Editorial 1: Tamil Nadu heatwave policy is only a start

Context

Government’s policy provides short-term relief but lacks long-term measures.

Introduction

In October, the Tamil Nadu government notified extreme heat as a State-specific disaster. As things stand, the decision is good because it allows those at risk of heat-related morbidity or mortality to avail institutional mechanisms and recompense in the event of a deadly heatwave. This expands the State’s responsibility to guarantee public welfare to the new and unique threats posed by climate change. But there are also reasons to wait and watch.

Challenges and Ambiguities in Heatwave Mortality and Policy Measures

• Medical Care and Water Supply as Incentives: The gazette notification says the government will provide “medical care including supply of oral rehydration solution packets” and “drinking water in water kiosks.
  • These are incentives in the policy, but there are no sanctions should the State fail to act appropriately or in the event that these measures are deemed insufficient.
• Defining Heat-Related Deaths: The next paragraph in the notification is more illuminating: that a heat-related death is diagnosed “based on a history of exposure to high ambient temperature and the reasonable exclusion of other causes of hyperthermia.”
  • Further, “diagnosis shall be established from the circumstance surrounding the death, investigative reports concerning environmental temperature, and/or measured ante-mortem body temperature at the time of collapse.”
• Challenges in Heatwave Mortality Estimation: Estimates of a heatwave’s deadliness are typically based on the extent to which the ambient temperature deviates from the historical average at a specific location and the number of lives lost during and because of the heatwave.
  • This is a tricky, even devious, combination as illustrated by the accompanying rider: “to the reasonable exclusion of other causes of hyperthermia.”

• Vulnerabilities and the impact of heatwaves: A heatwave injures and/or kills by first pushing more vulnerable people over the edge; the less vulnerable are further down the line.
• Policy Goal vs. Actual Outcome: The new policy is presumably designed to help the State catch those whose risk exposure the State has not been able to mitigate in time.
  • However, the goal should be to altogether reduce the number of people requiring such catching.
  • The policy lacks the instruments to guide the State toward this outcome.
• Crucial Reminder: This detail serves as a crucial reminder: this is well begun, and well begun is half done.
  • But bearing in mind governments’ penchant for taking isolationist views of how climate change affects the people, there is value in keeping what remains pending in sight.

What is the limitations in the policy’s scope?

• The policy skirts the State’s responsibility by limiting itself to the consequences of a heatwave or a heatwave declaration.
• It does not mitigate the deadliness of high heat in advance and in contexts beyond climate change.
• Such inaction could potentially facilitate a disaster, risking people’s lives even before the ambient temperature has crossed legally recognised thresholds.

Exclusion of Families from the Ex-Gratia Solatium

• For example, if a doctor concludes a person died of a heat-related injury because they could not ventilate themselves, yet the weather department has not declared a heatwave, the person’s family will not qualify to receive the ex-gratia solatium in the new policy.
• That is, the policy will not help catch in advance the same people who are likelier than others to be injured or killed during a heatwave.

The Interaction Between Heat and Comorbidities

• On a related note, if a person dies during a (declared) heatwave, the ambient heat itself will be less responsible for stressing an individual than the heat interacting with pre-existing vulnerabilities and comorbidities.
• At the least, the Tamil Nadu health department should clarify the interaction between high heat and comorbidities and which of the latter might disqualify families from receiving the solatium.

Way Forward

The Tamil Nadu government has adopted a climate change mission that could address some of the anthropogenic components responsible for aggravating heatwaves. But actions to mitigate climate change and to adapt to a future with it are long-term, whereas keeping a heatwave from being deadlier has many short-term solutions such as better urban planning, improving access to green spaces, better enforcement of working conditions in the informal sector, etc.

Conclusion

For now, the gratuitous relief is effectively a self-imposed penalty on the State’s failure to lower its people’s vulnerability to heat injury during a declared heatwave, at the expense of the State Disaster Response Fund. Tamil Nadu will miss the forest for the trees if it does not expand the policy in the future to include its implicit long-term responsibilities.

---

Editorial 2: The long fight for accessibility, dignity in Indian prisons

Context

While the general conditions of Indian prisons have always been abhorrent for all prisoners, those with disabilities face even greater challenges.

Introduction

The story of Professor G.N. Saibaba is not just one of a travesty of justice but is also a glaring indictment of the cruelty faced by prisoners with disabilities in India. His bittersweet victory came in March 2024, when he was finally exonerated after a decade behind bars. But just months later, in October 2024, he passed away.

