Activists flag concern over Karnataka’s proposed Right to Health Bill

Opposition to the proposed draft Karnataka Right to Health and Emergency Healthcare Bill (2025) is gaining momentum, with public health experts and civil society groups warning that the proposed legislation could entrench privatization rather than strengthen public healthcare.

At the public consultation meeting organized by the Karnataka Janaarogya Chaluvali and Dhwani Legal Trust, participants questioned whether the Bill meaningfully advances the right to health or dilutes the State’s responsibility as a primary care provider.

Lagging health indicators

Despite being one of the richest states in India, Karnataka continues to lag behind Kerala and Tamil Nadu in key indicators such as maternal mortality, infant mortality, neonatal mortality and under-five mortality. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) data also indicate high levels of anemia among women and children, persistent malnutrition in children, and unequal insurance coverage.

Public health doctor and researcher Sylvia Karpagam said the debate around the right to health law cannot be separated from these structural gaps. “The promise of the right to health will remain rhetorical unless the state commits to universal, free diagnosis, medicine and treatment through strengthened government facilities,” he said.

Karnataka is often envisioned as a model of reform due to its early adoption of privatization, public-private partnerships and insurance-based care, in line with policy prescriptions supported by institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But speakers argued that these approaches do not solve inequalities in access.

“The draft bill seems to legitimize these trends,” said Akhila Vasan of Janaarogya Chaluvali, Karnataka.

“In the bill circulating, the definitions of ‘public health’ and ‘health care’ are vague and do not clearly establish the State as the primary provider,” he said. “When the focus shifts to ‘eligible patients’ and staffed private institutions, this opens the door to greater outsourcing rather than strengthening public provision,” Ms. Vasan said.

The proposed State Health Authority (SHA) will mandate private hospitals, oversee ambulance services and ensure access to medical services. Critics during the consultation raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest and the lack of strong accountability measures.

emergency medical services

The bill’s emphasis on emergency medical services has also been subject to scrutiny. In the landmark decision in Pt. In the Parmanand Katara v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court held that the preservation of life is of paramount importance and every doctor, be it government or private, must provide immediate medical assistance. Participants argued that restating this obligation without strengthening enforcement mechanisms risks diluting existing legal standards.

Dr. “Emergency care is already a legal and ethical obligation,” Karpagam said. “What we need are clear penalties for violations and accessible complaint resolution systems, not provisions that could introduce new layers of compliance or hurdles to reimbursement,” he said.

Development economist Jean Dreze, who participated in the consultation, emphasized that health should be seen as a public good rather than a market product and underlined the importance of participatory management in shaping the new legislation.

legal loopholes

The draft proposes a multi-stage grievance redressal system but limits penalties to reasonable fines. Lawyers affiliated with Dhwani Legal Trust said they had identified many loopholes and would examine the bill more closely in the coming weeks.

“If this law does not reaffirm the State’s responsibility to provide comprehensive, free and accountable healthcare, it risks becoming a framework that normalises privatization rather than guaranteeing rights,” Ms Vasan said.