|
Events
& Issues
New Delhi, 30 April 2020
Lockdown Panic
LOCAL BODIES TO ACT
By Dr. S. Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)
Addressing a video
conference with Chief Ministers on 27 April, a week before the end of the
second phase of lockdown, Prime Minister Modi told them that the danger of the
virus was far from over and “constant vigilance is of paramount importance”.
More than a month has elapsed since India resorted to lockdown. The strategy
has yielded “positive results” in the words of the PM to the extent that it has
saved thousands of people from contracting COVID-19 infection.
In the midst of the
second phase of the lockdown, some States have already expressed the need to
continue it further as conditions are not normal. Goa, Odisha and Meghalaya,
where COVID-19 attack is less severe than in most other places, are ready to
face the inconveniences of the lockdown so that the fight against the pandemic
is not abandoned till we are free of the disease. Some States like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and
Kerala are in favour of following the decision of the Union Government – the
safest option. On the whole, no State Government presently seems to be keen on
lifting the lockdown.
Cautious approach of
the Chief Ministers is itself a big help to the PM to chalk out a plan for
gradual removal of restrictions depending on local conditions. As a
responsibility of the government, lifting of lockdown is more serious than its
introduction and involves a thorough study of the status of the epidemic and
factors conducive to its spread and efficacy of control measures. Return of a
virus is always more virulent than its first entry. We have to take into
account global status of the virus also while taking national decision.
Lockdown was commenced
in India on this 24 March certainly not as a panic response at the very first
case and also not as a late response when situation is out of control. First
case was noticed on 30 January and steady escalation from 3 March. Initially,
it was reported that even scientists considered lockdown as a “drastic public
health measure” which could lead to “long-lasting adverse health outcomes.”
Some sections were then in favour of “community and civil society led
self-quarantine and self-monitoring” method as more sustainable and
implementable strategy.
Lockdown was finally
adopted after a thorough examination by experts and not as a unilateral
political decision. At that time, some degree of lockdown was already in force
in many counties where the pandemic also entered earlier.
Flattening the spread
of the epidemic is the main purpose of the lockdown which gives time to health
systems to cope up with the disease so that normal activities could be resumed.
Reducing reproduction number below 1 (which is now 2 to 3) is necessary for
control of the epidemic, and for this contact between symptomatic,
asymptomatic, and pre-symptomatic patients with the rest of the population must
be stopped. This is what lockdown aims to do. Common people misunderstand the objective
of lockdown.
Each country may have
its own version of lockdown. But, there are six major measures which include
stopping of big events; closure of schools and colleges; self-isolation of
symptomatic cases; household isolation; social distancing for all; and social
distancing for 70+ age-group. The logic
of lockdown may vary from country to country, but the basic reason is common to
all which is physical contact between individuals to an undesirable extent which
facilitates transmission of infections. Human beings being human beings prone
to social living and subject to virus attacks, isolation has to be legally
enforced to fight infectious/contagious diseases.
As one month of
lockdown is already completed, it will be useful to review how it has worked
and what has been achieved. A protracted pandemic like COVID-19 has already
proved that soft handling will not work and stern determined measures are
needed. It implies that people will have to bear the burden of inconveniences
to free themselves and posterity from the deadly disease.
First of all, the
whole world is presently dependent on non-medical ways of fighting the pandemic
to prevent its escalation since no specific vaccine is made. It brings people’s
understanding and willing cooperation into focus. Lockdown is a strategy that needs
the support of the people. It is aimed at the affected and the unaffected
unlike quarantine which is isolation of the affected and people suspected to be
affected.
The practice of
quarantine began in 14th century Europe to protect coastal cities from
Plague. Ships arriving from infected
ports were required to sit at anchor for 40 days before landing. Frequent outbreak of Yellow Fever led to the
Federal Quarantine legislation in the US in 1878 and paved way for federal
action in quarantine matters which were dealt with by States. Under Public
Health Service Act of 1944, prevention and transmission of communicable
diseases from foreign countries became the responsibility of federal government
in USA.
Pandemic diseases
have to be centrally dealt with even in federal systems. To introduce questions
of State rights and autonomy sounds premature politics. States are to be
consulted to ascertain local situations and determine implementation
techniques. Strategies like lockdown have to be centrally decided to be
effective. There are grades and degrees of infection and therefore variations
in lockdown details, but decision must be national. Inter-State coordination
committees may be set up for purposeful joint action.
Decentralised
administrative machinery well established in the country is a great boon in
organising COVID-19 fight and implementing lockdown. The Health Department has
constituted State and district level committees to audit causes of death. In
Odisha, Sarpanchs are vested with powers of a magistrate to fight coronavirus
and are asked to ensure strict compliance of lockdown rules, and other
precautionary practices like wearing masks, hand washing, social distancing,
zero tolerance to spitting in public places, etc.
There are over 2.6
lakh village panchayats in India with over 30 lakh representatives, one-third
of whom are women. There are about 5,000 urban local bodies. Besides these
official bodies, thousands of voluntary organisations and Resident Welfare
Associations with elected members are functioning. They are all alive and
active, and concerned people do have trust in them. Panchayat presidents command some respect in
their villages. In times of crisis like the present wave of pandemic, these institutions
may be used to promote people’s cooperation which is the kingpin in the success
of lockdown measures.
A milder form of
lockdown named “Stay at home order” is adopted in many States in the US. Work from home has become common in India
wherever possible as a support system to lockdown.
India’s lockdown is
said to be one of the most severe forms that could adversely affect its economy
and is difficult to follow. There are several instances of violations, but not
all are due to hardships in observing lockdown. Photographs of people crowding
in markets, moving around without masks, and gathering in large numbers for
some festival show a mixture of ignorance and a common tendency to disregard
rules and regulations particularly on roads.
Local bodies and
associations must gear up to fight lockdown panic to defeat the pandemic.
---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
New Delhi
28 April 2020
|
Archives 
