💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF

GS Paper: Federalism

  • Centre reconstitutes Inter-State Council (ISC)

    The Inter-State Council, which works to promote and support cooperative federalism in the country, has been reconstituted with PM Modi as Chairman and CMs of all States and six Union Ministers as members.

    What is Inter-State Council (ISC)?

    Genesis of ISC

    • The Constitution of India in Article 263, provides for the establishment of Inter-State Council (ISC).
    • The objective of the ISC is to discuss or investigate policies, subjects of common interest, and disputes among states.

    Temporary or permanent?

    • The articles says that ISC may be established “if at any time it appears to the President that the public interests would be served by the establishment of a Council”.
    • Therefore, the constitution itself did not establish the ISC, because it was not considered necessary at the time the constitution was being framed, but kept the option for its establishment open.

    Establishment as permanent body

    • This option was exercised in 1990.
    • The ISC was established as a permanent body on 28 May 1990 by a presidential order on the recommendation of the Sarkaria Commission.
    • It had recommended that a permanent Inter-State Council called the Inter-Governmental Council (IGC) should be set up under Article 263.
    • It cannot be dissolved and re-established.
    • Therefore, the current status of ISC is that of a permanent constitutional body.

    Aims of the ISC

    • Decentralisation of powers to the states as much as possible
    • More transfer of financial resources to the states
    • Arrangements for devolution in such a way that the states can fulfil their obligations
    • Advancement of loans to states should be related to as ‘the productive principle’
    • Deployment of Central Armed Police Forces in the states either on their request or otherwise

    Composition

    The Inter-State Council composes of the following members:

    • Prime Minister, Chairman.
    • Chief Ministers of all states.
    • Chief Ministers of the union territories having legislative assemblies.
    • Administrators of the union territories not having legislative assemblies.
    • 6 Union Cabinet Ministers, including Home Minister, to be nominated by the Prime Minister.
    • Governors of the states being administered under President’s rule.

    Standing Committee

    • Home Minister, Chairman
    • 5 Union Cabinet Ministers
    • 9 Chief Ministers

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • As Indian economy grows, Centre and states must work together

    Context

    The ongoing discords between the Centre and states over issues ranging from the allocation of financial resources to fixing of GST rates has once again brought to the fore issues pertaining to our federal structure, the resolution of which is essential for the country’s growth.

    Combination of cooperative and competitive spirit

    • Positive competition: It is undeniable that cooperation is key to the smooth functioning of federal design.
    • However, if it is coupled with positive competition among the states, then the overall result would be large-scale economic development across the country.
    • The competitive aspect of federalism can positively be harnessed by encouraging states to adopt each other’s best practices.
    • Exclusivity and mutualism: Indian federalism today enables the Centre and states to function with both exclusivity and mutualism.
    • Vertical and horizontal level: Cooperation between the Centre and states is required at both vertical (between Centre and states) and horizontal (among states) levels and on various fronts.
    • What does it mean? This includes fine-tuning of developmental measures for desired outcomes, development-related policy decisions, welfare measures, administrative reforms, strategic decisions, etc.

    Steps in the direction of cooperation

    • Recent efforts in this direction, such as according greater leeway to states in the functioning of the NITI Aayog, frequent meetings of the prime minister with chief ministers as well as with chief secretaries and district magistrates, periodic meetings of the President of India with governors, and the functioning of “PRAGATI” to review the progress of developmental efforts have generated the requisite synergy between the Centre and states.
    • Positive efforts of states towards attracting investment can create a conducive environment for economic activities in urban and backward regions alike.
    • Healthy competition coupled with a transparent ranking system would ensure the full materialisation of the vast but least utilised potential of the federal framework.
    • Sector specific indices: In this direction, NITI Aayog’s initiatives such as launching sector-specific indices like the School Education Quality Index, Sustainable Development Goals Index, State Health Index, India Innovation Index, Composite Water Management Index, Export Competitiveness Index, etc. could prove to be a great contribution.
    • Central efforts toward synchronisation of cooperation and competition can be observed in the implementation of the 14th and 15th Finance Commission reports, which have greatly contributed to resource devolution.
    • Recent reform measures in the form of the New Labour Code and other amendments/enactments by the legislature also exhibit this trend.

