Rights to safety and information

The right to safety. Consumers have the right to be protected from goods and services that are dangerous to life and property. Producers must strictly follow safety rules. Example: a pressure cooker's safety valve must be of high quality, or it can cause a serious accident. The government must also check that quality is kept up. Bad products still reach the market because supervision is weak and the consumer movement is not strong enough.

Reji's case. Reji Mathew, a healthy Class IX student in Kerala, had his tonsils removed at a private clinic. Because of improper anaesthesia, he suffered brain damage and was crippled for life. His father asked the State Consumer Commission for Rs 5,00,000 compensation for medical negligence. The State Commission dismissed it, saying the evidence was not enough. His father appealed to the National Commission in New Delhi, which held the hospital responsible and ordered it to pay compensation.

The right to information. Packages carry details: what is in it, the price, the batch number, when it was made and when it expires, and the maker's address. Medicines show directions for use and side effects; clothes show washing instructions. Why? Because buyers are entitled to know the details of what they are paying for. Then, if a product is defective within its expiry period, you can ask for a replacement or compensation. Without printed dates, the maker could just blame the shopkeeper.

MRP. Selling expired medicines can bring severe action. You can also complain if anyone charges more than the price printed on the pack. This printed price is the MRP: maximum retail price, the most a seller may charge. You are free to bargain for a price below the MRP.

The Right to Information Act (2005). The right to information now also covers government services. In October 2005, India passed the RTI (Right to Information) Act, which lets citizens get information about how government departments work. Amritha's story: an engineering graduate, she gave her certificates and attended a job interview at a government department, but heard nothing about the result, and officials ignored her questions. She filed an RTI application, saying she had a right to know the result in reasonable time. She was told the reasons for the delay, and received her call letter for appointment.