---

Context

• Major General Qassem Soleimani, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander was killed in a US strike near Baghdad International airport.
• One of the most popular figures in Iran, Soleimani was known as the most powerful general in the Middle East and has been repeatedly touted as a possible presidential candidate.
• He was the long-serving head of Iran’s Quds (‘Jerusalem’) Force and has been seen as a deadly adversary by America and its allies.

Clouds of Wars

 

• The US and Iran have already been in confrontation for over a week, with each attack leading to a counterattack.
• On December 27, more than 30 rockets were launched at an Iraqi military base, killing an American contractor.
• The US responded on December 29 with airstrikes on sites in Iraq and Syria, killing 24 members of an Iranian-backed militia.
• On December 31 pro-Iranian militia members laid siege to the US Embassy in Baghdad, trapping American diplomats for more than 24 hours. Then came the US drone strike that killed Soleimani and others.

Who was Soleimani?

• Born March 11, 1957, Soleimani hails from a village in the mountains of Kerman Province, a region in Iran’s southeast, not far from the borders with Afghanistan and Pakistan.
• Revered in his home country and feared on battlefields across the Middle East, Soleimani remains virtually unknown in the West.

The Quds Force

• Until his death, Soleimani commanded the Quds Force, which is the Arabic word for Jerusalem and is responsible for carrying out unconventional warfare and intelligence activities.
• The force is responsible for training, financing and providing assistance to some extremist groups overseas.
• Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini set up the IRGC in 1979 after the Iranian Revolution ended to protect the Islamic order of the new Iranian government.
• According to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, the IRGC has contributed roughly 125,000 men to Iran’s forces and has the capability of undertaking asymmetric warfare and covert operations.
• This includes the Quds Force that over the years has established links with the Hezbollah of Lebanon, Shi’ite militias in Iraq, Shi’ites in Afghanistan and the Palestinian territories.

What did the Quds Force do?

• In 1982, Revolutionary Guard officers were sent to Lebanon to help organise Shia militias in the civil war, which eventually led to the creation of Hezbollah.
• The IRGC including the Quds Force has contributed roughly 125,000 men to Iran’s forces and has the capability of undertaking asymmetric warfare and covert operations.
• As Quds head, Soleimani briefly worked in cooperation with the US. This was during the US crackdown in Afghanistan following 9/11; Soleimani wanted the Taliban defeated.
• The cooperation ended in 2002 after President George W Bush branded Iran a nuclear proliferator an exporter of terrorism, and part of an “Axis of Evil”.
• By 2003, the US was accusing Soleimani of plotting attacks on US soldiers following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which eventually toppled Saddam Hussein.
• And in 2011, the Treasury Department placed him on a sanctions blacklist.
• In recent years, Soleimani was believed to be the chief strategist behind Iran’s military ventures and influence in Syria, Iraq and throughout the Middle East.

In popular support

• In recent years, Soleimani has gained a huge following on Instagram.
• His profile rose suddenly when he was pushed forward as the public face of Iran’s intervention in the Syrian conflict from 2013 appearing in battlefield photos, documentaries — and even being featured in a music video and animated film.

Active Politics

• Soleimani had become Iran’s most recognizable battlefield commander, ignoring calls to enter politics but becoming as powerful, if not more, than its civilian leadership.
• Soleimani wielded his regional clout publicly since 2018 when it was revealed that he had direct involvement in top-level talks over the formation of Iraq’s government.
• He has been in and out of Baghdad ever since, most recently last month as parties seeking to form a new government.

Why he was killed?

• The US accused Iranian general is actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region.
• The Pentagon said that Gen Soleimani and his Quds Force “were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more”.
• The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of which Soleimani’s Quds Force was the overseas operations arm and was designated a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO).
• The regime in Tehran is responsible for the deaths of at least 603 American service members in Iraq since 2003.
• This according to the US accounts for 17% of all deaths of US personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 and is in addition to the many thousands of Iraqis killed by the IRGC’s proxies.

According to the US, the Quds Force was involved in:

1. # 2011: The Quds Force plotted a terrorist attack against the Saudi Ambassador to the US on American soil.
2. # September 2018: A US federal court found Iran and the IRGC liable for the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing which killed 19 Americans.
3. # Support to terror organisations: Iran funds, equips, and fuels terrorism, violence, and unrest across the Middle East and around the world.
4. # Support to al-Qaeda: The US alleges that Iran allows al-Qaeda operatives to live in the country, and “move money and fighters to South Asia and Syria”.

Old enmity

• The US designated Iran a State Sponsor of Terrorism in January 1984.
• Ever since, Iran has been subjected to a number of sanctions and restrictions, including restrictions on US foreign assistance, a ban on defence exports and sales, exports controls of dual-use items, and miscellaneous financial and other restrictions.

Implications of the killing

• Soleimani’s death has resulted in a dramatic escalation in relations between the US and Iran. The strike has left the Middle East on edge, with possible repercussions beyond the region.
• President Rouhani said the killing would make Iran more decisive in resisting the US, while the Revolutionary Guards said anti-US forces would exact revenge across the Muslim world.
• Israel, too, was preparing for Iranian strikes.
• The killing could have a ripple effect in any number of countries across the Middle East where Iran and the US compete for influence. Oil prices have already jumped by $3 a barrel.

Possibility of retaliation

• The killing forced Iran’s hand, and Tehran immediately warned of retaliation. Each strike has led to a more severe retaliation.
• Also, by clearing the killing of Soleimani, Donald has taken a step his predecessors had avoided.
• But analysts believe Iran will also be conscious that it is more vulnerable than the US, with all the conflict likely to be in the Middle East itself, including within Iran.
• That said Iran’s military capabilities are higher than those of others in its neighbourhood.
• The US might be wary of that. At the same time, analysts believe Iran would require time to put together a working nuclear warhead.
• That possibility would end if the US chooses to strike Iran’s nuclear installations.

Can it be war?

• A lot will depend on how provocative Iran’s inevitable retaliation turns out to be.
• If these provoke the US into a direct strike on Iran, it can potentially open up the threat of a sustained war.
• While the possibility of an unintended slide to war is impossible to rule out, fears of World War Three —a phrase that trended overnight on social media are overblown.

Repercussions on India

 

Delay of Chabahar

• The killing is expected to slow down India’s plans to develop the Chabahar port that New Delhi first spoke of turning into a gateway to access landlocked Central Asia and Afghanistan.
• The 2015 Iran nuclear deal gave India a chance to revisit its plans to develop Chabahar port, also seen as a strategic counter to Pakistan’s Gwadar port developed by China.
• US sanctions on Iran for its suspect nuclear programme and India’s aim to clinch a civil nuclear deal with the US had delayed plans to develop the Chabahar port in the intervening years since 2003.
• In May 2016, India, Iran and Afghanistan signed a transport and transit corridor pact as well as a bilateral pact with Tehran to develop the Chabahar port and lay a railway line to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

Oil prices hike

• India’s immediate concern is the impact of tensions on international fuel prices that soared 4% last week.
• Brent crude futures jumped nearly $3 to hit a high of $69.16 a barrel the highest since September while the U.S.
• With India’s GDP growing at a record low of 4.5% in the September quarter, there are serious concerns that high fuel prices could adversely impact its economic recovery.
• Though India does not import oil from Iran thanks to a new set of sanctions but any unrest in the volatile region could impact imports from countries like Saudi Arabia.