    Conclusion

    The rising stature of the Indian economy on the world stage can only be strengthened by a tailored approach to cooperation and competition. The mandate to marry the two would inevitably be the collective responsibility of the Centre and the states. Any ideological differences between them will have to be inevitably put on the backburner for the great Indian federal structure to succeed and prosper.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • How Sikkim became a part of India?

    It was on May 16, 1975 that Sikkim became 22nd state of the Union of India.

    Why in news?

    • While in many modern narratives, the tale of the former kingdom under the Namgyal dynasty acquiring Indian statehood begins in decades close to the 1970s.
    • The real story, according to experts, can only be understood by tracing the events back to 1640s when Namgyal rule was first established.

    Sikkim’s accession into India: A complete timeline

    (1) Attacks during Namgyal Rule

    • Beginning with Phuntsog Namgyal, the first chogyal (monarch), the Namgyal dynasty ruled Sikkim until 1975.
    • At one point, the kingdom of Sikkim included the Chumbi valley (part of China now) and Darjeeling.
    • In the early 1700s, the region saw a series of conflicts between Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan, and Tibet, which resulted in a shrinking of Sikkim’s territorial boundaries.

    (2) Under East India Company

    • When the British arrived, their expansion plans in the Indian subcontinent included controlling the Himalayan states.
    • The kingdom of Nepal, meanwhile, continued with its attempts to expand its territory.
    • This resulted in the Anglo-Nepalese war (November, 1814 to March, 1816), also known as the Gorkha war, which was fought between the Gorkhali army and the East India Company.
    • Both sides had ambitious expansion plans for the strategically important mountainous north of the Indian subcontinent.
    • In 1814, Sikkim allied with the East India Company in the latter’s campaign against Nepal.
    • The Company won and restored to Sikkim some of the territories that Nepal had wrested from it in 1780.

    (3) Administrative control of British

    • A turning point in the history of Sikkim involves with the appointment of John Claude White as Political Officer of Sikkim.
    • Sikkim by then was a British Protectorate under the Treaty of Tumlong signed in March, 1861.
    • As with most of the Indian subcontinent that the British had under their administrative control, the kingdom of Sikkim, although a protectorate, had little choice in the administration of its own kingdom.
    • The Namgyal monarch could not criticise decisions made by the British, but the ruler did complain about this influx of Nepali migrants into the kingdom.

    (4) Scenario after 1947

    • Three years after India’s Independence in 1947, Sikkim became a protectorate of India.
    • In 1950, a treaty was signed between the then Sikkim monarch Tashi Namgyal and India’s then Political Officer in Sikkim, Harishwar Dayal.
    • A clause in the treaty read: “Sikkim shall continue to be a Protectorate of India and, subject to the provisions of this Treaty, shall enjoy autonomy in regard to its internal affairs.”

    (5) Chinese invasion of Tibet

    • China’s invasion of Tibet in 1949 and Nepal’s attacks on Sikkim throughout the kingdom’s history were cited as reasons why the kingdom needed the support and protection of a powerful ally.
    • Further, the talk of persecution of Tibetans after China’s arrival at the scene generated fear of the possibility of Sikkim suffering a similar fate.

    (6) Dalai Lama’s Arrival

    • In March 1959, the 14th Dalai Lama escaped from Tibet.
    • After the Dalai Lama reached Indian borders, he and his entourage settled at the Tawang monastery in Arunachal Pradesh.
    • A month later, he travelled to Mussoorie, where he met then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to discuss the future of the Tibetan refugees who had travelled with him.
    • The repercussions of India’s decision to welcome and give refuge to the Dalai Lama sent a message to some in Sikkim that unlike China, aligning with India would guarantee their protection and security.
    • This was the perspective of the ruling elite in Sikkim.

    (7) Public discontent against monarchy

    • The period between the 1950s and the 1970s marked growing discontent in Sikkim.
    • Primarily, there was anger against the monarchy because of growing inequality and feudal control.
    • Anti-monarchy protests grew in 1973, following which the royal palace was surrounded by thousands of protesters.
    • Indian troops arrived after the monarch was left with no choice but to ask New Delhi to send assistance.
    • Finally, a tripartite agreement was signed in the same year between the chogyal, the Indian government, and three major political parties, so that major political reforms could be introduced.

