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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: Governance, Transparency & Accountability, Citizens Charters

  • Maintaining India’s progress in food safety standards

    Why in the News?

    World Food Safety Day 2025 is observed with the theme “Food Safety: Science in Action.” It highlights India’s progress in food safety, though there are still some gaps to address.

    What is the theme of World Food Safety Day 2025?

    Theme: “Food Safety: Science in Action”. It emphasizes the importance of applying science to ensure food safety.

    How does it reflect India’s evolving approach to food safety?

    • Shift from Adulteration to Risk-Based Framework: Earlier, the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act, 1954 focused on whether food was adulterated or not. The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 introduced a scientific, risk-based approach through the creation of FSSAI.
    • Adoption of International Scientific Standards: India aligned its food regulations with global norms like those of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Eg: Standards for Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) and Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) values are now scientifically defined.
    • Efforts to Strengthen Scientific Capacity: India is focusing on generating its own toxicological data and conducting Total Diet Studies (TDS) to suit local needs. Eg: Indian-specific dietary patterns and environmental factors are being considered to improve food safety regulations.

    What are Toxicology Studies?

    These are scientific assessments that evaluate the harmful effects of chemicals or substances (like pesticides, additives, contaminants) on living organisms, especially humans.

    Why are India-specific toxicology studies important for food safety?

    • Reflect Local Dietary Habits: International toxicology data may not match Indian dietary patterns and consumption levels. Eg: An average Indian may consume more rice or spices than Western populations, affecting exposure to contaminants.
    • Consider Unique Agricultural Practices: India’s crop varieties, pesticide usage, and farming methods differ from global practices. Eg: Pesticide residues on Indian-grown vegetables may vary significantly compared to Europe, requiring tailored safety limits.
    • Account for Environmental and Genetic Differences: Climate, water quality, and genetic factors influence how toxins impact health in India. Eg: Heavy metal contamination in groundwater in Indian regions could cause higher cumulative exposure, not captured by foreign studies.

    What is monosodium glutamate (MSG)? 

    MSG is a flavour enhancer commonly added to food to intensify the umami taste (a savoury flavour). It is the sodium salt of glutamic acid, a naturally occurring amino acid found in many foods.

    How has the regulation of monosodium glutamate (MSG) in India differed from global practices?

    • Continued Use of Outdated Warning Labels: While global authorities like JECFA (Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives) have declared MSG safe since 1971, India still mandates a warning label stating it is unsafe for infants. Eg: Most countries have removed such warnings, but India continues them despite scientific consensus.
    • Misleading Public Perception: The mandatory label in India has led to consumer fear and confusion, with many believing MSG is inherently harmful. Eg: This is misleading, as natural glutamates (chemically identical to MSG) are found in tomato, mushroom, garlic, and even breast milk.
    • Lag in Regulatory Modernisation: India has been slow to align its food safety regulations with global scientific evidence. Eg: Despite MSG receiving an “ADI not specified” status globally (indicating high safety), India still treats it with caution due to legacy regulations.

    What can improve food safety risk communication in India?

    • Simplify Scientific Language: Communicate complex terms like MRLs (Maximum Residue Limits) and ADIs (Acceptable Daily Intake) in easy-to-understand formats for the public. Eg: Instead of stating “0.1 mg/kg,” explain it as a level safe for lifelong consumption in common quantities of food.
    • Replace Misleading Labels with Evidence-Based Information: Outdated or alarming labels should be updated to reflect current scientific understanding. Eg: The MSG warning label in India should be replaced with factual information about its safety, as done in other countries.
    • Enhance Public Engagement and Transparency: Build public trust through open communication with consumers, industry, and media to explain regulatory changes and safety updates. Eg: When MRL limits for pesticides were revised, clearer messaging could have prevented public fear and misunderstanding.