Impact on trade

• Most of the exports take place through the Straits of Hormuz a narrow waterway carrying a fifth of the world’s traded oil which Iranian officials had threatened to block in retaliation for sanctions.
• India had deployed naval assets in the region to protect its supplies in the wake of mine attacks on oil tankers.

Remittances flow

• A secondary worry is that tensions between Iran and the US could impact India’s trade with the region that now stands at $ 78 billion (from Gulf Cooperation Council member countries ie Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman).
• The West Asia region is the source of some $200 billion in terms of remittances, trade and investments for India.

Way Forward

• Overall, India will view the U.S.-Iran developments with deep concern and hope that the situation does not escalate.
• Beyond its short-term anxiety about India will have a medium-to-long-term concern about further deterioration — namely, that it will result in continued, if not greater, U.S. involvement in the Middle East at the expense of the Indo-Pacific.
• India wants US focused on the China challenge and it has hoped for years that the U.S. would indeed undertake a rebalance.
• Any escalation between the U.S. and Iran would put paid to any such shift; moreover, as India saw with the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, it could increase China’s space.

 

 

---

---

References

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/us-killing-of-soleimani-revives-worries-for-india-11578059448629.html

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-qasem-soleimani-the-us-accusations-against-irans-quds-force-6198051/

https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/watch-who-was-qasem-soleimani/article30472935.ece

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/irans-major-general-qassem-soleimani-killing-why-few-expect-full-blown-war-but-no-one-rules-it-out-donald-trump-6201285/

Continued ….

 

Comparison with 2017 report

• The 2019 survey has found an increase of 5,188 sq km in total forest and tree cover in the country.
• Tree and forest cover together made up 24.56% (8,07,276 sq km) of India’s area. In the last assessment it was 24.39%.
• The nation’s tree and forest cover has largely hovered from 21-25% and is short of the National Forest Policy, 1988, which envisages 33% to be under such cover.
• Mangrove cover in the country has increased by 54 sq km (1.10%) as compared to the previous assessment.

Various factors attributed to the increasing trend

The increasing trend of forest cover is largely due to the various national policies aimed at Conservation and sustainable management of our forests. Few of them are:

Green India Mission: It has the broad objective of both increasing the forest and tree cover by  5 million ha,  as well as increasing the quality of the existing forest and tree cover in another 5 million ha of forest/ non forest lands in 10 years.

PM Ujjwala Yojana: In India 67 per cent of the rural households depend on firewood for cooking.In order to address this problem, the Ujjwala scheme provides free LPG connections to BPL families in remote rural areas.

National Agroforestry Policy (NAP): A dynamic ecologically based concept which integrates woody perennials in the agricultural landscape diversifies and sustains production.

 REDD+ policy:  Its objective is to mitigate climate change through reducing net emissions of greenhouse gases through enhanced forest management in developing countries.

Joint forest management (JFM): It is the concept of developing relationships between fringe forest groups and forest department on the basis of mutual trust and jointly defined roles and responsibilities for forest protection and development.

National Afforestation Programme: It provides support, both in physical and capacity building terms, to the Forest Development Agencies (FDAs) which in turn are the main organs to move forward institutionalization of Joint Forest Management.

CAMPA: Funds under Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) has proved instrumental in compensating forest land diverted for non-forest purpose which would mitigate impact of diversion of such forest land.

Critical evaluation of the report

• The latest report should seem heartening given, today this stands at 7.12 lakh sq km, up from 6.7 lakh sq km in 2005—that too, in the face of development needs compelling the diversion of forest land.
• The depletion in the northeastern states forest cover is worrying given these are very old forests, and have greater carbon sequestration capacity.
• The rapid increase in forest cover, especially with a fair share of the gain being concentrated in the dense forests category (canopy density higher than 40%), is likely rooted in two factors.

Flaws with the satellite imaging

• The Forest Survey of India has been using better satellite imagery with a 1:50,000 scale, compared to the 1:250,000 scale earlier.
• This means any area, even as small as 0.01 sq km, with a canopy density of more than 10% is captured as a forest; the earlier resolution meant land units under 0.25 sq km didn’t get captured as forest.
• Thus, land that has been denuded of forest cover but did not get recorded as forest earlier because it fell below the 0.25 sq km threshold now figures in the ISFR as a “gain” in forest cover.

Canopy as a basis of identification

• The tree canopy basis of identification doesn’t differentiate between natural forests, plantations, orchards, or even palm groves.
• This means the loss in diversity doesn’t get captured by the data.
• Thus, the growth in forest-cover could be attributed to fast-growing plantation trees like eucalyptus that are favoured in compensatory afforestation programmes.

Accounting plantation

• ISFR 2019, for the first time ever, gives data for forest diversity.
• The ‘plantations/trees outside forests’ already account for nearly 9% of the total area under forests—making plantations the fourth largest group.
• Some of these are fast-growing species such as bamboo in the north-eastern region and also rubber and coconut plantations in the southern states.
• Monoculture practices cannot substitute natural forests in biodiversity or ecological services.

Less realistic data

• The last two decades have been almost drought for Andhra Pradesh, and 60% of Karnataka reeled under drought in 9-11 years between 2001 and 2015.
• It is hard to see how the two states have performed so well in increasing forest cover.

Conclusion

• Where forest cover is concerned, India has set itself a target that needs a much higher rate of afforestation in the coming years than the current one of 35 million tonnes per year carbon dioxide equivalent.
• Even though a progress has been made in increasing the green cover over the past few years, India is still quite far from achieving its target of 33 per cent of the total geographical area by 2030.
• India has committed to the UNFCCC as part of its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) that, besides reducing emission intensity of its GDP by 33-35 per cent by 2030.
• The forest data needs to reflect more of the ground reality instead of becoming a tool to lull the country into inaction on forests.

 

 

---

---

References

https://www.civilsdaily.com/news/india-state-of-forest-report-isfr/

https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/total-tree-forest-cover-in-country-increases-by-5188-sq-km-forest-report/article30431835.ece

https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/indias-forest-cover-growing-isfr-data-masking-harsher-on-ground-realities/1809920/

https://swachhindia.ndtv.com/tree-plantation-while-green-cover-in-india-has-increased-existing-forests-are-thining-india-state-of-forest-report-2019-40722/

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/specials/clean-tech/time-to-step-up-forest-cover-pace/article30445513.ece

https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/one-fifth-of-countrys-forests-prone-to-fires-study/article30446295.ece

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330222412_Potential_of_Short_Rotation_Forestry_and_Agroforestry_for_Climate_Change_Mitigation_and_Sustainability 

Context

• Forests play an extremely important role in ensuring ecological balance and existence of life on the earth.
• However, rampant cutting of trees and thinning of forests has been taking place in the country due to activities related to development and infrastructure building, emphasise the environmental experts.
• Thus, in a bid to keep up the pace of conservation of forests amidst developmental activities, the Forest Survey of India (FSI), an organisation under MoEFCC started monitoring forest cover in 1987.
• Under the same initiative, FSI released its biennial assessment report, India State of Forest Report 2019.