    (8) Attempts for constitutional development

    • A year later, in 1974, elections were held, where the Sikkim State Congress led by Kazi Lhendup Dorji won, defeating pro-independence parties.
    • That year, a new constitution was adopted, which restricted the role of the monarch to a titular post, which Palden Thondup Namgyal bitterly resented.
    • In the same year, India upgraded Sikkim’s status from protectorate to “associated state”, allotting to it one seat each in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
    • Opposed to the move, the monarch attempted to bring international attention to it soon after.

    (9) Finally accession into India

    • A referendum was held in 1975 where an overwhelming majority voted in favour of abolishing the monarchy and joining India.
    • A total 59,637 voted in favour of abolishing the monarchy and joining India, with only 1,496 voting against.
    • Sikkim’s new parliament, led by Kazi Lhendup Dorjee, proposed a bill for Sikkim to become an Indian state, which was accepted by the Indian government.

     

    Also try this PYQ:

    Q.The latitudes that pass through Sikkim also pass through:

    (a) Rajasthan

    (b) Punjab

    (c) Himachal Pradesh

    (d) Jammu & Kashmir

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”pbi6jukf5c” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • With delimitation over, a look at the slate for J&K

    Context

    Fresh delimitation was necessary for Jammu and Kashmir since the State had been divided into two Union Territories and elections could only be held under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.

    Issues with the report of the Delimitation Commission

    • The central question of why Jammu has gained six Assembly seats and the Valley only one has been brushed under general remarks on methodology with no explanation of how that methodology was applied.
    • Nor does it explain why Jammu’s Muslim-majority seats now comprise less than a quarter of the province’s total seats, though Muslims comprise over a third of the province’s population.
    • The commission’s recommendations further complicate the issue.
    • They propose that the President nominate Pandit migrants to two Assembly seats — why is there no reference to Pandits who remain in the Valley?
    • Indeed, the only overarching guideline which the report does describe in some detail is the commission’s desire to match the boundaries of Assembly and parliamentary constituencies.
    • Most of these questions were addressed to the commission during its consultation phase.
    •  By choosing not to do so they lost a valuable opportunity to display transparency and dispel suspicion of bias.

    Way forward

    • The only hope for a peace process in Jammu and Kashmir is if there is a clean election, statehood is speedily restored, and the new Assembly determines whether or in which form special status is required. 
    • The better option is to hold elections for existing constituencies and let the new assembly approve or query the delimitation report.
    • In fact, the commission itself proposed that the report be placed before the legislative assembly, a recommendation that makes sense only if new delimitation comes into force after and not before elections.
    • Urgent as elections are, attention to fundamental freedoms is even more important.

    Conclusion

    The peace process in Jammu and Kashmir needs to address the concerns of the people related to the restoration of statehood, and clean elections.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Panel notifies new J&K Assembly Constituencies

    The Jammu and Kashmir Delimitation Commission has notified the new boundaries, names and number of Assembly constituencies in Jammu and Kashmir, paving the way for the first-ever Assembly election in the Union Territory.

    What is Delimitation and why is it needed?

    • Delimitation is the act of redrawing boundaries of an Assembly or Lok Sabha seat to represent changes in population over time.
    • The Delimitation Commission is appointed by the President of India and works in collaboration with the Election Commission of India.
    • This exercise is carried out by a Delimitation Commission, whose orders have the force of law and cannot be questioned before any court.
    • The objective is to redraw boundaries (based on the data of the last Census) in a way so that the population of all seats, as far as practicable, be the same throughout the State.
    • Aside from changing the limits of a constituency, the process may result in a change in the number of seats in a state.

    How is it carried out?

    • Under Article 82, the Parliament enacts a Delimitation Act after every Census.
    • Article 170 provides that States also get divided into territorial constituencies as per Delimitation Act after every Census.
    • Once the Act is in force, the Union government sets up a Delimitation Commission.
    • The first delimitation exercise was carried out by the President (with the help of the Election Commission) in 1950-51.
    • The Delimitation Commission Act was enacted in 1952.
    • Delimitation Commissions have been set up four times — 1952, 1963, 1973 and 2002 under the Acts of 1952, 1962, 1972 and 2002.
    • There was no delimitation after the 1981 and 1991 Censuses.

