Instead we had a ban and bans only increase corruption. As Tacitus said, the more corrupt a country, the more the number of laws it has. There is a further complication: health is a state subject and there is no reason for a state to necessarily adopt THOA. When THOA was first enacted, it was accepted in Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra and UTs. I don’t quite know which states have now accepted THOA, but certainly some southern states are outside its ambit. All that happens is that the illegal market moves to these states, including the possibility of donors temporarily migrating.

I suspect budget session amendments to THOA will increase fines and terms of imprisonment. That was the kind of attempt undertaken when Essential Commodities Act created artificial shortages. Eventually, we recognised that if legislation created the shortage, the best course was to increase supply by amending the offensive law. Ditto for FERA (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) and assorted economic legislation. Had that realisation not sunk in, we wouldn’t have introduced liberalisation. That is what we ought to do with THOA — relax it, rather than tighten it. Since the health minister understands smoking metaphors better (that’s all he seems to be interested in), organ transplants aren’t injurious to health. However, THOA is injurious to health.

The writer is a noted economist bdebroy@gmail.com