 India State of Forest Report (ISFR)

• The ISFR is a biennial report published by the Forest Survey of India (FSI).
• FSI has been mandated to assess the forest and tree resources of the country including wall-to-wall forest cover mapping in a biennial cycle.
• Starting 1987, 16 assessments have been completed so far. ISFR 2019 is the 16th report in the series.

Highlights of the report

• In the present assessment, the total forest and tree cover of the country is 80.73 million hectare which is 24.56 per cent of the geographical area of the country.
• As compared to the assessment of 2017, there is an increase of 5,188 sq. km in the total forest and tree cover of the country.
• Out of this, the increase in the forest cover has been observed as 3,976 sq km and that in tree cover is 1,212 sq. km.
• Range increase in forest cover has been observed in open forest followed by very dense forest and moderately dense forest.
• The top three states showing increase in forest cover are Karnataka (1,025 sq. km) followed by Andhra Pradesh (990 sq km) and Kerala (823 sq km).

Some Major Findings

• Area-wise Madhya Pradesh has the largest forest cover in the country followed by Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Maharashtra.
• In terms of forest cover as percentage of total geographical area, the top five States are Mizoram (85.41%), Arunachal Pradesh (79.63%), Meghalaya (76.33%), Manipur (75.46%) and Nagaland (75.31%).

Increase in the tree cover

• Tree cover comprises of tree patches of size less than 1 hectare occurring outside the recorded forest area.
• The tree cover of the country is estimated as 95,027 sq km which is 2.89% of the geographical area.
• Maharashtra has had the highest increase in tree cover and a large part of that is due to horticulture.

Forest Cover in Tribal Districts

• The total forest cover in the tribal districts is 4,22,351 sq km, which is 37.54% of the geographical area of these districts.
• There has been a decrease of 741 sq km of forest cover within the Recorded Forest Area/ Green Wash (RFA/GW) in the tribal districts and an increase of 1,922 sq km outside.
• There has been a decline in tree cover inside forests due to tribal populations getting “land titles” (patta) and there has been a rise in trees outside the forest area due to an increase in tree plantation and afforestation.

Mangroves

• Mangrove cover has been separately reported in the ISFR 2019 and the total mangrove cover in the country is 4,975 sq km.
• An increase of 54 sq Km in mangrove cover has been observed as compared to the previous assessment of 2017.
• Top three states showing mangrove cover increase are Gujarat (37 sq km) followed by Maharashtra (16 sq km) and Odisha (8 sq km).

Bamboo

• The extent of bamboo bearing area of the country has been estimated 16.00 million hectare.
• There is an increase of 0.32 million hectare in bamboo bearing area as compared to the last assessment of ISFR 2017.

Wetlands

• Wetlands within forest areas form important ecosystems and add richness to the biodiversity in forest areas, both of faunal and floral species.
• Due to importance of wetlands, FSI has carried out an exercise at the national level to identify wetlands of more than 1 ha within RFA.
• There are 62,466 wetlands covering 3.8% of the area within the RFA/GW of the country.

Carbon Stock

• Under the current assessment the total carbon stock in country’s forest is estimated 7,124.6 million tonnes.
• There an increase of 42.6 million tonnes in the carbon stock of country as compared to the last assessment of 2017.
• The annual increase in the carbon stock is 21.3 million tonnes, which is 78.2 million tonnes CO2 eq.

Decline of Forest Cover in North Eastern

• Total forest cover in the North Eastern region is 1,70,541 sq km, which is 65.05% of its geographical area.
• There has been a decrease of forest cover to the extent of 765 sq km (0.45%) in the region.
• Except Assam and Tripura, all the States in the region show decrease in forest cover.

Forest Fires

• About 21.40% of forest cover in India is prone to fires, with forests in the north-eastern region and central India being the most vulnerable a/c to the report.
• The forest fire points (FFP) identified during the 13 years add up to 2,77,758.
• They were analysed using a moderate resolution imaging spectro-radiometer (MODIS) by overlaying the points coverage over the grid coverage of 5 km x 5 km.
• The analysis showed that extremely fire-prone areas account for 3.89% of total forest cover, very highly fire-prone areas account for 6.01% and highly fire-prone areas for 11.50%.
• Together, the three categories come to 21.40 % of forest cover.

 

to be continued …….

Note: Part-II of the same Burning Issue will be published by 20:00 hrs.

---

Context

• The Anti-Maritime Piracy Bill, 2019 was introduced in Lok Sabha by the Ministry of External Affairs, Dr Subrahmanyam Jaishankar this month.
• The Bill provides for prevention of maritime piracy and prosecution of persons for such piracy-related crimes. 
• It provides for stringent punishment, including the death penalty, for those involved in piracy at sea.

Why need such a Bill?

• The introduction of the bill comes days after some 18 Indians aboard a crude oil carrier were kidnapped off the coast of Nigeria.
• India is still negotiating the release of its nationals.
• At present, India does not have a separate legislation dealing in piracy, despite the fact that many Indian nationals fall prey to the menace.
• The provisions of the IPC pertaining to armed robbery and the admiralty jurisdiction of certain courts have been invoked in the past to prosecute pirates apprehended by the Indian Navy and the Coast Guard, it adds.
• But in the absence of any specific law relating to the offence of maritime piracy in India, problems are being faced in ensuring effective prosecution of the pirates.
• The Anti-Maritime Piracy Bill 2019 is aimed at promoting the safety and security of India’s maritime trade, and the safety of its crew members.
• The government’s aim in drafting the proposed legislation was to keep up with India’s commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which concluded in 1982.
• India had ratified the UNCLOS in 1995.

About UNCLOS:

• The Law of the Sea Treaty formally known as the Third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was adopted in 1982 at Montego Bay, Jamaica.It entered into force in 1994.
• The convention establishes a comprehensive set of rules governing the oceans and to replace previous U.N. Conventions on the Law of the Sea
• The convention defines distance of 12 nautical miles from the baseline as Territorial Sea limit and a distance of 200 nautical miles distance as Exclusive Economic Zone limit.

Impact of Maritime Piracy

• In recent years, thousands of seafarers have been killed, injured, assaulted, taken hostage or threatened as piracy and armed robbery have increased dramatically.
• Attacks which previously were limited to Nigerian and Somali coastal waters have now expanded eastwards, across the Indian Ocean.

Seafarers

• Seafarers are on the frontline of the piracy problem.
• All seafarers transiting the Gulf of Aden and Northern Indian Ocean, have to live with the risk of attack.
• When ships are attacked by pirates, crews suffer the stress of being fired upon with guns and rocket-propelled grenades and those captured can be held hostage for months. F
• a piracy attack those involved can be seriously affected by post-traumatic stress.

Shipping Industry

• For the shipping industry, costs are soaring.
• Operators now face rising insurance premiums for a high-risk area that now covers most of the Indian Ocean and one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world.
• Other costs include installing preventative measures and protection on board, employing private security personnel, as well as ransom payments.

Economic Impact

• Impact of sea piracy on economic activities is wider.
• Shipowners are finding it increasingly hard to justify putting seafarers at risk.
• They are also struggling to find crews that are willing to transit the area.
• As the situation worsens a blockade of the area becomes more likely. This would add several days to most voyages, would push up transport costs, would see oil prices skyrocket and would have a huge impact on the world economy.
• If the attacks move further into the Gulf, oil supplies worldwide may be severely affected.