    Delimitation in J&K

    • Assembly seats in J&K were delimited in 1963, 1973 and 1995.
    • Prior to August 5, 2019, carving out of J&K’s Assembly seats was carried out under the J&K Constitution and Jammu and Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957.
    • Until then, the delimitation of Lok Sabha seats in J&K was governed by the Constitution of India.
    • However, the delimitation of the state’s Assembly was governed by the J&K Constitution and J&K Representation of the People Act, 1957.
    • There was no census in the state in 1991 and hence no Delimitation Commission was set up by the state until 2001 census.

    Why is it in the news again?

    • After the abrogation of J&K’s special status in 2019, the delimitation of Lok Sabha and Assembly seats in the newly-created UT would be as per the provisions of the Indian Constitution.
    • On March 6, 2020, the government set up the Delimitation Commission, headed by retired Supreme Court judge Ranjana Prakash Desai, which was tasked with winding up delimitation in J&K in a year.
    • As per the J&K Reorganization Bill, the number of Assembly seats in J&K would increase from 107 to 114, which is expected to benefit the Jammu region.

    Next step: Assembly polls

    • With the final order now notified, all eyes will be on the EC and the Union government regarding the timing of Assembly elections.
    • Though mainstream parties in the Valley have criticised the report, it is likely that this will make space for political engagement in the UT.

    What changes have been made?

    • ASSEMBLY: The Commission has increased seven Assembly seats — six in Jammu (now 43 seats) and one in Kashmir (now 47). It has also made massive changes in the structure of the existing Assembly seats.
    • LOK SABHA: The Commission has redrawn the boundaries of Anantnag and Jammu seats. Jammu’s Pir Panjal region, comprising Poonch and Rajouri districts and formerly part of Jammu parliamentary seat, has now been added to Anantnag seat in Kashmir. Also, a Shia-dominated region of Srinagar parliamentary constituency has been transferred to Baramulla constituency, also in the Valley.
    • KASHMIRI PANDITS: The Commission has recommended provision of at least two members from the community of Kashmiri Migrants (Kashmiri Hindus) in the Legislative Assembly.
    • Seats for POK migrants: It has also recommended that Centre should consider giving representation in the J&K Legislative Assembly to the displaced persons from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, who migrated to Jammu after Partition.

    Why has the exercise been controversial?

    • Jammu vs. Kashmir: Concerns had been expressed over how the delimitation process may end up favoring the Jammu region over Kashmir in terms of the seats.
    • Under-representation of Ladakh: Arguments have been made on how Ladakh has been underrepresented, with demands for statehood/sixth schedule.
    • Non-proportionate reservations: It is argued that seats for STs should’ve been divided in both Jammu province & Kashmir province, as the ST population is almost equal.
    • Frozen till 2026: Constituency boundaries are being redrawn only in J&K when delimitation for the rest of the country has been frozen until 2026. The last delimitation exercise in J&K was carried out in 1995.
    • Issue over reorganization: Again, political parties in Jammu and Kashmir have been pointing out that the Delimitation Commission is mandated by the Reorganisation Act, which is sub judice.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Tamil Nadu NEET Exemption Bill sent to Home Ministry

    The CM informed the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly that Governor has forwarded the NEET exemption Bill to the Union Home Ministry to be sent to the President of India for his assent.

    What is the TN Bill about?

    • The Bill exempts medical aspirants in Tamil Nadu from taking NEET examination for admission to UG degree courses in Indian medicine, dentistry and homeopathy.
    • Instead, it seeks to provide admission to such courses on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying examination, through “Normalization methods”.
    • The aim of the Bill is to ensure “social justice, uphold equality and equal opportunity, protect all vulnerable student communities from being discriminated”.
    • It seeks to bring vulnerable student communities to the “mainstream of medical and dental education and in turn ensure a robust public health care across the state, particularly the rural areas”.

    Why TN is against NEET?

    • Non-representative: TN opposes because NEET undermined the diverse societal representation in MBBS and higher medical studies.
    • Disfavors the poor: It has favored mainly the affordable and affluent sections of the society and thwarting the dreams of underprivileged social groups.
    • Exams for the elite: It considers NEET not a fair or equitable method of admission since it favored the rich and elite sections of society.
    • Healthcare concerns: If continued, the rural and urban poor may not be able to pursue medical courses.

