Laws laid down by supreme court
The blood donor guidelines by central Government under challenge (5 March 2021)
The blood donor guidelines by central Government under challenge (5 March 2021)
A writ petition has been filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court
objecting to the blood donor guidelines issued by the central Government
imposing a blanket ban on Transgender
persons, female sex workers, etc. from donating blood. Bench issued notice on
the petition after hearing Advocate Jayna Kothari who had asked for grant an
interim relief which was refused by a bench headed by CJI SA Bobde stating that the court is not an expert in scientific
issues . However court issued notice to the center for reply .
Thangjam Santa Singh a member of the
Transgender community has taken plea in the Public Interest Litigation that Clauses 12 and 51 of
the said guidelines consider transgender persons, gay men and female sex
workers to be a high-risk HIV/ AIDS category and prohibit them from donating
blood .Exclusion of the above class of persons, solely on the basis of their
gender identities/ sexual orientation, is not only unreasonable but also
unscientific.
"All blood units that are collected
from donors are tested for infectious diseases including Hepatitis B, Hepatitis
C, and HIV/AIDS and hence permanently excluding them from donating blood and
categorising them as high-risk only on the basis of their gender identity and
sexual orientation is violative of their right to be treated equal’
"The prohibition of transgender persons, men having sex
with men and female sex workers is due to assumptions based on negative
stereotypes which amounts to discrimination under Articles 14 and 15 of the
Constitution and they are denied equal dignity under Article 14 as they are
deemed less worthy and subordinate in social participation and healthcare ally as other blood donors."
."
In support to his argument ,petitioner also referred to the
decided case by Supreme court NALSA v. Union of
India, (2014) 5 SCC 438 and Navtej Johar
v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1.wherein it was prescribed not to make
deferrals based on gender identities and they merely
prescribe a 3 month or 45-day deferral from the last high-risk sexual contact.It
is further averred that across the world, guidelines on blood donation have
been updated to the above stand .
In this backdrop, the plea states,
"blood donor guidelines need to be based on an
individualized system for all donors based on and not perceived risk and not
based on identities. The present impugned Guidelines are stigmatizing as they
are not based on how HIV transmission actually works, nor are they based on the
actual risks involved in specific activities but are based only on the
identities of donors such as, whether they are transgender, gay or bisexual men
or female sex workers."
Now ball is in the court of Central Government to take
stand-whether to defend their stand or to change it . It appears it is going to
be an issue of fundamental right and may call for a debate on the issue .
Become a Member of the new revolution "Consumer Awakening" and instantly expand your knowledge with the Important Landmark Judgements, Laws Laid down by the Supreme Court for Consumer Rights, Get access to hundreds of Featured Articles in 2 different Languages; English and Hindi - a valuable professional resource to draw upon, and a powerful, collective voice to advocate for your protection of rights as a consumer nationwide.
Thank you for your interest in becoming a "Consumer Awakening" Member!
You will find information on Customer Rights, what we're doing and how to become a member. If you are looking forward to become a member of our portal and gain access to Hundreds of Featured Articles which will clearly give you an insight of yoru rights as a Consumer, then Read Further. more detail on our technologies and technology process,