A Stark Reality of Inhumane Conditions in Indian Prisons

• Challenges faced by disable dprisoners: While recounting at a press conference the unimaginable horrors he had endured during his incarceration, he described the challenges he had with even basic tasks — using the toilet, fetching water or having a bath — due to the complete lack of wheelchair accessibility at the Nagpur Central jail premises.
  • His “anda cell” was so cramped that he had to rely on fellow inmates to lift his wheelchair, which often led to injuries.
• Historical context of prison abuse in India: Prisons in India have been plagued by violence, abuse, and neglect. In 1979-80, the infamous “Bhagalpur blindings” incidents, where acid was poured into prisoners’ eyes, shocked the nation.
• Reforms and the Mulla Committee Report: In the early 1980s, the Mulla Committee report on prison reforms was released, recommending extensive measures to improve prison conditions and administration.
• The persistent lack of action: Yet, in typical Indian policy fashion, no substantial improvements followed.

Stuffed prisons, appalling conditions

• Rama Murthy vs State of Karnataka (1996): In 1996, a Bengaluru’s Central Jail inmate wrote to the Chief Justice of India about deplorable prison conditions.
  • Consequently, Rama Murthy vs State of Karnataka was a landmark case where the Supreme Court of India directed the government to address key issues such as overcrowding, trial delays, torture, and neglect in prisons, in line with the Mulla Committee recommendations.
  • Again, nearly three decades later, no substantial progress has been made, evident in the current state of prisons.
• Overcrowding in Indian Prisons: Indian prisons house around 5.73 lakh people, far exceeding their capacity of 4.36 lakh, with many operating at over 100% or even 200% capacity (National Crime Records Bureau, 2022; Maharashtra Prison Department, 2024).
  • While the conditions of Indian prisons have always been appalling, they are exacerbated for prisoners with disabilities.

Prisoners with Disabilities: Vulnerability and Neglect

• Prisoners with disabilities are easy targets for abuse and violence from other prisoners and prison staff.
• Their special needs are simply ignored when they need special assistance with essential daily activities.
• While the government lacks data on the number or the condition of prisoners with disabilities, there are numerous news reports highlighting the challenges they encounter.
• One of the most prominent examples includes Father Stan Swamy who had Parkinson’s disease and was denied essential assistive items such as a straw and a sipper during his imprisonment, making it difficult for him to eat and drink.

Rampant Inaccessibility in Prisons

• Further, prisoners with disabilities also encounter rampant inaccessibility. A 2018 audit of the Tihar, Rohini, and Mandoli jails in Delhi conducted by the Nipman Foundation highlighted accessibility gaps such as:
  • The unavailability of functional wheelchairs.
  • Inaccessible prison cells, toilets, mulaqat rooms, and recreational spaces.
  • Water coolers located on floors which lacked accessible entries.

Rights that are only on paper

• Constitutional Guarantees for Prisoners: All prisoners in India have the right to equality, freedom, and life and personal liberty, as enshrined in the Constitution, a principle upheld by the Supreme Court in multiple judgments.
  • Notably, in Upendra Baxi vs State of U.P. (1983), the Court affirmed that prisoners have the right to live in humane conditions with dignity.
• International Obligations for orisoners with disabilities: India has obligations under various international covenants for the protection of prisoners with disabilities:
  • he Nelson Mandela Rules (2015) require prison administrations to make reasonable accommodations and adjustments for prisoners with disabilities.
  • The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities prohibits torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment for persons with disabilities.
  • These obligations are reflected in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, which mandates the state to protect persons with disabilities from abuse, violence, exploitation, and the denial of food and fluids.
  • The denial of a straw and sipper to Father Stan Swamy constituted a clear violation of these laws.
• National Guidelines for prison accessibility: The Ministry of Home Affairs’ Model Prison Manual (2016) specifies dignified living conditions in prisons.
  • In July 2024, the Ministry issued the ‘Accessibility Guidelines for MHA Specific Built Infrastructures & Associated Services for Police Stations, Prisons & Disaster Mitigation Centres’, which outlined detailed requirements to make prison facilities accessible.
• Enforcement and implementation challenges: While the rights of prisoners with disabilities,
  • both against abuse and for accessibility,
  • appear promising on paper,
  • they are seldom enforced like many other pieces of social welfare legislation in India.
  • Had the reality been different, Prof. Saibaba would not have suffered the way he did as a person with a disability.

Conclusion: A lack of political will

Many in society believe that cruelty to prisoners is deserved, fuelling a troubling indifference that undermines the political will for prison reforms. However, the message to the state is clear: compliance with the law, in spirit and in substance, is non-negotiable. Regardless of political will, all prisoners, including those with disabilities, are the responsibility of the government. Given that ‘prisons’ is a State subject, State governments bear the explicit responsibility to ensure that the rights of prisoners with disabilities are upheld. It is critical that the suffering endured by Prof. Saibaba is a wake-up call for state authorities to reevaluate and reorient their attitudes toward prisoners with disabilities.