    Can any state legislate against NEET?

    • Admissions to medical courses are traceable to entry 25 of Concurrent List, Schedule VII of the Constitution.
    • Therefore, the State can also enact a law regarding admission and amend any Central law on admission procedures.

    Why is it going for President’s assent?

    • The question is not whether the State government can amend a law falling under the Concurrent List.
    • The question is whether the State government can exempt Section 10D of the IMC Act, which is a parliamentary law that falls under the Central List (Entry 66).
    • Moreover, the Supreme Court has also upheld NEET as a requirement.
    • Mere statistics highlighting that a majority of the stakeholders do not want NEET in Tamil Nadu is not an answer for exempting the examination.

    Again, it is State and Centre are at crossroads

    • Normally, a Bill requires assent from the Governor to become a law. Stalin’s contention is that this Bill deals with education, which is a Concurrent List subject.
    • Admissions to medical courses fall under Entry 25 of List III, Schedule VII of the Constitution, and therefore the state is competent to regulate the same.
    • Yet, as far as matters relating to the determination of standards for higher education are concerned, the central government has the power to amend a clause or repeal an Act.
    • So, just the passing of the Bill doesn’t enable the students to get exempted from writing NEET.
    • Already, Union Higher Education Secretary has held that if any State wants to opt out of the exam, it has to seek permission from the Supreme Court.

    Options for Tamil Nadu

    • Data is necessary only when there is power to legislate on the subject concerned.
    • Since the Bill, which will become an Act only after the President’s nod, will come into effect only from the next academic year, the battle for and against the NEET requirement will continue in courts.
    • Hopefully, the courts will determine the legality and have a definite solution to the question of medical admissions within the next year.
    • Till such time, students who wrote NEET will fill the seats under the State quota.

     

    Also read:

    Bill assent, a delay and the Governor’s options

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • What is the Delhi Dual Governance Conundrum?

    New Delhi has been at the flashpoint of innumerable power struggles these days.

    Why in news?

    • In the absence of statehood for Delhi, there has been a prolonged confrontation on the relative powers of the territorial administration and the Union government.

    Dilemmas of Dual Governance

    • Article 239AA of the Constitution of India granted Special Status to Delhi among Union Territories (UTs) in the year 1991 through the 69th constitutional amendment.
    • It provided a Legislative Assembly and a Council of Ministers responsible to such Assembly with appropriate powers.
    • That’s when Delhi was named as the National Capital Region (NCT) of Delhi.
    • As per this article – Public Order, Police & Land in NCT of Delhi fall within the domain and control of Central Government which shall have the power to make laws on these matters.
    • For remaining matters of State List or Concurrent List, in so far as any such matter is applicable to UTs, the Legislative Assembly shall have the power to make laws for NCT of Delhi

    [a] Centre-State Dispute

    • Delhi was given a fully elected legislative assembly and a responsible government through an amendment in the constitution in 1991.
    • Since 1991, Delhi had been made a UT with an assembly with “limited legislative powers”.
    • Cordial relations have prevailed between the Central and Delhi governments since 1996 and all differences have been resolved through discussions – with a few exceptions.

    [b] Lt. Governor vs the CM

    • The Article 239AA while conferring on the assembly the power to legislate on all matters in the state list as well as the concurrent list except land, police and public order – contained one sore point.
    • It said that in case of a difference between the L-G and the council of ministers, the matter shall be referred to the president by the LG for his decision and pending such decision the LG can take any action on the matter as he thinks fit.
    • It is this issue that the constitution bench of the Supreme Court resolved in 2018, when it said that the government does not have to seek the concurrence of the L-G on its decisions.
    • Any differences between them should be resolved to keep in view the constitutional primacy of representative government and co-operative federalism.

    It is after this judgement, the Centre brought up this Bill.

