NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the UOI, NACO, NBTC and sought their detailed responses after hearing a petition filed by a gay man, Sharif D Rangnekar, challenging the constitutional validity of Blood Donor rules of 2017.
The blood donor rules were issued by the National Blood Transfusion Council (NBTC) and National Aids Control Organisation (NACO) and Union of India (UOI). These permanently restrain transgenders, female sex workers and LGBTQI persons from donating blood.
The bench of the top court, led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud, issued notices to the concerned bodies on the petition filed by Rangnekar. The petition, filed in the top court by Rangnekar, was drafted by lawyer Rohin Bhatt and filed by Ibad Mushtaq.
Rangnekar said that the guidelines are based on a highly prejudicial and presumptive view taken with regard to gay men in the 1980s in the United States of America. It has since been revisited by majority of countries, including the USA, the United Kingdom, Israel and Canada, amongst others. The governments have come out with revised guidelines for blood donors which do not impose a blanket restriction on gay men or gender queer persons from donating blood.
"Even viewed from a scientific perspective, such a blanket restriction on blood donation is based on an assumption that a particular group of persons may be suffering from sexually transmitted diseases. The medical technology and education, especially in the field of haematology has progressed by leaps and bounds in the 21st century and screening of blood donors is conducted for every donation before a possible transfusion. In such era, a blanket prohibition emanating from a highly discriminatory view of gay persons, does not stand to reason," Rangnekar, in his PIL, a copy accessed by this newspaper, said.
Requesting the SC to pass appropriate orders on the issue, Rangnekar said, "such a blanket prohibition is a violation of the right to equality, dignity and life protected under Articles 14, 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution. Such guidelines violate the right to live with dignity, and do not afford full membership of living in a society to LGBTQ+ community and thus, reduces them to second class citizenship."
The petitioner, Rangnekar said that clauses 12 and 51 of general criteria under blood donor Guidelines and Blood Donor Referral, 2017, is discriminatory and unconstitutional as it excludes gay / LGBTQI persons, permanently, from donating blood to others.
Rangnekar sought thereby a direction from the SC to the Centre to frame guidelines that allow gay and LGBTQI persons can donate blood, with reasonable restrictions based on ‘screen and defer’ or ‘assess and test’ policies.
He also sought a direction to the UOI, NACO, NBTC to carry out sensitisation programs, while dealing with gay/ LGBTQI persons, who donate blood without subjecting them to invasive questions, and State AIDS Control Organisations about new policies, once they are enacted.
"The three Respondents - UOI, NACO, NBTC - should carry out public campaigns accordingly that sensitise the society about risky behaviour, and the new guidelines. The Supreme Court of Brazil sturck down a 12 year deferral on gay men donating blood as unconstitutional on the ground that the modern testing technology has evolved, and that blood donation deferral period for 12 months was discriminatory," the plea said.