Key features of the Bill include

Defining Piracy

• The Bill defines piracy as any illegal act of violence, detention, or destruction committed against a ship, aircraft, person or property, for private purposes, by the crew or passengers of a private ship or aircraft. 
• Such acts may be carried out on the high seas or in any place outside the jurisdiction of India.  Inciting or intentionally facilitating such acts would also qualify as piracy. 
• Piracy also includes voluntary participation in the operations of a pirate ship or aircraft. It also includes any other act that is considered piracy under international law.
• This includes a ship or aircraft which is either:

1. intended to be used for committing any act of piracy, or
2. has been used to commit an act of piracy, and is still under the control of the persons guilty of such act. 

Applicability of the Bill

• The Bill will apply to all parts of the sea adjacent to and beyond the limits of the Exclusive Economic Zone of India. 
• Exclusive Economic Zone refers to the area of sea to which India has exclusive rights for economic activities.

Offences and penalties

• An act of piracy will be punishable with: (i) imprisonment for life; or (ii) death, if the act of piracy includes attempted murder, or causes death. 
• An attempt to commit, aid, abet, or procure for an act of piracy, or directing others to participate in an act of piracy will be punishable with up to 14 years of imprisonment, and a fine.  
• Offences will be considered extraditable.  This means that the accused can be transferred to any country for prosecution with which India has signed an extradition treaty.  
• In the absence of such treaties, offences will be extraditable on the basis of reciprocity between the countries.

Arrest and seizure

• A ship or aircraft under the control of pirates may be seized, persons aboard may be arrested, and the property on board may also be seized. 
• The seizure may be carried out only by:

1. a warship or military aircraft of the Indian Navy,
2. a ship or aircraft of the India Coast Guard, or
3. ships or aircraft on government service, and authorised for such purpose.

Designated Court

• The central government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, may notify the Sessions Courts to be the Designated Courts under this Bill. 
• It may also notify the territorial jurisdiction of each Designated Court.

Jurisdiction of the Court

• The Designated Court will try offences committed by:

1. a person in the custody of the Indian Navy or Coast Guard, regardless of his nationality,
2. a citizen of India, a resident foreign nationals in India, or a stateless person. 

• Further, the Court may try a person even if the person is not physically present in the Court. 
• The Court will not have jurisdiction over offences committed on a foreign ship unless an intervention is requested by:

1. the country of origin of the ship,
2. the shipowner, or
3. any other person on the ship.

• Warships and government ships employed for non-commercial purposes will not be under the jurisdiction of the Court.

Presumption of guilt

The presumption of guilt will be on the accused if:

1. the accused is in possession of arms, explosives and other equipment which were used or intended for use in committing the offence,
2. there is evidence of use of force against the ship’s crew or passengers, and
3. there is evidence of the intended use of bombs and arms against the crew, passengers or cargo of a ship.

It was very important to have a domestic anti-piracy legislation to provide the necessary legal framework within the country for the prosecution of those involved in piracy-related crimes and the bill is the right move in the direction.

 

---

---

References:

http://prsindia.org/billtrack/anti-maritime-piracy-bill-2019

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/anti-maritime-piracy-bill-introduced-in-lok-sabha-11575893586086.html

 

• The United States no longer thinks Israeli settlements in the West Bank violate international law.
• This recognition of the Jewish settlements is yet another indication that the two-state solution is dead.

What are the West Bank settlements?

• The West Bank, a patch of land about one and a half times the size of Goa, was captured by Jordan after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
• Israel snatched it back during the Six-Day War of 1967, and has occupied it ever since.
• It has built some 130 formal settlements in the West Bank, and a similar number of smaller, informal settlements have mushroomed over the last 20-25 years.
• Over 4 lakh Israeli settlers many of them religious Zionists who claim a Biblical birthright over this land — now live here, along with some 26 lakh Palestinians.

Are these Israeli settlements illegal?

• To the vast majority of the world’s nations, yes.
• The UN General Assembly, the UNSC, and the International Court of Justice have said that the West Bank settlements are violative of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
• Under the Oslo Accords of the 1990s, both Israel and the Palestinians agreed that the status of settlements would be decided by negotiations. But the negotiations process has been all but dead for several years now.
• Israel walked into East Jerusalem in 1967, and subsequently annexed it. For Israel, Jerusalem is non-negotiable.
• The Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state. Most of the world’s nations look at it as occupied territory.

What is Fourth Geneva Convention?

• Under the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), an occupying power “shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”.
• Under the Rome Statute that set up the International Criminal Court in 1998, such transfers constitute war crimes, as does the “extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly”.

American stand on Palestine

• In 1978, when Jimmy Carter was President, the State Department concluded that the Israeli settlements were “inconsistent with international law”.
• Soon after taking office in 1981, President Ronald Reagan said he did not agree — even though the establishment of new Israeli communities in Palestinian territory was indeed “unnecessarily provocative”.
• Thereafter, the United States took the line that the settlements were “illegitimate”, not “illegal”, and repeatedly blocked UN resolutions condemning Israel for them.
• In 2016, President Barack Obama broke with this policy — and the US did not veto a resolution that called for an end to Israeli settlements.
• The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.

US’s present stand on Palestine

• Indeed, Trump’s recognition of the settlements means little compared to allowing Israel to build those settlements over a 52-year period.
• Likewise, the U.S. has continued to provide aid to Israel to the tune of more than $3 billion annually, as well as unflinching military and diplomatic support — including from official sanctions over the settlements at the U.N.
• The U.S. has also allowed its private citizens to give tax-free donations to charities and organizations that support the settlements.
• So, while the Trump administration has gone a step further, it is not as drastic a departure from past administrations as it would seem.

Impacts of the development

• Those who support the right of Israelis to settle in the West Bank are likely to see the decision as an endorsement.
• It will boost PM Benjamin Netanyahu, who has promised sweeping annexations in the West Bank.
• However, Pompeo did not come out as directly backing the settlers.
• The hard truth is there will never be a judicial resolution to the conflict, and arguments about who is right and wrong as a matter of international law will not bring peace.
• This is a complex political problem that can only be solved by negotiations.

Implications for Palestinians

• What does change in a significant way, however, is what the recognition of settlements means for the status of the territory and of the government that administers it.
• While the new U.S. policy does not alter the legal status of the Palestinian territories, Israel’s PM welcomed the change and said that it “reflects an historical truth — that the Jewish people are not foreign colonialists” in the West Bank.
• If it is not military occupation, which undoubtedly prohibits the type of settlement that Israel has engaged in, then it is something else that Israel must clarify its position and intentions over the territory.
• This puts the onus for fulfilling the political rights of the Palestinians back on Israel.