    [c] NCT of Delhi (Amendment) Bill, 2021

    • Among the major proposed amendments, one makes it explicitly clear that the term “government” in any law made by the Legislative Assembly shall mean the L-G.
    • This, essentially, gives effect to the former L-G 2015 assertion that “Government means the Lieutenant Governor of the NCT of Delhi appointed by the President under Article 239 and designated as such under Article 239 AA of the Constitution”.
    • The Bill adds that the L-G’s opinion shall be obtained before the government takes any executive action based on decisions taken by the Cabinet or any individual minister.

     

    [d] 

    Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Bill, 2022

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Status of the Naga Peace Talks

    The annual report of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) released a report on insurgency-related incidents in Nagaland.

    It recently said that the Isak-Muivah faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM) was involved in 44% of insurgency-related incidents in 2020.

    Why in news?

    • The Union government had, in 2015, signed a framework agreement with the NSCN-IM to find a solution to the Naga political issue.
    • The negotiations are yet to be concluded.

    Who are the Nagas?

    • The term Naga was created by the British for administrative convenience to refer to a group of tribes with similar origins but distinct cultures, dialects, and customs.
    • The Naga tribes are accumulated in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, and Myanmar.

    Why did the Naga insurgency begin?

    • Residing in the Naga hills of Assam during the advent of the British and the annexation of Assam in 1820, the Nagas did not consider themselves a part of British India.
    • The British adopted a way of governance over the Nagas that involved keeping in place their traditional ways of life, customs, and laws while putting British administrators at the top.
    • At the time of the withdrawal of the British, insecurity grew among the Naga tribes about the future of their cultural autonomy after India’s independence.
    • This was accompanied by the fear of the entry of “plains people” or “outsiders” into their territory.

    Do you know?

    In a memorandum to the Simon Commission in 1929, representatives of Naga tribes demanded that Nagas be left free after Independence and not be included in the Indian Union.

    Collective actions of the Nagas

    • Above mentioned factors gave rise to the formation of the Naga Hills District Tribal Council in 1945, which was renamed the Naga National Council (NNC) in 1946.
    • Amid uncertainties over the post-independence future of the Nagas, a section of the NNC, led by Naga leader A.Z. Phizo declared the independence of the Nagas on August 14, 1947.
    • The underground insurgency began in the early 1950s when Mr. Phizo founded the Naga Federal Government (NFG) and its armed wing, the Naga Federal Army (NFA).

    Outcome of the then insurgency

    • The Central Government sent the armed forces into Naga areas to curb the insurgency.
    • It imposed the contentious Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) which is still in place in parts of Nagaland.
    • The Nagas, led by Mr. Phizo, demanding an independent state outside of India, boycotted the 1952 and 1957 general elections and armed clashes grew.
    • Unlike other groups in the north east which were accepting some form of autonomy under the Constitution, Nagas rejected this in favour of sovereignty.

    Negotiations with the govt

    • Some leaders among the NNC formed their own group to hold discussions with the government, leading to the formation of the State of Nagaland in 1963.
    • This, however, did not satisfy many in the NNC and NFG, who, following years of negotiations with the government, eventually signed the Shillong Accord of 1975, agreeing to surrender arms and accept the Constitution.

    When did the NSCN come into the picture?

    • This signing of the Shillong Accord was not agreeable with many top leaders of the NNC and those operating from Myanmar.
    • A/c to them, the agreement did not address the issue of Naga sovereignty and coerced them to accept the Constitution.
    • Three NNC rebel leaders, formed the National Socialist Council Of Nagaland (NSCN) to continue the armed movement for ‘independence’.

    Again split in NSCN

    • In 1988, after years of infighting and violent clashes along tribal lines and over the main cause of the movement, the NSCN split into two factions.
    • One, led by Mr. Muiwah and Swu called the NSCN-IM and the other, led by Mr. Khaplang called the NSCN-K.
    • The NSCN-IM demanded and continues to demand for ‘Greater Nagaland’ or Nagalim.
    • It wants to extend Nagaland’s borders by including Naga-dominated areas in the neighbouring States of Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh.
    • The NSCN-IM has now grown to become the most powerful insurgent group, also playing a role in the creation of smaller groups in other States.

    Where do the peace talks stand now?

    • In 1997, the Government of India got the NSCN-IM to sign a ceasefire agreement to begin the holding of talks with the aim of signing a Naga Peace Accord.
    • After this ceasefire, there have been over a hundred rounds of talks spanning over 24 years between the Centre and the insurgent group, while a solution is still awaited.