    Way forward: 

    • Invest in India-Specific Scientific Research: Conduct localized toxicological studies and Total Diet Studies (TDS) to ensure food safety standards reflect Indian dietary habits, agricultural practices, and environmental conditions.
    • Strengthen Risk Communication and Public Awareness: Simplify scientific terms for the public, revise outdated labels, and build transparent engagement with stakeholders to promote informed consumer choices and trust in regulatory decisions.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] Briefly discuss the status and significance of the food processing industry in India.

    Linkage: The “status and significance of the food processing industry” in India is directly and fundamentally linked to the country’s food safety standards. For this industry to achieve and maintain a significant status, it must adhere to and uphold rigorous food safety standards. The perception and reality of food safety directly influence consumer trust, market access (both domestic and international), and overall economic contribution of the sector.

  • Drinking to death: On illicit liquor cases

    Why in the News?

    Recently, in Majitha, Amritsar district of Punjab, 21 people aged between 26 and 80 died and 10 others were critically hospitalised after allegedly drinking spurious liquor.

    Note: Hooch tragedies refer to incidents where people die or fall seriously ill after consuming illicit or spurious liquor.

    What systemic issues contribute to recurring hooch tragedies in India?

    • Poverty and Social Vulnerability: Poor, daily wage earners often turn to cheap illicit liquor as a coping mechanism. Eg: Victims in the 2023 Punjab hooch tragedy were mostly from low-income backgrounds.
    • Easy Availability and Misuse of Methanol: Methanol, an industrial chemical, is cheap, easily pilfered, and often used in spurious liquor despite being highly toxic. Eg: Bootleggers dilute methanol to create hooch, as seen in several mass poisoning incidents.
    • Weak Regulatory Oversight and State Capacity: Lax control over methanol transport and lack of inter-state coordination enable theft and illegal use. Eg: No central framework exists to monitor methanol movement, despite repeated incidents.
    • Corruption and Nexus Among Stakeholders: A deep-rooted nexus between bootleggers, local politicians, and police often shields the culprits. Eg: In many hooch cases, police are suspended post-tragedy, but no long-term accountability follows.
    • Ineffective Legal Enforcement: Laws like the Poison Act are rarely used, and convictions are rare due to weak evidence or delayed trials. Eg: In the 2015 Malvani case, only 4 out of 14 accused were convicted after 9 years.

    Who is primarily accountable for spurious liquor deaths?

    • Bootleggers and Illicit Manufacturers: They produce and distribute toxic brews, often using dangerous chemicals like methanol for profit. Eg: In the 2023 Punjab hooch case, bootleggers used methanol-laced liquor that killed at least 23 people.
    • Corrupt Law Enforcement Agencies: Police often ignore illegal activities due to bribes or political pressure, enabling the supply chain to flourish. Eg: After the Punjab incident, several police officers were suspended for negligence.
    • Regulatory Authorities and State Governments: Weak oversight of methanol distribution, lack of tracking mechanisms, and poor implementation of prohibition laws lead to repeated failures. Eg: States lack robust frameworks to monitor industrial alcohol movement, allowing diversion.
    • Local Politicians and Political Nexus: Some politicians support or protect bootleggers for electoral or financial gains, compromising public safety.

    What are the legislations to regulate spurious liquor or illicit alcohol in India? 

    • The Poisons Act, 1919: Regulates the manufacture, possession, sale, and transport of poisonous substances like methanol, which is often diverted to make illicit liquor. Eg: Methanol is classified as a Class B poison under this Act, but its diversion is a key issue in hooch tragedies.
    • The Essential Commodities Act, 1955: Controls the production and distribution of essential goods, including alcohol ingredients, to prevent hoarding and illegal diversion. Eg: Used to regulate methanol supply and prevent pilferage that fuels illicit liquor trade.

    Why has the legal framework failed to ensure convictions in illicit liquor cases?

