Lawyer Moves Delhi High Court Seeking Disclosure Of Information Regarding Procurement, Funding Of COVID-19 Vaccines

A lawyer has moved the Delhi High Court seeking disclosure of various information regarding procurement, funding and purchase of COVID-19 vaccines by the Central Government under the under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Lawyer and author of books on intellectual property rights Prashant Reddy T. has filed three petitions before the court.

One of the pleas has been filed against an order passed by Central Information Commission (CIC) on October 10, 2022, allowing the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to withhold disclosure of the purchase orders for COVID-19 vaccines.

The second plea seeks direction on the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) to provide a copy of the collaboration agreement entered with Bharat Biotech and a breakup of costs and investments relating to COVAXIN under the RTI Act.

The third plea seeks direction on Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council (BIRAC) to provide a copy of funding agreements entered with Gennova and Bharat Biotech as well as the total amount of funds that have been disbursed so far.

The pleas challenge the orders passed by CIC upholding the non disclosure of the said information by the CPIOs of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, ICMR and BIRAC. The CPIOs claimed that disclosure of the information were exempted under sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act.

Justice Prathiba M Singh has listed the matter for hearing on January 9 observing that it is an important case. However, the court refused to issue notice on the pleas and renotified the same for hearing after the court reopens after winter break.

In his pleas moved through Advocate N. Sai Vinod, Reddy has placed reliance on a 2009 full bench decision of CIC in Navroj Mody v. Mumbai Port Trust which held that "mere fact of the presence of the confidentiality provision in the License Agreement was a sufficient condition to keep the Agreement secret, /is/ untenable." The said decision also held that the terms of public-private partnership agreement cannot be exempted under section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act.

The petitioner lawyer has also averred that the refusal to provide the said information denies the right of public to know about the basic terms of the partnership, especially those relating to responsibilities of contracting entities, important milestones and timelines, vaccine pricing, warranties and immunities.

"These disclosures are key to assure the public that the purchase orders were based on sound commercial principles and to achieve maximum effect - i.e., procuring and delivering safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines on a war footing," the plea states.

The plea also states that the agreement concerning research and development of COVID-19 vaccine is distinct from commercial aspects relating to vaccine procurements and vaccinations, adding that the ICMR has failed to identify the detrimental nature of adverse effect on vaccinations from disclosure.

Title: Prashant Reddy T. v. Union of India & Another and other connected matters