    Issues of contention

    • Independence celebration: Nagas across Nagaland, Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh celebrate August 14 as Independence Day. According to Naga historians, Gandhi agreed that the Nagas would celebrate their independence a day ahead of India, on August 14, 1947.
    • Naga flag: In the Naga narrative, passed down generations by word of mouth, the Naga flag was not designed by a mortal but is of divine origin.
    • Secessionist tendencies: A large section of the Nagas still holds dear the idea of the Naga identity and their tribal roots.

    Way ahead

    • The Naga struggle claimed thousands of lives over decades and devastated countless homes, all over the idea of a sovereign Naga nation.
    • If the NSCN (I-M) accedes to economic and political packages alone, without a separate flag and constitution, it remains to be seen whether it will be seen as a solution, or as a defeat.

     

    Also read,

    [Burning Issue] Naga Peace Talks

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Explained: Arunachal-Assam Boundary Dispute

    Less than a month after the Union government gave the seal of approval to an agreement to partially resolve the disputed sectors on the Assam-Meghalaya border, Arunachal Pradesh CM and his Assam counterpart decided to form district-level committees for settling their inter-state boundary disputes.

    Arunachal-Assam Boundary Dispute

    • Assam has had boundary disputes with all the north-eastern states that were carved out of it.
    • While Nagaland became a State in 1963, Meghalaya first became an Autonomous State in 1970 and a full-fledged State in 1972.
    • Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram were separated from Assam as Union Territories in 1972 and as States in 1987.
    • None of the new States accepted the “constitutional boundary” that they said was dictated by the partisan administration of undivided Assam without consulting the tribal stakeholders.
    • They also claimed that the disputed areas were traditionally under the control of tribal chieftains before Assam, post-India’s independence, inherited the “imaginary boundaries” drawn during British rule.
    • The issue with Arunachal Pradesh has more to do with a 1951 report prepared by a sub-committee headed by Assam’s first Chief Minister, Gopinath Bordoloi.

    Genesis of the dispute

    • Arunachal Pradesh and Assam have disputes at about 1,200 points along their 804 km boundary.
    • The disputes cropped up in the 1970s and intensified in the 1990s with frequent flare-ups along the border.
    • However, the issue dates back to 1873 when the British government introduced the inner-line permit vaguely separating the plains from the frontier hills.
    • This area became the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA) in 1954, three years after a notification based on the 1951 report saw 3,648 sq. km of the “plain” area of Balipara and Sadiya foothills being transferred to the Darrang and Lakhimpur districts of Assam.
    • Arunachal has been celebrating its statehood with an eye on China since 1987, but what has been causing resentment is the inability of the people living in the transferred patches.
    • Leaders in Arunachal Pradesh claim the transfer was done arbitrarily without consulting its tribes who had customary rights over these lands.
    • Their counterparts in Assam say the 1951 demarcation is constitutional and legal.

    Earlier attempts for resolving dispute

    • There were several efforts to demarcate the boundary between Assam and NEFA/Arunachal Pradesh between 1971 and 1974.
    • To end the stalemate, a high-powered tripartite committee involving the Centre and the two States was formed in April 1979 to delineate the boundary based on Survey of India maps.
    • About 489 km of the inter-state boundary north of the Brahmaputra River was demarcated by 1984, but Arunachal did not accept the recommendations and staked claim to much of the areas transferred in 1951.
    • Assam objected and approached the Supreme Court in 1989, accusing Arunachal Pradesh of “encroachment”.
    • The apex court-appointed a local boundary commission in 2006 headed by one of its retired judges.
    • In its September 2014 report, this commission recommended that Arunachal Pradesh should get back some of the areas transferred in 1951. However, this did not work out.

    Way forward

    • Following the model adopted in the exercise to resolve the dispute with Meghalaya, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh have agreed to form district-level committees.
    • They will be tasked with undertaking joint surveys in the disputed sectors to find tangible solutions to the long-pending issue based on historical perspective, ethnicity, contiguity, people’s will and administrative convenience.
    • The two States have decided to form 12 such committees involving the districts sharing the boundary. Assam has eight districts touching the boundary with Arunachal Pradesh, which has 12 such districts.