    • Weak Application of Existing Laws: Cases are often booked under prohibition laws or general criminal provisions, but not under stronger laws like the Poison Act or organized crime statutes, leading to weaker prosecution. Eg: In the 2015 Malvani hooch tragedy (Mumbai), 105 people died, but the court acquitted 10 out of 14 accusedafter 9 years; none was convicted under the Poison Act.
    • Poor Evidence Collection and Investigation: Police often fail to collect scientific and documentary evidence, link the entire supply chain, or prove intent and causation beyond reasonable doubt. Eg: In multiple cases, including the 2023 Bihar hooch incident, forensic reports were delayed or inconclusive, weakening the case in court.
    • Lack of Inter-State Regulatory Mechanism for Methanol: Methanol, used industrially, is not illegal in itself. Without a centralised tracking system, tracing its diversion becomes difficult, weakening the case against suppliers. Eg: Bootleggers source methanol from authorised dealers across states, making it hard to fix legal liability on any single actor.

    What policy measures can prevent methanol diversion into the illicit liquor trade? (Way forward)

    • Centralised Methanol Monitoring Framework: Establish a nationwide tracking system for methanol production, transport, and sale using barcoding or GPS tracking. Eg: Like the track-and-trace system for pharmaceutical drugs, methanol consignments can be monitored to prevent theft or leakage.
    • Tighter Regulation and Licensing of Dealers: Enforce strict licensing norms for methanol dealers with regular audits and surprise inspections; cancel licences for non-compliance. Eg: Some states classify methanol as a Class B poison and regulate it under the Poison Act.
    • Criminal Liability for Supply Chain Negligence: Amend laws to hold manufacturers and transporters accountable for diversion due to negligence or collusion, with higher penalties and jail terms. Eg: In the Punjab hooch tragedy (2020), weak action against upstream suppliers limited accountability—stronger legal deterrents can close such gaps.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2024] Explain how narco-terrorism has emerged as a serious threat across the country. Suggest suitable measures to counter narco- terrorism.

    Linkage: Criminal activities linked to trafficking dangerous substances for profit and the security threats they pose, similar in nature to the illicit methanol trade described in the article.

  • Indians fear fake news but are less concerned about press freedom

    Why in the News?

    In India, although many people are worried about fake news and misinformation, they don’t mostly blame the government for it. Instead, many people are okay with the government having more control over the media, according to a recent survey by the Pew Research Centre.

    What does the Pew survey reveal about misinformation and government control in India?

    • High concern about fake news: 65% of Indian respondents said made-up news and information is a “very big problem,” placing India among the top 10 countries with the highest concern.
    • Low emphasis on need for free media: Only 68% said it is very or somewhat important for the media to report news without government censorship, the second-lowest among 35 countries surveyed.
    • Belief in media freedom: 80% of respondents believe that the Indian media is currently “somewhat” or “completely” free from state intervention, among the highest in the survey.
    • Misinformation seen as non-governmental: Citizens largely attribute fake news to sources like social media and WhatsApp, rather than to state action or censorship.

    Why is there a contradiction between concern for fake news and support for state control?

    • Misinformation blamed on non-state actors: Many Indians see fake news as stemming from social media platforms like WhatsApp or Facebook, not from government channels. Eg: Viral misinformation during elections is often attributed to private forwards, not official news broadcasts.
    • Trust in government regulation over systemic reforms: There is greater public belief that the state can control misinformation better than a free and independent press. Eg: Support for internet bans during riots or unrest, viewed as a way to stop rumors, even if it limits press freedom.
    • Low awareness of press freedom deterioration: Despite India’s declining World Press Freedom Index ranking, most respondents think the media is already free. Eg: 80% of Indians believe media is free, while only 68% think freedom from state censorship is important.

    How does India’s World Press Freedom Index ranking reflect on media freedom?

