After successfully flattening the curve in late 2020, India witnessed a horrific resurgence of cases. Many attributed this to the “policy casualness” of the government of India, and the lack of effective measures taken by it to ensure social distancing and the wearing of masks. As restrictions were lifted, sights of holiday-goers reaching jam-packed airports and bus terminals became common. The Election Commission of India also faced widespread flak for allowing large election rallies in poll-bound states such as West Bengal and Assam. As the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) entered into election mode, the Prime Minister gloated “wherever I go, I see crowds.” Many politicians made public appearances unmasked, setting a dangerous example for the country.

After hitting a 6-month low in early February 2021, the trend reversed and made a high of over 400,000 fresh cases with over 3,000 deaths taking place daily. As the healthcare system grappled with an unprecedented increase in cases, numerous cities in India reported a shortage of hospital beds, oxygen cylinders and ventilators (with some of them defective, forcing the Courts to intervene) – leading to over 100,000 deaths and forcing patients to lie on the floor, suffocate to death, or run from pillar to post. Many patients were forced to go to quacks and other unlicensed clinics.

Many, including leading businessmen such as Navneet Kalra and hospital-owners, have been accused of black marketing and hoarding. The situation became so dire that the Delhi High Court was forced to issue a threat of contempt against the government of India in case a minimum amount of oxygen was not supplied to hospitals across India’s capital on a daily basis. On the vaccination front, the situation was equally worse. The government of Delhi was forced to suspend its vaccination drive ‘indefinitely’ as vaccines ran short.

However, possibly the worst toll was on crematoriums. Many of them were working around-the-clock and resorting to mass cremations in order to dispel the long queues waiting outside. This, coupled with a lack of ambulances, resulted in numerous instances where the rights of the dead were violated. In Solan, a garbage lifting vehicle was used to carry a cadaver to a funeral ground, prompting the Chief Minister of the state to order a probe. Twenty-two cadavers were cut to pieces and transported simultaneously in gunny bags in a mini-ambulance in Mumbai. The government of Chhattisgarh, on the other hand, transported over 50 cadavers in Tempo Trawlers under its “Muktanjali” Scheme. Delhi experienced horrifying scenes as a dog crematorium had to be used for humans and over 100 bodies were cremated a day in the Seema Puri suburb of New Delhi, leading to breathing difficulties for citizens in the locality.

The dire situation in the Ganges led the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India to issue notices to the state governments of Uttar Pradesh & Bihar – threatening legal action if appropriate measures were not taking in consonance with India’s obligations under International Law. The Department of Water Resources and Ganga Rejuvenation, headed by the Ministry of Jal Shakti, was also asked to file an Action Taken Report (ATR) by the 13^th of June. The Patna High Court also followed suit and asked the District Commissioners of Buxar and Kaimur to file a report.

The Rights of the Dead are enshrined in Article 21, The Right to Life, of the Constitution of India. As early as 1989, the Supreme Court of India (SC) in Parmanand Katra v Union of India & Ors had observed that the Right to Human Dignity was available to all human beings, dead or alive, and had struck down a prison rule that required the corpse of a convict to be suspended in the air for half an hour post-execution. In 2001, the SC ruled that it is the State’s responsibility to ensure that every citizen gets a decent burial, as per their religious rites. The Madras High Court had also recognized this right in a recent case, where a doctor who had passed away due to COVID-19 was denied burial by a mob of locals. The Court also proceeded with booking them under S. 297 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Right of the Dead to a dignified disposal was first codified in the Geneva Conventions of 1929 and was elaborated upon in the 1949 Convention. Other soft law instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 23 (3)), International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the ICRC Handbook (Rules 113 and 115) also address the concept of human dignity and its application to all human beings, dead or alive. Although most of these instruments apply during times of conflict, they must also apply during times of a pandemic or pestilence as well.

Although the Indus Valley civilization of India was well known for introducing the concept of dignified disposal of human bodies in 3500 BC, the government of India seems to have gone shamefully astray today. The Ganga (Rejuvenation, Protection, and Management) Order, 2016, which was passed to prohibit the pollution and indecent disposal of bodies in the Ganges, has turned into a dead letter. Moreover, despite its colonial heritage, India does not possess any legislation related to burial rights, such as the Burial Act, 1857 in the United Kingdom. The government of India must take immediate steps in order to rectify this situation by enacting a legislation for the decent disposal of human bodies and conducting mass sensitization activities amongst government servants.

Dr. Heather Katharine Allansdotir is an incoming visiting fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (LCIL) at the University of Cambridge. She is known for her research in the field of Comparative Climate Provisions in Global Constitutions and her work in the field of Polar Law.

Naman Anand is a student at the Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law (RGNUL), Punjab. His core areas of interest are International Human Rights Law, Conflict Resolution, and Construction Law.

Suggested citation: Dr. Heather Katharine Allansdottir and Naman Anand, “River of Life, River of Death:” The Curious Case of the Ganges Cadavers and its Implications in International Law, JURIST – Professional Commentary, June 21, 2021, https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2021/06/allansdottir-anand-river-ganges-cadavers-international-law/.

This article was prepared for publication by Giri Aravind, a JURIST staff editor. Please direct any questions or comments to him at commentary@jurist.org