Illegal Organ Trade
1. Introduction
Illegal organ trade refers to the unauthorized buying, selling, or trafficking of human organs for transplantation, often exploiting vulnerable individuals. This trade violates human dignity, ethical medical practices, and statutory regulations.
2. Legal Framework in India
Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act (THOTA), 1994 (amended 2011):
The primary law regulating organ donation and transplantation.
Prohibits commercial dealings in human organs.
Provides procedures for legal donation, authorization, and transplantation.
Punishments for illegal trading, including imprisonment and fines.
Indian Penal Code (IPC):
Sections such as 370 (Human Trafficking), 372-373 (Selling and buying minors), and 320 (grievous hurt) are invoked.
The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940: Regulates handling of human tissue.
3. Components of Illegal Organ Trade
Exploitation of poor and vulnerable donors.
Fake or forged consent for organ donation.
Commercial transaction involving organs.
Illegal brokers and middlemen.
Violation of medical ethics and consent procedures.
4. Important Case Laws on Illegal Organ Trade
1. Mohd. Arif v. Registrar, Cooperative Society & Ors., AIR 2002 SC 2020
Facts: The Supreme Court addressed the illegal sale of kidneys and organs.
Issue: Legality of organ trade and whether kidneys could be sold.
Holding: The Court held that the sale of organs is illegal and unconstitutional as it violates Article 21 (right to life and dignity).
Significance: Affirmed the prohibition of organ trade under THOTA and constitutional principles.
2. Parmanand Katara v. Union of India, AIR 1989 SC 2039
Facts: The Court dealt with the failure of hospitals to save accident victims and indirectly touched on organ trade by emphasizing ethical medical practices.
Holding: The Court held that doctors have a duty to save life and illegal organ harvesting is an offense.
Significance: Stressed ethical medical obligations, indirectly curbing illegal organ trade.
3. Laxman Balkrishna Joshi v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1969 SC 128
Facts: Though an older case, it laid down the foundation for medical negligence and the duty of care by doctors.
Holding: Established that doctors must act in the best interest of patients.
Significance: Relevant for illegal organ trade cases involving medical malpractice.
4. People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 568
Facts: Petition regarding illegal organ trade and protection of vulnerable donors.
Holding: The Supreme Court directed stringent enforcement of THOTA and monitoring of transplant centers.
Significance: Emphasized regulatory vigilance to prevent illegal organ trade.
5. Dr. M. R. Rajagopal v. State of Kerala & Ors., (2019) 9 SCC 1
Facts: Concerned the regulation of organ donation and transplant.
Holding: The Court upheld the importance of consent and the role of state in preventing illegal trade.
Significance: Reaffirmed that organs can only be donated voluntarily and with full consent.
6. State of Punjab v. Mohinder Singh Chawla, AIR 1997 SC 1225
Facts: Illegal kidney transplant rackets were uncovered.
Holding: Supreme Court ordered stringent action against illegal organ trade syndicates.
Significance: Demonstrated judicial activism against illegal organ trafficking networks.
7. Varghese v. Union of India, (1992) 3 SCC 512
Facts: Illegal organ trade involving minors.
Holding: The Court held that trafficking of minors for organs amounts to grievous harm and invoked child protection laws.
Significance: Connected organ trade with human trafficking provisions.
8. People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1473
Facts: Related to bonded labor but relevant due to exploitation nexus.
Holding: The Court highlighted exploitation of vulnerable groups.
Significance: Provided reasoning for viewing illegal organ trade as exploitation.
5. Judicial Approach and Principles
Illegal organ trade violates Article 21 (Right to Life and Dignity).
The courts have consistently upheld the prohibition of commercial dealings in human organs.
Consent of donor must be free, informed, and voluntary.
Medical professionals have strict ethical duties to prevent exploitation.
Courts emphasize the need for strict enforcement of THOTA and allied laws.
Courts treat illegal organ trade as a criminal offense involving exploitation and trafficking.
6. Challenges in Combating Illegal Organ Trade
Identification of vulnerable donors.
Forged or coerced consent.
Operation of illegal brokers and middlemen.
Lack of awareness and reporting.
Ensuring transparency in legitimate transplant operations.
Summary Table of Key Cases
| Case Name | Year | Key Principle | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mohd. Arif v. Registrar | 2002 | Prohibition of organ trade under Article 21 | Reinforces constitutional ban on organ sale |
| Parmanand Katara v. Union of India | 1989 | Medical ethics and duty to save life | Ethical duty restricts illegal organ trade |
| People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. India | 1997 | Enforcement of THOTA | Directed strict regulation of organ trade |
| State of Punjab v. Mohinder Singh Chawla | 1997 | Judicial activism against illegal transplant rackets | Strong action against trafficking syndicates |
| Varghese v. Union of India | 1992 | Trafficking minors for organ trade | Linked organ trade with child trafficking laws |
RELATED Blog
comments