    • Deteriorating Position Globally: India ranked 159 out of 180 countries in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders, reflecting a serious decline in media independence and journalist safety. Eg: India has consistently ranked below 100 since 2003, showing a long-term concern.
    • Gap Between Perception and Reality: While 80% of Indians believe media is free, global rankings suggest significant censorship, legal pressure, and harassment of journalists. Eg: Arrests and raids on independent news portals contradict the public’s belief in press freedom.
    • Impact of State Influence and Surveillance: The low ranking indicates increasing state influence, with reports of surveillance, restrictions on digital media, and pressure on newsrooms. Eg: Pegasus spyware allegations against journalists in India highlight these issues.
    • Legal and Political Threats to Journalists: India’s ranking reflects how stringent laws (like UAPA and sedition) are used against journalists, creating a chilling effect on independent reporting. Eg: The arrest of journalist Siddique Kappan under UAPA demonstrates misuse of laws.
    • Public Support for Control vs. Press Freedom Standards: Despite the low press freedom score, a large section of Indians supports state control over the media, showing a disconnect between democratic ideals and citizen expectations. Eg: Only 68% Indians see uncensored reporting as important—the second-lowest globally.

    Where is the “press freedom gap” reversed according to the survey?

    • India and Kenya Show Reversal: Unlike most countries, India and Kenya are the only two where more people believe the media is free than believe media freedom is important. Eg: In India, 80% say the media is free, but only 68% feel uncensored reporting is important.
    • Contrary to Global Trend: In 33 out of 35 countries, the importance of media freedom is rated higher than the belief that it actually exists, but India and Kenya show the opposite. Eg: In Greece, a higher number want free media but few believe it actually exists, unlike India.
    • High Confidence Despite Global Ranking: Even though India’s global press freedom ranking is poor (159/180), public confidence in existing media freedom remains oddly high. Eg: 80% Indians feel the media is free despite evidence of censorship and harassment.
    • Low Awareness of Press Challenges: The reversed gap suggests a lack of public awareness about the extent of media control, censorship, or intimidation. Eg: Many Indians attribute misinformation to social media platforms rather than government control.
    • Potential for Justifying State Control: Since many believe the media is already free, there is less pressure on governments to ensure genuine press freedom, and greater acceptance of censorship. Eg: High public tolerance allows laws and actions against journalists to go unchallenged.

    Way forward: 

    • Enhance Media Literacy and Public Awareness: Launch nationwide campaigns to educate citizens about the role of a free press, the risks of censorship, and the importance of independent journalism. Eg: School curricula and public broadcasts can include modules on identifying misinformation and understanding media freedom.
    • Strengthen Institutional Safeguards for Press Freedom: Enact legal and institutional reforms to protect journalists from harassment, ensure transparency in state actions, and promote accountability in media regulation. Eg: Independent media commissions and judicial safeguards against misuse of laws like UAPA.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2014] What do you understand by the concept “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it cover hate speech also? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of expression? Discuss.

    Linkage: “Freedom of speech and expression”, which is guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution and forms the fundamental basis for press freedom in India. 

  • [10th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Will Aviation Disputes be easier to Resolve?

    PYQ Relevance:

    Question: “If the last few decades were of Asia’s growth story, the next few are expected to be of Africa’s.” In the light of this statement, examine India’s influence in Africa in recent years. [UPSC 2021]

    Linkage: The broader context of competition for influence in the continent. 

    Mentor’s Comment:  The aviation sector is vital for India’s economic growth, connectivity, and global integration. The Protection of Interests in Aircraft Objects Bill, 2025 strengthens legal protections for lessors, encouraging foreign investment and lowering leasing costs. This directly supports fleet expansion, enhances regional connectivity, and boosts India’s ambition to become a global aviation hub, especially through GIFT City.

    Today’s editorial talks about the aviation sector, which is a key part of India’s infrastructure. This topic is useful for GS Paper 3 (Infrastructure) and GS Paper 2 (Policy and Governance) in the UPSC exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Last week, Parliament passed the Protection of Interests in Aircraft Objects Bill, 2025. This new law sets up a legal system to handle disputes between airlines and aircraft lessors over valuable aviation assets like planes, helicopters, and engines.

    What is the main objective of the Protection of Interests in Aircraft Objects Bill, 2025?