India’s stance on Palestine

• Sticking to its historic stance towards the Palestinian cause India was among 166 nations that endorsed Palestinian “right to self-determination”.
• According to the MEA website, India’s support for the Palestinian cause is an integral part of the nation’s foreign policy.
• In 1974, India became the first non-Arab country to recognise Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
• In 1988, India became one of the first countries to recognise the Palestinian State. While, in 1996, India opened its representative office in Gaza, which was later shifted to Ramallah in 2003.
• India also co-sponsored the draft resolution on “the right of Palestinians to self-determination” during the 53rd session of the UNGA and voted in favour of it.
• It also voted in favour of UNGA Resolution in October 2003 against construction of the separation wall by Israel.
• In 2011, India voted for Palestine becoming a full member of the UNESCO.
• At the Asian African Commemorative Conference in April 2015, India supported the Bandung Declaration on Palestine. It also backed the installation of the Palestinian flag at UN’s premises in September 2015.
• PM Modi visited the West Bank in February 2018, which was the first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the Palestinian territories.

Why does India support Palestinian cause?

• India has a considerable number of Muslim Population has been always sympathetic to the Muslim population in Palestine.
• India did not want to jeopardize the interest of its citizens (more than 7 million) working in Arab countries which are a good source of forex reserves.
• India is dependent on the Arab nations for its larger oil imports.
• India’s co-operation with the Soviet Union during cold war era and our desire to counter Pakistan with the support of Arab nations was another reason for our pro-Palestine policy.
• However, with an increased focus on closer ties with Israel, there is little doubt that India has diluted its support to Palestine.

Limitations of Cooperation

• India has so far been successful in building up its level of cooperation with Israel without en­dangering its relations with others.
• Never­theless, limits to the cooperation are visible, especially in the field of security cooperation, as this remains a somewhat sensitive issue for some Arab states. However, despite its perceived fondness of Israel, India has been cautious.
• In addition, ties with Israel are an area of potential disagreement between India and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
• This often manifests in Iranian leaders’ flagging of the issue in Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state claimed by both India and Pakistan.

Conclusion

• Mutu­al interests run deeper than mere super­­ficial, short-term cooperation.
• There is a growing marginalization of the Pales­tin­ian issue. And that has immensely benefited Indo-Israeli relations.
• The interest-based development of bilateral ties between Israel and India is likely to prevail and result in future cooperation, even if the Pales­tinian issue regains prominence.

 

 

---

---

References

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/west-bank-what-change-in-us-policy-means-6127732/

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/pm-modi-amit-shah-p-chidambaram-nrc-cab-1630951-2019-12-23

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/11/25/recognizing-israeli-settlements-is-about-sovereignty-and-thats-a-game-changer/

https://time.com/5732752/israeli-settlements-trump-administration/

---

Context

• The 25th annual talks under the UNFCCC referred to as the Conference of Parties (COP) ended in Madrid.
• The countries party to the Paris Agreement failed to agree on various important aspects regarding climate change like:
  • rules and procedures to govern a global carbon market
  • finance for losses caused by extreme weather events
  • on meeting the commitments made before the agreement and on raising their ambitions.
• This two weeks of negotiations in the longest COP ever hence is regarded as a spectacular failure.

What was the agenda set for Madrid COP?

• There was only one major agenda for the Madrid talks to negotiate and decide — the rules for a new carbon market to be set up under the Paris Agreement.
• That would have completed the Paris Agreement rulebook that was finalized in Katowice in 2018, without the provisions related to carbon markets on which countries had major disagreements.
• Two other issues came to dominate the discussions were:

1. First, relating to the demand to enhance climate actions being currently taken, and;
2. Second, to make developed countries accountable to their climate obligations in the pre-2020 period

What did India pursue?

• India played a mixed role. It demanded the carryover of the untraded emission reduction certificates held by Indian companies (estimated at 750 million Certified Emissions Reductions or CERs), which they can sell to raise funds.
• On the question of ‘loss and damage’, India urged developed countries to give financial teeth to the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage (WIM).
• India’s current efforts are already much more compared to even rich and developed countries. Thus, India reiterated its stand for ”Common but Differentiated Responsibilities”.
• India played a strong role in critiquing the developed world’s continuing poor record on climate action.
• India also took a lead in calling for more finance for developing countries for climate action, with the minister emphasizing that “not even 2 per cent” of the promised “$1 trillion in the last 10 years” had been delivered.

Outcomes: An incompetent agreement

• The first draft of the agreement had these options but was heavily bracketed — each bracket representing a difference of opinion and different option on the table.
• The revised draft was put before the negotiators on, many of the earlier options had been removed. This triggered angry reactions from whoever was backing those.
• The European Union, Spain, Bangladesh, Belize, Colombia, Grenada and many others pointed out that the draft text did not strongly ask the countries to raise the “ambition”.

Lack of ambition

• This was supposed to be a COP of ambition. However, these ambitions were reflected in nowhere.
• Countries such as India and China lamented the fact that a provision on creating a work programme to assess the performance of developed countries on their pre-2020 promises had been dropped.
• The problems we are facing today are not because of lack of intent but because of lack of implementation which is very glaringly visible in the unmet pre-2020 targets.

The US deviance

• China had already made it clear that strong provisions on the assessment of pre-2020 actions was “very important for all developing countries”, and needed to be strongly reflected in the final agreement.
• The United States strongly objected to even a mention of assessment of pre-2020 actions and demanded that it be removed.

Carbon Markets ignored yet again

• While all this was being discussed, the draft text on carbon markets had not even been finalised.
• The provisions related to carbon markets have been deeply contested with India, Brazil, China and some other developing countries.

The most contested issue: Article 6

• Ahead of COP25, many expected a key focus to be agreeing rules for “Article 6” carbon markets and other forms of international cooperation.
• This deals with the question of how to deal with billions of Kyoto-era carbon offset “units”, potentially amounting to more than five billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
• These units were mostly generated under the Clean Development Mechanism, where projects in developing countries created “certified emissions reductions” (CERs) in the developing world.
• This was the last remaining piece of the Paris regime to be resolved after the rest of its “rulebook” was agreed in late 2018.

What is it all about?

• Article 6 contains three separate mechanisms for “voluntary cooperation” towards climate goals, with the overarching aim of raising ambition.
• Article 6.2 governs bilateral cooperation via “internationally traded mitigation outcomes” (so-called ITMOs), which could include emissions cuts measured in tonnes of CO2 or kilowatt-hours of renewable electricity.
• If these rules are well-implemented, supporters argue that Article 6 could unlock higher ambition or reduce costs, while drawing in the private sector and spreading finance, technology and expertise around the world.

‘OMGE’ for net climate benefits

• The final major area of Article 6 disagreement was around the idea of securing “overall mitigation in global emissions” (OMGE), a concept introduced in the Paris text for Article 6.4.
• OMGE is supposed to ensure a net-benefit for the atmosphere, rather than a zero-sum outcome where emissions in one place are offset by reductions elsewhere.
• Some groups argued that the only way to achieve OMGE was to automatically cancel a portion of any offsets created under Article 6.
• They argued that applying this cancellation would create an imbalance that could skew the market.

Few successes to count

Finance

• While the main financial matter being discussed at this year’s COP was how to support countries affected by extreme climate impacts, the usual standing items were also being considered.
• Both the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF) guidance documents were caught up in the debate around whether to instruct them to start working more specifically on loss and damage.
• There was also some discussion about the creation of a new climate finance goal, now that the deadline for “$100bn by 2020” (agreed in 2009 at the Copenhagen COP) is almost up.
• Another issue being considered was long-term climate finance (LTF), a workstream that examines progress and scaling up of climate finance, but which is due to end in 2020.

