Treatment at Hospitals: SC stays all but 3 HC directives
The Supreme Court yesterday stayed all but three High Court observations and directives that concern ensuring treatment for patients at all government and private hospitals across the country irrespective of whether or not they are infected with coronavirus.
Chamber judge of the Appellate Division of the SC Justice Md Nuruzzaman passed the order following a petition filed by the government, seeking stay on the HC orders and observations delivered on Monday.
The three HC directives that the apex court upheld are -- submission of a report by the health ministry and the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) by June 30 on whether the directives issued by the health ministry to public and private hospitals on May 11 and 24 have been implemented properly; the formation of a monitoring cell to ensure that private hospitals provide proper treatment to patients and that they do not charge extra or unreasonable fees; and fixing and displaying of retail and refilling prices of oxygen cylinders at outlets and shops so that the customers are not charged extra.
The health ministry circulars on May 11 and 24 say: all private and government hospitals must have separate arrangements for treating suspected Covid-19 patients and private hospitals and clinics cannot refuse treatment to patients, Covid-19 or otherwise, if they have the requisite facilities or equipment.
It also said if a private hospital or clinic does not have the requisite facilities or equipment to treat a patient, then it may refer the patients to another hospital and the transfer can only take place after ensuring treatment in the other hospital in consultation with the Covid-19 hospital control room of DGHS.
During the virtual hearing on the government petition yesterday, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam and Additional Attorney General Murad Reza opposed the HC directives, saying that the government has been relentlessly working to provide treatment to patients whether they are infected with Covid-19 or not.
They argued there was no negligence on part of the government in providing treatment to patients and therefore, there is no necessity for such directives from the HC. They also opposed the HC observation that said "If a patient dies or is deprived of treatment at a hospital due to negligence, it would be considered a criminal and punishable offence".
If the HC observations remain in force, doctors cannot work properly out of fear, they said, adding that several doctors have already died from Covid-19 while treating patients.
Murad Reza told the court no victims have brought any allegations of denying treatment against hospitals.
The writ petitions were moved before the HC on the basis of newspaper reports on alleged negligence of treatment, and therefore those writ petitions are not acceptable, he said.
Murad Reza also argued that there were no specific allegations of violation of the health ministry directives.
Writ petitioners' lawyers opposed the government's stay petition, saying that the HC has issued the directives necessary to protect people's right to life in accordance with the constitution.
Advocate ZI Khan Panna, a lawyer for the writ petitioners, told the apex court that the directives issued by the HC were not against doctors, but for the protection of patients' health.
The mismanagement that takes place in private hospitals is because of their owners, he said, adding that doctors provide treatment to patients in the hospitals amid risk.
The lawyer said the writ petitions were filed as public interest litigation, which can be moved on the basis of newspaper reports, adding that the Indian Supreme Court has introduced the tradition of accepting public interest litigations based on newspaper reports.
The High Court directives need to be upheld to protect people's health, he argued.
He told The Daily Star that the authorities concerned must ensure treatment of patients at both government and private hospitals in accordance with the health ministry directives, although the SC stayed some of the HC directives.
The health ministry and DGHS have to submit a compliance report to the HC by June 30 in line with Appellate Division order, he said, interpreting the Apex court order.
Apart from Advocate ZI Khan Panna, Advocate Manzill Murshid, Barrister Aneek R Haque, Barrister Mahfuzur Rahman Milon and Advocate Jamiul Hoque Faisal appeared for the writ petitioners during yesterday's hearing.
Earlier, the HC bench Justice M Enayetur Rahim on Monday made a number of observations and issued a number of directives following five separate writ petitions filed recently as public interest litigation seeking necessary orders from it.
Rights organisation Justice Watch Foundation, Deputy Registrar of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University Dr Sheikh Abdullah Al Mamun, Supreme Court lawyers Mahbubul Islam and Aynunnahar Siddiqua filed a petition each.
THE HC DIRECTIVES THAT WERE STAYED BY SC
The HC directives stayed by the SC include: the death of or denial of treatment to a patient due to negligence being a criminal and punishable offence; taking legal action against those displaying negligence while treating patients in a hospital; informing people of the number of ICU beds in government hospitals through media and regular bulletins; making ICU bed management more accountable and launching an ICU hotline; making a countrywide list of private hospitals with 50 or more beds and compiling information on the treatment given to Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 patients since the issuance of health ministry guidelines on May 24; taking necessary measures to stop the sale of oxygen cylinders without prescriptions from registered doctors; and engaging the commerce ministry and Directorate of National Consumer Rights Protection to strengthen monitoring of supply and sale of oxygen cylinders.
Comments