    • To Protect Aircraft Lessors’ Rights: The Bill allows aircraft lessors to repossess aircraft and engines swiftly in case of default by airlines. Eg: During GoFirst’s insolvency (2023), lessors couldn’t recover their planes due to legal delays—this Bill now provides legal backing for quicker repossession.
    • To Implement the Cape Town Convention and Protocol: Aligns Indian aviation law with global standards to enhance legal predictability and reduce risk for international investors. Eg: Many countries that have implemented the Convention see lower leasing costs and more confidence from global leasing firms.
    • To Boost Investment and Reduce Costs in Aviation: Encourages leasing activity in India (especially at GIFT City) by reducing legal and financial uncertainties, lowering aircraft leasing costs by up to 8–10%. Eg: IndiGo and Air India’s fleet expansion could benefit from cheaper leases, ultimately leading to lower operational costs.

    What was the Cape Town Convention in 2008?

    The Cape Town Convention is an international treaty designed to standardize and protect the rights of creditors (like aircraft lessors) in transactions involving high-value mobile assets, especially in aviation, rail, and space sectors.

    Why was the Bill needed despite India signing the Cape Town Convention in 2008?

    • Lack of Implementing Legislation in India: Though India signed the Convention in 2008, it did not pass a domestic law to give it legal force. Eg: Courts couldn’t apply the Convention directly, leading to confusion during airline insolvency cases like GoFirst.
    • Conflict with Existing Indian Laws: Domestic laws such as the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) often clashed with the Convention’s provisions. Eg: In GoFirst’s 2023 case, NCLT imposed a moratorium that barred lessors from repossessing aircraft, conflicting with the Convention’s rights.
    • Low Compliance Score on Global Index: India scored low on the Cape Town Compliance Index (score of 50 out of 100), reducing global confidence. Eg: Lessors viewed India as high-risk, making leasing more expensive and legally uncertain.
    • Previous Airline Failures Exposed Legal Gaps: Airline shutdowns like Kingfisher, SpiceJet, and GoFirst highlighted legal ambiguities in asset repossession. Eg: Lessors struggled for months to retrieve aircraft and were also burdened with costs like parking fees.
    • To Encourage Investment and Reduce Risk Perception: The absence of a robust legal mechanism discouraged foreign leasing firms from doing business in India. Eg: The new Bill aims to improve investor sentiment and facilitate cheaper leases for growing airlines like IndiGo and Air India.

    How did legal conflicts affect aircraft repossession during GoFirst’s insolvency?

    • Moratorium under IBC Prevented Repossession: The NCLT imposed a moratorium that barred lessors from reclaiming their aircraft, despite defaults by GoFirst. Eg: Lessors were legally restricted from de-registering and removing aircraft even though the Cape Town Convention allows it.
    • Delay in Aircraft Maintenance and Access: Legal restrictions also denied lessors access to their aircraft for routine maintenance, risking airworthiness. Eg: Aircraft parked at airports couldn’t be inspected or serviced, causing additional losses to lessors.
    • Lessors Incurred Extra Operational Costs: Lessors had to pay dues on behalf of GoFirst, including airport handling, parking, and office space charges. Eg: These unexpected expenses made the leasing business financially unviable under Indian legal conditions.

    What concerns do lessors have about India’s tax regime and GIFT City push?