Gender action plan

• A rare success story at this year’s COP was a decision on a new five-year gender action plan (GAP), intended to “support the implementation of gender-related decisions and mandates in the UNFCCC process”.
• The original plan, agreed at COP20 in Lima, “seeks to advance women’s full, equal and meaningful participation and promote gender-responsive climate policy and the mainstreaming of a gender perspective”.
• Early negotiations did not go smoothly. Parties initially failed to deliver a text for consideration, owing in part to disagreements about the inclusion of text relating to human rights and just transition.

What is sought next?

• A number of countries — mainly the ones most threatened by climate change, such as small island states, some developed countries and civil society organisations — had been demanding that countries take more climate actions.
• They called upon all the countries to update their climate action plans, called Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs, with greater commitments by next year.

Conclusion

• The Madrid talks were expected to nudge all countries to scale up their commitments under the Paris Pact — Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs.
• The developed countries including the EU and US were, however, non-committal when it came to honouring their previous pledges on funds and technology transfers to the developing countries.
• CoP 25 was an opportunity to answer the questions that have been raised over the UNFCCC’s processes.
• Unfortunately, the two weeks of negotiations have been an opportunity lost.

 

---

---

References

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/united-nations-climate-change-conference-cop25-madrid-6170239/

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/cop-25-climate-change-talks-in-madrid-6170500/

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/climate-change/climate-emergency-cop-25-india-s-mixed-role-68449

https://thewire.in/environment/developed-world-sabotages-un-climate-summit-now-declared-a-failure

Context

• The Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) became law after receiving the President’s assent following a bruising debate in Parliament.
• Since then, Assam has been in the throes of violence with its capital under indefinite curfew, and Army and paramilitary columns rolling across multiple towns.
• The protest has also rocked various colleges and university campuses across the nation along with protests in Delhi. Civil society, students and various political parties have opposed the law on various grounds.
• At least three opposition ruled states Kerala, Punjab and West Bengal have said they will not implement the new citizenship law and legal challenges have been made in the Supreme Court.

What is the Citizenship (Amendment) Act?

• The act is sought to amend the Citizenship Act, 1955 to make Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian illegal migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, eligible for citizenship of India.
• In other words, it intends to make it easier for non-Muslim immigrants from India’s three Muslim-majority neighbours to become citizens of India.
• Under The Citizenship Act, 1955, one of the requirements for citizenship by naturalization is that the applicant must have resided in India during the last 12 months, as well as for 11 of the previous 14 years.
• The amendment relaxes the second requirement from 11 years to 6 years as a specific condition for applicants belonging to these six religions, and the aforementioned three countries.

Defining Illegal migrants

• Illegal migrants cannot become Indian citizens in accordance with the present laws.
• Under the Act, an illegal migrant is a foreigner who: (i) enters the country without valid travel documents like a passport and visa, or (ii) enters with valid documents, but stays beyond the permitted time period.
• Illegal migrants may be put in jail or deported under the Foreigners Act, 1946 and The Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920.
• The Bill provides that illegal migrants who fulfil four conditions will not be treated as illegal migrants under the Act.  The conditions are:

1. they are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis or Christians;
2. they are from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan;
3. they entered India on or before December 31, 2014;
4. they are not in certain tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, or Tripura included in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, or areas under the “Inner Line” permit, i.e., Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland.

How many people could now be given Indian citizenship under the new law?

• As of December 31, 2014, the government had identified 2, 89,394 “stateless persons in India”, according to data presented in Parliament by the Home Ministry in 2016.
• The majority were from Bangladesh (1,03,817) and Sri Lanka (1,02,467), followed by Tibet (58,155), Myanmar (12,434), Pakistan (8,799) and Afghanistan (3,469).
• The figures are for stateless persons of all religions. For those who came after December 31, 2014, the regular route of seeking refuge in India will apply.
• If they are regarded as illegal immigrants, they cannot apply for citizenship through naturalization, irrespective of religion.

States exempted from the Act

• Citizenship, aliens and naturalization are subjects listed in List 1 of the Seventh Schedule and fall exclusively under the domain of Parliament.
• Most states of the Northeast are, however, wholly or partially exempted under special provisions for tribal areas, such as Inner Line Permit (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram and now extended to Manipur) and the Sixth Schedule with special provisions in practically all of Meghalaya, and a large chunk of Tripura.

Are the communities mentioned indeed persecuted in these three countries?

• The MHA relied on news reports as evidence of religious persecution against minorities in Pakistan, ranging from forced conversion to the demolition of temples and other religious structures.
• Notable examples were Asia Bibi, a Pakistani Christian convicted of blasphemy who spent eight years on death row before being acquitted by the Pakistan Supreme Court.
• In Bangladesh, cases of killings of atheists by Islamic militants are well-documented.
• Although Home Minister referred to non-Muslim religions as persecuted minorities, the law avoids using the word persecution in its text.

Controversy with the Act

• There are two kinds of protests that are taking place across India right now, against the Act. In the northeast, the protest is against the Act’s implementation in their areas.
• Most of them fear that if implemented, the Act will cause a rush of immigrants that may alter their demographic and linguistic uniqueness.
• In the rest of India, like in Kerala, West Bengal and in Delhi, people are protesting against the exclusion of Muslims, alleging it to be against the ethos of the Constitution.
• The fundamental criticism of the Bill has been that it specifically targets Muslims. Critics argue that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality.

I. Country of origin

• The Act classifies migrants based on their country of origin to include only Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
• The statement of objects and reasons states that India has had historic migration of people with Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, and these countries have a state religion, which has resulted in religious persecution of minority groups.

II. Deviation from its own purpose

• Given that the objective of the Bill is to provide citizenship to migrants escaping from religious persecution, it is not clear why illegal migrants belonging to religious minorities from these countries have been excluded from the Bill.
• India shares a border with Myanmar, which has had a history of persecution of a religious minority, the Rohingya Muslims.
• Sri Lanka has had a history of persecution of a linguistic minority in the country, the Tamil Eelam.

III. Other religious minorities are ignored

• It is unclear why illegal migrants from only six specified religious minorities have been included in the Act.
• For example, over the years, there have been reports of persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslims who are considered non-Muslims in Pakistan have significant population in India.

IV. Date of Entry

• It is also unclear why there is a differential treatment of migrants based on their date of entry into India, i.e., whether they entered India before or after December 31, 2014.
• The logic justifying the date has not been discussed while passing of the said act.

V. Exclusion of Sixth Schedule Areas

• The act excludes illegal migrants residing in areas covered by the Sixth Schedule, that is, notified tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura.
• The act so excludes the Inner Line Permit areas. Inner Line regulates the entry of persons, including Indian citizens, into Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Nagaland.
• Once an illegal migrant residing in these areas acquires citizenship, he would be subject to the same restrictions in these areas, as are applicable to other Indian citizens.
• Therefore, it is unclear why the Bill excludes illegal migrants residing in these areas.

Assam Connection

Why is Assam fuming with protests?

