The coronavirus pandemic, which has affected more than 165 countries across the globe, is an unprecedented crisis that has exposed a lack of preparedness of many countries, with India being no exception to this.
Following popular calls for a self-imposed curfew, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a 21-day nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of the virus, realising that community transmission and that a proliferation of cases will overwhelm the nation’s fragile health system. While some have criticised the decision for coming too late, others have suggested that it was too early and too abrupt, pointing to a lack of preparedness by the government.
While much of the debate about the governmental response–in India and abroad–has centred around the restriction of movement within the country, questions are being asked about initial travel restriction policies for people coming from outside the country. Such questions have only increased after a Muslim missionary group’s annual conference in Delhi’s Nizamuddin area that comprised of many foreign nationals led to over 1,000 members becoming infected. Authorities have undertaken massive attempts to trace down thousands of attendees of the Tablighi Jamaat’s gathering, which now accounts for 30% of India’s total number of cases. But several people have questioned why the members–several of whom came from Bangladesh, Malaysia, Thailand, and Kyrgyzstan–were allowed entry and whether they were quarantined.
In its defence, be it through screening air passengers, issuing travel advisories, suspending visas, or banning international flights from affected regions, India's response was both swifter and stricter than that of most countries.
Thermal screenings of incoming passengers from China and Hong Kong were initiated on 18 January, much before the detection of the first case in the country on 30 January. In comparison, most European countries began screenings much later. For example, Italy only implemented such measures 25 days after its first reported case, while Spain took 39 days. On January 17, just three days after the infamous declaration by the WHO that stated no evidence of human-to-human transmission of the coronavirus, three Indian airports–Mumbai, Delhi, and Kolkata–started screening everyone coming from the affected countries. By the 21st, it was expanded to four other major airports, and by the end of the week, 30 airports had begun screening passengers. Similar steps were also taken at 12 major and 65 minor ports, and at land borders.
Despite facing flak from the WHO and the Chinese ambassador, India, along with the US and Australia, was among the first countries to issue an advisory against travel to China. It is important to note that the WHO was very vocal about its stand and strictly recommended against restrictions on international travel, for which it has faced a lot of criticism lately.
In addition, on 5 February, the Indian government issued a blanket ban on the entry of any foreigner who had visited China after January 15. This announcement by the DGCA was accompanied by the Immigration authorities’ decision to suspend all visas for Chinese nationals and people of other nationalities residing in China, at a time when only 563 fatalities were reported worldwide. Such drastic steps, at that stage of the crisis, were only matched by Vietnam and Singapore, both of whom are seen as early responders to the crisis. While India has not been able to match either nation’s ability to contain or considerably slow the spread of the virus, its response is comparable in terms of the early imposition of strict travel restrictions. These steps, which many countries delayed for weeks if not months, were taken by India at a time when it only had three cases.
In the first week of March, when Germany and France had around 500 cases and Switzerland, Spain, the UK, and the US had just over 100 cases, India mandated screening for all incoming passengers. It followed a similar protocol for southeast Asian countries, which, at that time, had a combined total of fewer than 50 cases. On March 3, India suspended the visas of South Korean nationals and became one of the first countries to screen passengers and restrict arrivals from Israel, El Salvador, and all parts of Italy. This measure came at a time when the US, Singapore, Malaysia, and much of Europe only had restrictions in place for passengers coming in from some parts of Italy.
Furthermore, on the day on when the WHO declared COVID-19 as a global pandemic, which came at a stage when India had not yet recorded its first coronavirus-related death, Indian officials announced the suspension of all existing visas–with a few exceptions–from 13 March-15 April. Such restrictions were put in place regardless of the traveller’s nationality and recent travel history and came just four days after Italy had gone into lockdown.
At that stage, when India had just 73 cases, out of which 16 were Italian tourists, it announced a mandated 14-day quarantine for anyone coming from China, Iran, South Korea, Spain, France, Germany, or Italy. Even Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) privileges and exemptions, including their visa-free entry, were suspended. Moreover, Indian nationals returning from China, South Korea, and Italy required certificates to prove that they weren't infected.
Furthermore, in what came as an unprecedented move for that time, India banned all international flights for a week on March 22; this has now been extended until April 14. Also, it has now banned all passengers coming from the UK, Turkey, the EU, and all the countries within the European Free Trade Association. Meanwhile, the US has only banned entry from a handful of European nations.
Having said that, criticisms surrounding the Indian government’s lack of knowledge about–or monitoring of–such a big group of travellers coming for religious activity persist. In response, the government posits that the Tablighi Jamaat members violated visa rules by not declaring the real purpose of their visit as they applied for a tourist visa. Moreover, most of the majority of non-Indian members came from Malaysia and Indonesia, countries which had seen zero cases up until that point.
Whether it is the supply and production of essential medical equipment, the maintenance of supply chains of crucial items, or the proper enforcement of the national lockdown, India’s response can be criticised on a lot of fronts. Questions must also be asked about the Central government’s delays in tracing or evacuating the Tablighi Jamaat members after the gathering took place is. Moreover, despite its timely restrictions and measures, the cases in India have steadily increased. However, these failures and criticisms must be separated from discussions on the promptness of the imposition of travel restrictions by Indian officials. Ultimately, India was far ahead of the curve in this regard and merits praise for taking multiple pre-emptive and preventative measures from an early stage.
Image Source: Straits Times