    • Stringent Tax Scrutiny under GAAR: India’s General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR), implemented in 2017, allows tax authorities to deny tax benefits if a leasing company is deemed to exist solely for tax-saving purposes without substantial commercial activity. Eg: Lessors cannot merely establish a shell entity in GIFT City to avail tax perks; they must demonstrate genuine business operations, unlike the more lenient frameworks in countries like Ireland.
    • Challenges in Financing Support: Unlike other global leasing hubs, Indian banks are cautious about lending to airlines due to past airline failures, leading lessors to rely on overseas funding, which increases costs. Eg: European banks support leasing businesses in Ireland, but in India, the absence of similar backing means lessors face higher financing costs.
    • Uncertainty in Tax Incentives Implementation: While GIFT City offers tax incentives, ambiguity in their application and interpretation by tax officials can lead to procedural delays and increased compliance burdens. Eg: Lessors may face delays due to unclear tax exemption procedures, affecting their operational efficiency.
    • Requirement to Establish Physical Presence: The push for lessors to set up operations in GIFT City necessitates a physical presence, involving additional costs and administrative efforts. Eg: Lessors must establish offices and staff in GIFT City to comply with regulatory requirements, unlike jurisdictions that allow more flexible arrangements.
    • Regulatory and Operational Challenges: Despite incentives, lessors face regulatory hurdles and operational challenges, such as the absence of an airport in GIFT City, complicating logistics for leased aircraft. Eg: Newly leased aircraft need proper parking facilities, and the lack of an airport in GIFT City poses logistical issues.

    Way forward: 

    • Enact and Operationalize the Bill Swiftly: The government should ensure the Protection of Interests in Aircraft Objects Bill, 2025 is not only passed but implemented effectively, with clarity on how it interacts with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and other domestic laws.
    • Enhance Infrastructure and Regulatory Clarity at GIFT City: India should build supportive infrastructure (like an airport) in or near GIFT City and offer clear, predictable tax and regulatory policies to attract top-tier leasing companies.

  • [9th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Why is active mobility necessary in India?

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2024] Why do large cities tend to attract more migrants than smaller towns? Discuss in the light of conditions in developing countries.

    Linkage:  Increasing urbanisation and the consequent challenges in large cities, such as traffic congestion and strain on infrastructure, which active mobility can help alleviate by providing alternative modes of transport.

     

    Mentor’s Comment: Active mobility is getting more attention in India because of growing traffic jams, pollution, health problems, and more deaths of people walking on the roads. The government is now focusing more on sustainable transport through policies like the National Transit Oriented Development (NTOD) policy and the Smart Cities Mission. At the same time, global efforts like the Paris Agreement are pushing countries to cut carbon emissions and support environment-friendly ways of travel.

    Today’s editorial highlights why active mobility is important for India. This topic is useful for UPSC Mains preparation, especially for GS Paper 2 (governance, health, and urban planning) and GS Paper 3 (environment, infrastructure, and sustainable development).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Accidental deaths and injuries of pedestrians, cyclists, street vendors, and others are increasing in metro cities of India.

    What is Active Mobility?

    Active mobility refers to human-powered transportation modes like walking, cycling, and skateboarding used for commuting, promoting sustainability, public health, and reduced pollution, without relying on motorised vehicles or fuel.

     

    Why are accidental deaths and injuries of pedestrians, cyclists increasing in metro cities of India?

    • Encroachment of Dedicated Lanes: Even when cities build footpaths or cycling tracks, they are often occupied by motor vehicles, street vendors, or parked cars, making them unsafe. Eg: In Delhi and Bengaluru, two-wheelers and cars frequently use cycle lanes during traffic jams, forcing cyclists onto busy roads.
    • Lack of Proper Infrastructure and Road Design: Many urban roads lack continuous, well-marked, and safe pedestrian crossings or protected bike lanes, leading to risky road usage. Example: Mumbai’s arterial roads have few safe pedestrian crossings, leading to frequent jaywalking and accidents.
    • Poor Enforcement of Traffic Rules: Drivers often ignore speed limits, red lights, and pedestrian right-of-way due to weak law enforcement, increasing accident risks for non-motorised users. Example: In Chennai, despite designated zebra crossings, vehicles rarely stop for pedestrians, leading to unsafe road conditions.

    Why is active mobility gaining attention in urban planning and national policies?

