Personal autonomy and article 21

Personal autonomy and article 21

Subject: Polity

Section: Constitution

Context:  The Supreme Court upheld the right of an individual against forcible vaccination and the government’s COVID-19 vaccination policy to protect communitarian health.

It found certain vaccine mandates imposed by the State governments and Union Territory administrations disproportionate as they tend to deny access to basic welfare measures and freedom of movement to unvaccinated individuals.

Article 21 vs Communitarian health’

• The court struck a balance between individual right to bodily integrity and refusing treatment with the government’s concern for public health.
• “With respect to bodily integrity and personal autonomy of an individual in the light of vaccines and other public health measures introduced to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, court is of the opinion that bodily integrity is protected under Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution and no individual can be forced to be vaccinated,”
• A person has the right under Article 21 to refuse treatment, the court acknowledged.
• “Personal autonomy of an individual, which is a recognised facet of protection guaranteed under Article 21 encompasses the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment in the sphere of individual health, ”Supreme court observed.
• However, when the issue extended to “communitarian health”, the government was indeed “entitled to regulate issues”.
• The government’s right to regulate by imposing limits to individual rights for the sake of protecting public health was also open to judicial scrutiny.
• Courts had the authority to review whether the government’s interventions into the personal autonomy of an individual and right to access means of livelihood met the “three-fold” requirements as expounded in the Constitution Bench judgment in K.S. Puttaswamy case (the judgment which upheld the right of privacy as a constitutional right under Article 21).
  • The three-fold requirements include whether the legality of the limitations imposed by the government on individual rights presupposes the existence of a law. That is, the limitations should be backed by a clear statutory law.
  • The need for limitations should be proportionate to a legitimate State aim.
  • There should be a rational nexus between the State’s objectives for imposing the restrictions and the means adopted to achieve them.