The Supreme Court’s decision to set up a three-member committee to oversee the functioning of the Medical Council of India, is a desperate attempt by the apex court to fix a completely broken system. It is a revealing commentary on the state of affairs that the MCI, which regulates medical education and quality standards in medical practice in India for the Government of India, will now be regulated by an ad-hoc and non-statutory body.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

The committee is to be headed by retired Justice RM Lodha who earlier this year unveiled a revolutionary proposal to revamp the Board of Control for Cricket in India. The Supreme Court’s intervention in the functioning of the BCCI, a private body, had raised eyebrows, but there was backing in the form of popular sentiment, which was further bolstered by the no-nonsense approach of the Lodha panel to the oligarchic manner in which the BCCI functioned. Similarly, the court’s intervention in MCI, is problematic considering that it is an independent statutory body governed by the MCI Act, 1956. 

By appointing an oversight committee using its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, which allows the court to pass decrees to ensure “complete justice” in any matter pending before it, the court may not have tampered explicitly with the provisions of the MCI Act, but in effect has overrode the Act. In its judgment the court said it “hoped” the Centre would consider the recommendations of an Expert Committee that suggested the annulment of the MCI and the creation of a National Medical Commission (NMC). Ultimately, the power to legislate and amend laws rests with Parliament. The oversight committee will function for one year, but what if the government and Parliament do not amend the MCI Act or consider the NMC as an unviable alternative? The present MCI is a 113-member jumbo body comprising nominees of the central and state governments, medical universities and practising doctors. The desire to satisfy all stakeholders has resulted in a bloated organisation, when a lean body with quick decision-making powers made more sense. The MCI can take credit for giving India the record for having more medical colleges than any other country. But that is where its contribution ends. The MCI has failed to create a medical education system that facilitates the public health needs of the country.

The abysmal doctor-patient ratios in India’s rural areas and poorer districts, the sanctioning of new medical colleges without ensuring trained medical faculty, the failure to produce adequate specialist doctors, and corruption in the conduct of inspections and in granting sanctions to medical colleges have wrecked the MCI’s credibility. The central government is now in receipt of three official documents — the report of an expert panel led by Dr Ranjit Roy Chaudhury, a parliamentary standing committee report on health and Monday’s Supreme Court judgment — all essentially stating the same aspect, that the MCI, in its present form, is a losing proposition. From the government’s submissions to the parliamentary committee, it appears that consensus is emerging on splitting the MCI’s functions into four verticals focusing on undergraduate curriculum, postgraduate curriculum, licensing and accreditation. To address quality concerns, a common exit exam is also on the cards for graduating doctors. The government has also implicitly admitted that there needs to be better synergy with the MCI. The government seems to have the answers but as is its wont, is slow in taking the remedial action. It remains to be seen whether the interference from a non-statutory, externally-constituted body comprising a former judge, a former auditor, and a medical expert, will force its hand on MCI reforms.