    • Rising Traffic Congestion and Air Pollution: Active mobility offers a sustainable solution to reduce vehicle load and emissions in crowded cities. Eg: Delhi’s EV Policy promotes cycling and walking infrastructure to curb air pollution and decongest roads.
    • Public Health and Lifestyle Benefits: Walking and cycling improve physical and mental health, reducing the burden on healthcare systems. Eg: WHO supports active transport to combat lifestyle diseases like obesity, diabetes, and heart ailments.
    • High Rates of Pedestrian and Cyclist Fatalities: Inadequate infrastructure has made Indian roads unsafe for non-motorised users, triggering urgent reforms. Eg: Karnataka Active Mobility Bill, 2022 was drafted after the state reported the highest pedestrian deaths in 2020 (13%).
    • Climate Change Commitments and Sustainable Goals: Active mobility helps reduce carbon emissions and supports international commitments like the Paris Agreement. Eg: The National Transit Oriented Development (NTOD) Policy integrates eco-friendly transport in urban planning.
    • Inclusion in Smart Cities and Urban Missions: Government schemes now prioritise walkable, cyclist-friendly cities for better liveability and accessibility. Eg: Pune developed over 300 km of dedicated cycle lanes under its Comprehensive Bicycle Plan.

    What has WHO said about Active mobility?

    • Health Benefits: Active mobility helps combat physical inactivity, which leads to nearly 1 million deaths annually in the WHO European Region. Regular walking and cycling lower the chances of developing noncommunicable diseases such as cancer, type-2 diabetes, obesity, and heart disease. Eg: Just 20 minutes of cycling or 30 minutes of walking a day can reduce the risk of death by over 10%.
    • Environmental Impact: Opting for active transport instead of motorised vehicles helps curb greenhouse gas emissions, cuts down air pollution—which is responsible for over 500,000 deaths in Europe each year—and reduces energy use and noise. Eg: Cities prioritising cycling and pedestrian zones experience cleaner air and quieter surroundings.
    • Economic and Social Benefits: Active mobility drives green job creation and lowers the economic burden of healthcare related to lifestyle diseases. It also improves inclusivity by offering affordable, accessible mobility options to people across income groups. Eg: Investment in pedestrian zones often boosts local economies and enhances community interaction.
    • Global Initiatives: WHO leads programs like the Global Action Plan on Physical Activity and regional collaborations such as THE PEP (Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme). These aim to reduce global physical inactivity by 15% by 2030 through integrated, measurable efforts.

    Where have Indian cities taken steps to improve infrastructure for active mobility?

    • Chennai’s Non-Motorized Transport (NMT) Policy: Chennai was the first Indian city to adopt a dedicated NMT policy in 2014, allocating 60% of its transport budget to pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. The city has transformed over 100 km of streets with better footpaths, improved access to bus stops, and inaugurated the Pondy Bazaar Pedestrian Plaza, a model public space. with underground utilities and seating areas.
    • Coimbatore’s NMT Network Plan: Coimbatore developed a comprehensive NMT network plan focusing on creating 290 km of safe roads for walking and cycling. This initiative aims to improve safety, increase the share of non-motorized transport, and benefit approximately 1 million residents by 2035.
    • India Cycles4Change and Streets4People Challenges: Launched under the Smart Cities Mission, these initiatives have inspired 33 cities to implement over 570 km of walking and cycling projects, with an additional 1,400 km under development. These programs have encouraged cities to prioritize active mobility as part of their urban planning.
    • Surat and Pimpri-Chinchwad’s Active Mobility Efforts: Surat and Pimpri-Chinchwad have created dedicated public transport funds that support walking and cycling infrastructure. These cities are integrating active mobility into their broader urban development plans to make streets more people-centric.

    How do other countries like the Netherlands and Germany promote active mobility successfully?

    Key Factor Description Example
    Extensive Dedicated Infrastructure Safe, continuous networks of cycling and walking paths. Netherlands – Over 35,000 km of cycling lanes for daily and commuter use.
    Pro-Pedestrian and Cycling Laws Legal systems prioritize non-motorised users with right of way and protection. Germany – Berlin Mobility Act gives cyclists and pedestrians legal priority.
    Speed Regulations & Traffic Calming Low-speed zones in urban areas to reduce accidents and promote walking/cycling. Germany – Urban areas enforce 30 km/h speed limits.
    Integration with Public Transport Active mobility combined with public transport through parking, rentals, and policies. Netherlands – Railway stations offer bicycle parking and rental services.
    Cultural Normalisation & Education Awareness campaigns and education embed active mobility in daily life. Netherlands – Children are taught cycling and road safety from an early age.

