The PIL highlighted the necessity to change a longstanding trend in India, where living donors have predominantly provided kidneys for transplants, and over the past fifteen years, have also been the principal source for liver transplants. The Supreme Court on Friday called upon this.
The Supreme Court on Friday (February 2) has called upon the Centre, the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), and state governments for a comprehensive response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) advocating for the strict regulation of organ removal, storage, and transplantation activities. This PIL, championed by the Madhya Pradesh-based organization ‘Gaveshna: Maanvotthan Paryavaran Evam Swasthya Jaagrookata Samiti’, underscores the necessity for only registered medical institutions to partake in such sensitive medical procedures.
The bench, led by justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan, acknowledged the urgency of the matter, as presented by Senior Advocate Vikas Singh. Singh highlighted the paramount importance of ensuring that government or semi-government medical institutions are duly registered with the National Organ and Tissue Transplant Organization (NOTTO) to undertake organ and tissue transplantation. This call for action is rooted in the alarming reliance on living donors for kidney and liver transplants over the years, a trend that the PIL seeks to reverse by advocating for a more regulated and ethical approach to organ donation.
The plea also draws attention to the recommendations of a task force led by Dr. YK Chawla, former Director of PGIMER, Chandigarh, on “Organ Donation and Transplantation”. These recommendations aim to streamline and strengthen medical facilities involved in transplantation, ensuring a more ethical and efficient system that could potentially save countless lives.
The Supreme Court’s notice extends to the Centre, all states, and UTs, reflecting the national significance of the issue. The PIL, filed through lawyer Varun Thakur, demands that government or semi-government medical colleges and district hospitals comply with Sections 14 and 14-A of the Transplantation of Human Organs (Amendment) Act, 2011. This legislation mandates the registration of hospitals engaging in organ and tissue transplantation activities, emphasizing the need for a structured and legally compliant organ donation ecosystem.
The plea sheds light on the grim statistics of fatal road traffic accidents (RTAs) and cerebral vascular accidents (CVAs) in India, pointing out the potential of these unfortunate incidents to contribute to the organ donor pool. With nearly 160,000 RTA deaths annually, a significant portion of which involves head injuries, and the high prevalence and fatality rates of CVAs, there exists a substantial yet untapped source for organ transplantation that could address the dire need for organs in the country.
Furthermore, the PIL emphasizes the stark contrast between India’s organ donation rate and that of Western countries, advocating for the establishment of organ donation and tissue retrieval centers in all government and semi-government medical institutions. This initiative aims not only to meet the increasing demand for organ transplants but also to uphold the fundamental right to life with dignity, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court’s engagement with this issue marks a critical step towards reforming the organ donation landscape in India. By mandating compliance with the Transplantation of Human Organs Act and ensuring that only registered institutions can perform such procedures, the judiciary is paving the way for a more ethical, efficient, and life-saving organ transplantation system. This initiative has the potential to revolutionize organ donation in India, saving up to eight lives per registered donor and improving the lives of up to 75 people through tissue donation, thereby addressing the acute shortage that sees barely 2-3% of the annual demand for organs being met.