    Conclusion

    • The Assam-Meghalaya boundary agreement has raised hopes of the Assam-Arunachal boundary dispute being resolved.
    • This is especially in light of egging the north-eastern States to end their territorial issues once and for all by August 15, 2022, when the country celebrates 75 years of independence.
    • Moreover, there is a general belief that the region’s sister-States are in a better position to fast-track the resolution since they are ruled by the present regime with the same dispensation at the Centre.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Freebies model of Governance

    Context

    Against the backdrop of promises of freebies in Punjab, this article deals with the harm caused by such freebies to the economy, life quality and social cohesion in the long run.

    Macroeconomic stability of the Union and the States

    • India is a Union of states. It is not a confederation of states.
    • The Union is indestructible.
    • The Union, therefore, is integral to both the Centre and the states.
    • The strength of the Centre lies in the strength of the states.
    • Therefore, the macroeconomic stability of the Union is contingent on the macroeconomic stability of both the Centre and states.

    The complex issue of freebies

    • There is great ambiguity in what “freebies” mean.
    • Merit goods Vs. Public goods: We need to distinguish between the concept of merit goods and public goods on which expenditure outlays have overall benefits.
    • Examples of this are the strengthening and deepening of the public distribution system, employment guarantee schemes, support to education and enhanced outlays for health, particularly during the pandemic.
    • All over the world, these are considered to be desirable expenditures.
    • Freebies could be expensive? It’s not about how cheap the freebies are but how expensive they are for the economy, life quality and social cohesion in the long run.

    Issues with the culture of competitive freebie politics

    1] It affects macroeconomic stability

    • Freebies undercut the basic framework of macroeconomic stability.
    • The politics of freebies distorts expenditure priorities.
    • Outlays are being concentrated on subsidies of one kind or the other.
    • Illustratively, in the case of Punjab, while estimates vary, some have speculated that the promise of freebies might cost around Rs 17,000 crore.
    • As we know, the debt-to-GDP ratio of Punjab is already at 53.3 per cent for 2021-22, which would worsen on account of these new measures.

    2] Distortion of expenditure priorities

    • Take, for instance, the change to the new contributory pension scheme from the old scheme, which had a fixed return.
    • Rajasthan announced that it would revert to the old pension scheme.
    • This decision is regressive as the move away from the old scheme was based on the fact that it was inherently inequitable.
    • The pension and salary revenues of Rajasthan amount to 56 per cent of its tax and non-tax revenues.
    • Thus, 6 per cent of the population, which is made up of civil servants, stands to benefit from 56 per cent of the state’s revenues.
    • Intergenerational inequality: This is fraught with dangers not only of intergenerational inequality, but also affects the broader principles of equity and morality.

    3] Increases social inequality

    • The issue of intergenerational equity leads to greater social inequalities because of expenditure priorities being distorted away from growth-enhancing items.

    4]  It affects the environment

    • When we talk of freebies, it is in the context of providing, for example, free power, or a certain quantum of free power, water and other kinds of consumption goods.
    • This distracts outlays from environmental and sustainable growth, renewable energy and more efficient public transport systems.

    5]  The distortion of agricultural priorities

    • The depleting supply of groundwater is an important issue to consider when speaking of freebies pertaining to free consumption goods and resources.

    6] Effect on the future of manufacturing

    • Lower the quality of competitiveness: Freebies lower the quality and competitiveness of the manufacturing sector by detracting from efficient and competitive infrastructure enabling high-factor efficiencies in the manufacturing sector.

    7] Subnational bankruptcy

    • Freebies bring into question market differentiation between profligate and non-profligate states and whether we can have a recourse mechanism for subnational bankruptcy.

    Way forward

    • The race to the bottom implies government deregulation of markets and business.
    • We must strive instead for a race to efficiency through laboratories of democracy and sanguine federalism where states use their authority to harness innovative ideas and solutions to common problems which other states can emulate.

    Consider the question “What are the challenges in dealing with the competitive freebies politics? What are its drawbacks?”

    Conclusion

    The economics of freebies is invariably wrong. It is a race to the bottom. Indeed, it is not the road to efficiency or prosperity, but a quick passport to fiscal disaster.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)