SUPREME COURT SEEKS REPORT ON ORGAN TRANSPLANT ACT, GENDER DISPARITY STEPS:

SUPREME COURT SEEKS REPORT ON ORGAN TRANSPLANT ACT, GENDER DISPARITY STEPS:

In a public interest litigation concerning organ transplants, the Supreme Court has directed the Union Government to convene a meeting involving the Chief Secretaries and Secretaries, Public Health, of all States and Union Territories. The purpose of this meeting is to collect relevant data and submit a comprehensive report. This directive was issued by a bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih. The bench has specifically asked the Union to gather detailed information from the States and UTs on several key aspects related to the implementation and functioning of the organ transplant framework across the country.

Firstly, the Court has asked for details on which States have adopted the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994, and if not, the reasons for non-adoption. Secondly, it seeks information on whether the States have adopted the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues (Amendment) Act, 2011 along with the corresponding Rules framed in 2014. If any State has not done so, the reasons for the same are to be provided. Thirdly, the bench has sought clarification on whether all States have adopted and implemented the policies and guidelines framed by the National Organ and Tissue Transplant Organization (NOTTO) to facilitate organ transplants, and if not, an explanation for non-compliance is required.

The Court has also directed that data be collected on the percentage of transplants conducted from cadavers as compared to those from live donors. Furthermore, the report of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has revealed a concerning gender disparity, noting that the number of female live donors is significantly higher than that of males, while the number of male recipients exceeds that of females. In this regard, the States are required to submit the percentage of female donors compared to male donors, as well as the percentage of female recipients in comparison to male recipients. Additionally, they must outline the steps taken to address and remove this gender disparity in access to organ transplants.

The Court also enquired whether the relatives of brain-dead patients are being adequately informed about the option of organ donation. It further asked whether all States have established policies for ‘swap transplantation’ and whether these are aligned with the provisions of the 1994 Act. If not, reasons for the misalignment or absence of such policies must be provided.

Another key point of enquiry relates to the process followed by States for the allocation of organs to recipients. The Court has asked whether this process aligns with the point system developed by NOTTO and, if there are any deviations, to explain the rationale behind them. In terms of infrastructure, the Court has sought a detailed count of government and private hospitals in every State that are equipped with the necessary machinery, doctors, and infrastructure for organ transplantation. The States are also required to specify their current needs in this domain.

Further, the Court wants to know how many government hospitals in each State are capable of performing multi-organ transplants, including liver, kidney, heart, lungs, pancreas, etc. It also seeks details on the initiatives undertaken by States to raise awareness among the public about organ transplantation.

In addition, the Supreme Court has asked whether State governments are providing any form of financial assistance to either the donor or the recipient of organs. Finally, the Court inquired if there exists any national-level portal where information about donors and recipients is updated regularly to facilitate smoother and more transparent organ transplantation procedures.

The Union Government has been directed to compile all this information and submit the final report to the Supreme Court by July 18, 2025.