a gap between the two doses. People who will be vaccinated with Covishield in the last quarter of 2021 can get the second dose only in the first quarter of 2022. This apart, there are so many concerns relating to vaccine production, testing, procurement, pricing, equitable access and so on. The proceedings in the apex court can’t be expected to go into all such questions.

The task of a full review of the vaccine policy as well as other aspects of the pandemic response, therefore, should be entrusted to the parliamentary committee on health or science and technology, or a specially constituted panel consisting of members of both the committees or even a joint parliamentary committee. The ambit of such a panel should cover the entire pandemic response and it should be allowed to hold its proceedings in public, not in camera, given the unique challenge posed by the pandemic.

Parliaments across the world are doing so, with house committees holding health officials, scientific advisers and vaccine companies accountable. In the UK, the Lord’s Covid-19 Committee is looking at the long-term implications of the pandemic on the economy. The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis in the US is investigating failures of the Operation Warp Speed launched by President Trump and is seeking public inputs on abuse and fraud of relief funds. Members of the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee of the European Parliament is seized of the vaccine problem in Europe. The Brazilian Congress has launched a full investigation into President Bolsonaro’s pandemic policies including allegations of irregularities in the Covaxin deal.

If the parliamentary panels in India can question officials of social media companies over fake news and other issues, they can certainly do so for a raging health emergency that directly concerns the lives of citizens. Such an exercise will hold the government and policymakers accountable for their actions, and enhance public confidence in vaccination and pandemic-related policies.