• In Assam, what is primarily driving the protests is not who are excluded from the ambit of the new law, but how many are included.
• The protesters are worried about the prospect of the arrival of more migrants, irrespective of religion, in a state whose demography and politics have been defined by migration.
• The Assam Movement (1979-85) was built around migration from Bangladesh which many Assamese see as a threat to their culture and language, besides putting pressure on land resources and job opportunities.
• The protesters’ argument is that the new law violates the Assam Accord of 1985, which sets March 24, 1971, as the cutoff for Indian citizenship.
• If both CAB and the NRC will be implemented, the non-Muslims excluded under the NRC will be included under CAB.
• The net result will be that only Muslims will be identified as illegal migrants and excluded.
• The Assamese fear that Banglaspeakers will easily outnumber Assamese-speaking people in the state, as it has happened in Tripura where Bengali-Hindu immigrants from East Bengal now dominate political power, pushing the original tribals to the margins.
• The Assamese look at the issue from the linguistic, and not any religious angle. For them, Bengalis are one large linguistic community who are growing in numbers and could, one day, become numerically stronger than them.
• Hence, the Assamese view the CAB (Citizenship Amendment Bill) as legislation that will grant citizenship to Bengali-speaking migrants from Bangladesh. And that is something they do not want.

How much of Assam is exempted?

• In Assam, three Autonomous Districts are exempted but the new law remains applicable to the major area.
• This also raises the question: can there be two citizenship laws applicable to the same state?
• Under Clause 5.8 of the Assam Accord, “Foreigners who came to Assam on or after March 25, 1971, shall continue to be detected; deleted and practical steps shall be taken to expel such foreigners.”

Legality and constitutionality check

• Legal experts and Opposition leaders have argued that it violates the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
• One argument made in Parliament is that the law violates Article 14 that guarantees equal protection of laws.
• According to the legal test prescribed by courts, for a law to satisfy the conditions under Article 14, it has to first create a “reasonable class” of subjects that it seeks to govern under the law.
• Second, the legislation has to show a “rational nexus” between the subject and the object it seeks to achieve. Even if the classification is reasonable, any person who falls in that category has to be treated alike.
• If protecting the persecuted minorities is ostensibly the objective of the law, then the exclusions of some countries and using religion as a yardstick may fall foul of the test.

How is this act referred to here?

• Granting citizenship on the grounds of religion is seen to be against the secular nature of the Constitution which has been recognised as part of the basic structure that cannot be altered by Parliament.
• It is argued that persecuted minorities in three neighbouring countries, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, whose state religion is Islam, is a reasonable classification.
• Another argument is that the law does not account for other categories of migrants who may claim persecution in other countries.

Justification of the Law given by the Central Government

• It is argued that Muslims can never be persecuted in Islamic countries.
• Sri Lanka and Bhutan both Bhutan and Sri Lanka offer constitutional patronage to the state religion, Buddhism.
• Defending the exclusion of Shias and Ahmadiyyas from Pakistan it was argued by the government that a persecuted Shia would rather go to Iran than come to India.
• There are thousands of refugees in India of Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians and Parsis who have entered India after facing religious persecution in countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan without any valid document.
• These refugees have been facing difficulty in getting Long Term Visa (LTV) or Citizenship.
• For Naturalization they have to stay at least 12 years in India.
• Those minorities who are persecuted due to their religion have no other place to go except India as the three nations are declared Islamic Nations.

It excludes only “non-Indian” Muslims

• On the face of it, the amendment is not to exclude any Indian citizen. However, the NRC in Assam and the latest citizenship law cannot be decoupled.
• The new law gives a fresh chance to the Bengali Hindus left out to acquire citizenship, whereas the same benefit will not be available to a Muslim left out, who will have to fight a legal battle.
• Plugged with NRC, the new amendment becomes an enabling law to potentially disenfranchise an individual of a religion not mentioned in the amendment.
• Politically, the law is expected to impact West Bengal and Northeastern states. Assam and West Bengal head for polls in 2021.

Conclusion

• India is a constitutional democracy with a basic structure that assures a secure and spacious home for all Indians, including and especially its
• India has to undertake a balancing act here. India’s citizenship provisions are derived from the perception of the country as a secular republic.
• In fact, it is a refutation of the two-nation theory that proposed a Hindu India and a Muslim Pakistan. Granting citizenship based on religious identity violates this principle.
• That being said, we need to balance the civilization duties to protect those who are prosecuted in the neighbourhood.
• Hopefully, the government pays heed to the voices of different communities and takes an action only after a consensus is achieved.

 

---

---

References

https://www.civilsdaily.com/news/explained-nehru-liaquat-agreement-of-1950/

https://www.civilsdaily.com/news/exemption-categories-under-cab/

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/citizenship-amendment-act-2019-all-you-need-to-know-11576401546515.html

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/brute-majority-citizenship-amendment-bill-6162515/

https://www.newindianexpress.com/thesundaystandard/2019/dec/15/citizenship-act-escaping-religious-persecution-the-broken-finally-break-free-2076236.html

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-how-to-be-a-citizen-of-india-earlier-now-6165960/

http://prsindia.org/billtrack/citizenship-amendment-bill-2019

---

Context

The Parliament has passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha approving it by a voice vote. The Lok Sabha had already passed the bill in December 2018.

Why need such a bill?

• Transgender individuals in India often face stigma and systematic exclusion in education and employment.
• As a result, some feel they have no alternative but to turn to sex work.
• Trans individuals also face disproportionate public violence and police brutalities.

Background:

• In 2013, the government set up an expert committee to study the problems of transgenders and recommend solutions.
• The committee, comprising experts from various fields and members of the community, also looked at past experience as in the State of Tamil Nadu, which had set up a welfare board for transgender persons.
• TN has made recommendations right from allowing a ‘third gender’ in official forms, to setting up of special toilets and customizing health interventions.
• In 2014, a private member Bill, The Rights of Transgendered Persons, was introduced in the Rajya Sabha by Tiruchi Siva, a Member of Parliament from Tamil Nadu.
• It looked at a range of entitlements of such persons, providing specifically for them in health, education sectors, skill development and employment opportunities, and protection from abuse and torture.
• It was passed in the Rajya Sabha.
• In 2016, the Government introduced its own Bill in the Lok Sabha which made a number of recommendations including defining the term persons with intersex variations, granting reservations for socially and educationally backward classes, and recognition of civil rights including marriage, partnership, divorce and adoption. However, with the dissolution of the 16th Lok Sabha (2014-19), that Bill lapsed.

Judicial subordination

• Indian courts have long held that trans people deserve the government’s recognition on their own terms, without mandatory intervention or discrimination.
• In 2014, the Indian Supreme Court in NALSA v. India ruled that transgender people should be recognized as a third gender and enjoy all fundamental rights, while also being entitled to specific benefits in education and employment.
• Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan, writing for the bench, ordered that “Transgender persons’ right to decide their self-identified gender” should be recognized by state and federal authorities.
• The court made clear that any insistence for [sex reassignment surgery] for declaring one’s gender is immoral and illegal.

Transgender in India

Count

• Indian census has never recognized the third gender, i.e., transgender while collecting census data for years.
• According to the 2011 Census, the number of persons who do not identify as ‘male’ or ‘female’ but as ‘other’ stands at 4,87,803 (0.04% of the total population)
• The 2011 census also reported 55,000 children as transgenders identified by their parents.

