Uzbekistan sentences 21 over Indian-made cough syrup deaths

Defendant Singh Raghvendra Pratar, an executive of Quramax Medical, a company that sold medicines produced by India's Marion Biotech in Uzbekistan, stands inside an enclosure for defendants during a court hearing in the case of child deaths linked to contaminated cough syrups, in Tashkent, Uzbekistan August 16, 2023. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 26 February 2024
Follow

Uzbekistan sentences 21 over Indian-made cough syrup deaths

  • At least 86 children were poisoned in the Central Asian country between 2022 and 2023, of whom 68 died
  • India subsequently canceled the production license for Marion Biotech, which manufactured the cough syrups

TASHKENT: Uzbekistan on Monday handed out sentences to 21 people linked to the deaths of 68 children who consumed a contaminated cough syrup produced in India.

At least 86 children were poisoned in the Central Asian country between 2022 and 2023, of whom 68 died.

Indian citizen Singh Raghvendra Pratap, the director of a company that imported the Doc-1 Max syrup into Uzbekistan, was given the harshest sentence of 20 years.

He was found guilty of corruption, tax fraud and forgery, according to the Supreme Court of Uzbekistan.

Samples of the syrup revealed it was contaminated with either diethylene glycol or ethylene glycol, which are toxic substances used as industrial solvents that can be fatal if ingested even in small amounts, the World Health Organization said in January 2023.

India subsequently canceled the production license for Marion Biotech, which manufactured the cough syrups.

During the same period, at least 70 children died in Gambia from acute kidney failure after consuming another syrup imported from India.

In Indonesia, another syrup in similar containers caused the deaths of more than 200 children between 2022 and 2023.


US judge rejects Trump administration’s halt of wind energy permits

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

US judge rejects Trump administration’s halt of wind energy permits

  • 17 Democratic-led states challenged the suspension
  • Offshore wind group supports ruling for economic and energy priorities
BOSTON: A federal judge on Monday struck down an order by US President Donald Trump’s administration to halt all federal approvals for new wind energy projects, saying that agencies’ efforts to implement his directive were unlawful and arbitrary.
Agencies including the US Departments of the Interior and Commerce and the Environmental Protection Agency have been implementing a directive to halt all new approvals needed for both onshore and offshore wind projects pending a review of leasing and permitting practices.
Siding with a group of 17 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, US District Judge Patti Saris in Boston said those agencies had failed to provide reasoned explanations for the actions they took to carry out the directive Trump issued on his first day back in office on January 20.
They could not lawfully under the Administrative Procedure Act indefinitely decline to review applications for permits, added Saris, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose state led the legal challenge, called the ruling “a big victory in our fight to keep tackling the climate crisis” in a social media post.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement that Trump through his order had “unleashed America’s energy dominance to protect our economic and national security.”
Trump has sought to boost government support for fossil fuels and maximize output in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, after campaigning for the presidency on the refrain of “drill, baby, drill.”
The states, led by New York, sued in May, after the Interior Department ordered Norway’s Equinor to halt construction on its Empire Wind offshore wind project off the coast of New York.
While the administration allowed work on Empire Wind to resume, the states say the broader pause on permitting and leasing continues to have harmful economic effects.
The states said the agencies implementing Trump’s order never said why they were abruptly changing longstanding policy supporting wind energy development.
Saris agreed, saying the policy “constitutes a change of course from decades of agencies issuing (or denying) permits related to wind energy projects.”
The defendants “candidly concede that the sole factor they considered in deciding to stop issuing permits was the President’s direction to do so,” Saris wrote.
An offshore wind energy trade group welcomed the ruling.
“Overturning the unlawful blanket halt to offshore wind permitting activities is needed to achieve our nation’s energy and economic priorities of bringing more power online quickly, improving grid reliability, and driving billions of new American steel manufacturing and shipbuilding investments,” Oceantic Network CEO Liz Burdock said in a statement.