'No-Fault' Compensation Policy
Context:
The Supreme Court of India recently directed the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to frame a 'no-fault' compensation policy for individuals who suffered serious adverse events or died following Covid-19 vaccination.
The ruling ensures that affected families can access structured financial relief without having to fight complex legal battles in civil courts.
Concepts and Principles:
No-Fault Liability:
This legal principle allows victims or their families to receive financial relief without having to prove that the injury was caused by negligence, defect, or intentional wrongdoing.
The Court noted that insisting on "proof of negligence" for complex medical attributions would impose an "onerous burden" on families.
Constitutional Obligation:
Rejecting the argument that vaccination was strictly voluntary and thus indemnified the government, the Court ruled that the Constitution views the State as an "active guardian of welfare and dignity," not a "distant spectator."
Because the mass vaccination drive was a State-led public health intervention, the Right to Life (Article 21) imposes a positive obligation on the government to provide institutional support for grave adverse outcomes.
No Admission of Fault:
The Supreme Court explicitly clarified that the formulation of this no-fault framework shall not be construed as an admission of legal liability, illegality, or fault by the Union government or vaccine manufacturers.
Global Precedents:
The judgment highlighted that this mechanism is standard practice globally, noting that countries like the United Kingdom, Australia, and Japan already successfully operate similar no-fault vaccine injury compensation programs.
Background Precedent:
Gaurav Kumar Bansal vs Union of India:
The recent ruling closely mirrors the Supreme Court's earlier intervention during the pandemic regarding compensation for Covid-19 deaths.
In this 2021 case, the Court was tasked with deciding if families of Covid-19 victims were entitled to relief.
Disaster Management Act, 2005:
The Court ruled that under this Act, providing relief for loss of life was a "mandatory statutory duty," not an optional charitable act.
Following the Court's directive, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) established guidelines fixing an ex-gratia amount of ₹50,000 per deceased person.
This was disbursed by states from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF) through simplified district-level grievance redressal mechanisms.