Issues

• Sexual health issues
  • Transgender communities face several sexual health issues including HIV.
  • Both personal- and contextual- level factors influence sexual health condition and access to and use of sexual health services.
• Mental health issues
  • Some of the mental health issues reported in different community forums include depression and suicidal tendencies, possibly secondary to societal stigma, lack of social support and violence-related stress.
  • Most transgender people, especially youth, face great challenges in coming to terms with one’s own gender identity which are opposite to that of the gender identity imposed on them on the basis of their biological sex.
  • They face several other related issues such as: shame, fear, and internalized transphobia; adjusting, adapting, or not adapting to social pressure to conform; fear of loss of relationships; and self-imposed limitations on expression or aspirations.
• Violence

Multiple studies have shown that transgender people across the age spectrum face alarmingly high rates of physical and verbal violence, including child abuse, sexual violence, intimate partner violence, workplace violence and hate crimes.

• Social Exclusion

Social Exclusion Framework is increasingly used in highlighting the issues and problems faced by disadvantaged and disenfranchised groups.

• Family – Most families do not accept if their male child starts behaving in ways that are considered feminine or inappropriate to the expected gender role. Consequently, family members may threaten, scold or even assault their son/sibling from behaving or dressing-up like a girl or woman.
• Heath care Setting – Often, healthcare providers rarely had the opportunity to understand the sexual diversities and they do not have adequate knowledge about the health issues of sexual minorities.
• Lack of livelihood options – Most employers deny employment for even qualified and skilled transgender people. Lack of livelihood options is a key reason for a significant proportion of transgender people to choose or continue to be in sex work.
• Residence – The community is grossly discriminated by Indian Society when it comes to renting or selling the house to a transgender.
• Insurance – Health insurance companies often systematically exclude transition-related care and in many cases, these exclusions are used to deny coverage for a wide range of care for transgender people that may or may not have any connection to gender transition.

Various Provisions of The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019 includes:

Defining Transperson

• The Bill defines a transgender person as one whose gender does not match the gender assigned at birth.
• It includes trans-men and trans-women, persons with intersex variations, gender-queers, and persons with socio-cultural identities, such as kinnar and hijra (eunuch).

Prohibition against discrimination

• It prohibits the discrimination against a transgender person, including denial of service or unfair treatment in relation to education, employment, healthcare, access to, or enjoyment of goods, facilities, opportunities available to the public.
• Every transgender person shall have a right to reside and be included in his household.
• No government or private entity can discriminate against a transgender person in employment matters, including recruitment, and promotion.

HRD measures

• A transgender person may make an application to the District Magistrate for a certificate of identity, indicating the gender as ‘transgender’.
• Educational institutions funded or recognised by the relevant government shall provide inclusive facilities for transgender persons, without discrimination.
• The government must provide health facilities to transgender persons including separate HIV surveillance centres, and sex reassignment surgeries.

Grievances redressal

• The National Council for Transgender persons (NCT) chaired by Union Minister for Social Justice, will advise the central government as well as monitor the impact of policies with respect to transgender persons.
• It will also redress the grievances of transgender persons.

Legal Protection

The Bill imposes penalties for the offences against transgender persons like bonded labour, denial of use of public places, removal from household & village and physical, sexual, verbal, emotional or economic abuse.

Positive Impact of the Bill:

• The Bill will benefit a large number of transgender persons, mitigate the stigma, discrimination and abuse against this marginalized section and bring them into the mainstream of society.
• This will lead to inclusiveness and will make the transgender persons productive members of society.

What were the objections to the Bill?

Binary concept of gender

• Activists had problems right from the beginning, starting with the name.
• ‘Transgender’ was restrictive, they argued, and it showed a lack of understanding of the complexities in people who do not conform to the gender binary, male/female.
• Rejecting ‘Transgender’ as the nomenclature, they suggested instead that the title should be a comprehensive “Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics (Protection of Rights) Bill”, and in definition, sought to introduce the distinction between transgender and intersex persons upfront.
• Members of the community perceive transgender as different from intersex and were insistent that the distinction be made in the Bill.

No Self-determination

• While the Act is progressive in that it allows self-perception of identity, it mandates a certificate from a district magistrate declaring the holder to be transgender.
• This goes against the principle of self-determination itself, activists argue, also pointing out that there is no room for redress in case an appeal for such a certificate is rejected.

Others

• One long-pending demand has been to declare forced, unnecessary and non-consensual sex reassignment surgery illegal, and to enforce punitive action for violations.
• Transgender and intersex persons might require a range of unique health care needs, and that should have been incorporated into the Act, activists say.
• While the Act envisages the setting up of a National Council to provide the institutional framework for its implementation, suggestions on the composition of such a council, or the demand to set up a working group for a Council for Intersex Persons were also ignored.

Way Forward: 

• The mention of intersex persons in the Indian bill is an important inclusion but the bill should be renamed the Rights of Transgender and Intersex Persons Bill and include explicit protections for intersex people in line with India’s international human rights obligations.
• The bill should be revised to emphasize training teachers to help them adopt inclusive teaching methods to ensure that children are not harassed or discriminated against by staff or other children.
• Certain provisions of Private member bill introduced in 2014 by Tiruchi Siva can also be incorporated such as reserving 2% of seats in education institutions funded by the government, formation of special employment exchanges for transgender people n government jobs, etc.
• The bill should be provisioned in such a manner that it is able to integrate transgender persons seamlessly into the fabric of everyday public life be it public spaces, at workplaces, and in normative domestic spaces.
• Policies and regulation alone won’t help there is a need to increase awareness and inculcate a sense of respect and acceptance for the transgender community.
• Their grievance of being not included in policies formulation or decision making needs to be allayed and chances for their public participation should increase.
• The government should implement stigma and discrimination reduction measures through a variety of ways like mass media awareness for the general public to focused training and sensitization for police and health care providers.
• India should take lessons from Thailand. It is one of those model countries wherein all the required facilities are being made available to the Transgender Community.
• Parents of the Transgender need to be counselled appropriately in order to treat Kinnar children at par with other normal children
• There should be a proper census of the community. The community should be involved in this exercise. For the time being, the United Nations Development Programme(UNDP has more authentic data on Transgender in India. It could be used for planning welfare schemes.
• Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment should take up research studies to generate more evidence to design the programs and interventions for the community.
• The ministry should also compile the existing experiences /interventions taken by many states like Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Sikkim, and Delhi etc.

The Bill must recognise that gender identity must go beyond biological; gender identity is an individual’s deep and personal experience. It need not correspond to the sex assigned at birth. It includes the personal sense of the body and other expressions such as one’s own personal inducing proceeds.

---

---

References

https://www.civilsdaily.com/news/parliament-passes-transgender-persons-protection-of-rights-bill-2019/

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/why-are-there-objections-to-the-transgender-persons-bill/article30125894.ece

https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/12/05/indias-transgender-rights-law-isnt-worth-celebrating

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/what-the-transgenders-rights-bill-passed-by-lok-sabha-says-5896444/

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/nartaki-nataraj-tiruchi-siva-my-gender-is-my-right-transgender-community-6144704/