    Way forward: 

    • Institutional Integration and Funding: Mandate dedicated NMT (Non-Motorised Transport) cells and budget allocations in all urban local bodies to ensure planning, execution, and maintenance of active mobility infrastructure.
    • Behavioural Change and Awareness: Launch nationwide campaigns and school-based programs to promote cycling and walking as safe, healthy, and aspirational choices for daily commute.

  • How the police view custodial torture in India

    Why in the News?

    The data shows that many police officers accept using forceful methods like shouting, threatening, slapping, or even harsh physical torture during investigations, even for small crimes.

    How the police view custodial torture in India

    What proportion of police support violence against serious offenders for the greater good?

    • Majority Support Violence: 63% of police personnel believe it’s acceptable to use violence on serious offenders for the greater good of society. Eg: Officers may justify beating a suspected murderer if they believe it helps prevent future crimes.
    • Strong vs Moderate Support: Among those who agreed, 22% strongly agreed and 41% moderately agreed with using violence. Eg: Some officers might strongly feel torture is necessary in terrorism cases, while others may support limited force.
    • Opposition is Minor: Only 35% of police personnel opposed the idea of violence, showing that a minority disagrees with such practices. Eg: These officers might believe in legal methods like investigation and interrogation without physical harm.

    How does this infringe Fundamental Rights? 

    • Violation of Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21): Coercive actions like custodial torture and third-degree methods breach the right to live with dignity. Eg: A suspect beaten during interrogation suffers physical and mental trauma without legal conviction.
    • Denial of Protection Against Self-Incrimination (Article 20(3)): Forcing suspects to confess under pressure or torture violates their right to remain silent during interrogation. Eg: A person forced to admit guilt in a theft case, even if innocent, due to police pressure.
    • Breach of Equality Before Law (Article 14): Targeting specific individuals like history-sheeters or the poor with harsh treatment undermines equal legal protection. Eg: Repeat offenders being tortured without due process, while others get fair legal treatment.

    Why do many police personnel justify torture in national security and serious crime cases?

    • Perceived Urgency in National Security Cases: Many police believe torture is necessary to extract crucial information in time-sensitive situations like terrorism. Eg: 42% of police personnel strongly supported torture during terrorism-related interrogations.
    • Belief in Strong Punishment for Heinous Crimes: Officers feel that serious crimes such as rape and murder deserve harsher treatment to deliver justice quickly. Eg: 34% of police strongly supported torture in cases involving rape and serious violent crimes.
    • Assumption that Certain Suspects Are Repeat Offenders: There’s a mindset that “history-sheeters” don’t respond to normal interrogation, justifying harsher methods. Eg: 28% of police strongly agreed that torture is justified for repeat or habitual offenders.

    What are the coercive methods that police frequently justify during interrogations, even for minor offenses?

    • Verbal Abuse and Threats: A large portion of police personnel find it acceptable to verbally abuse or threaten suspects in minor crimes like theft. Eg: 49% said such verbal abuse and threats are justified even in petty cases.
    • Slapping Suspects: Physical force such as slapping is often seen as a mild and acceptable tactic. Eg: 32% of police justified slapping suspects during minor offence investigations.
    • Use of Third-Degree Methods: Even for minor crimes, some support more extreme measures like third-degree torture to get confessions. Eg: 9% of personnel justified using third-degree methods in minor cases.
    • Threats as Routine Practice: Many police reported that threats are a frequent part of their interrogation techniques. Eg: 26% said threats are used “often” during investigations; 34% said they occur “sometimes.”
    • Light Force Considered Normal: Slapping or applying light physical force is not seen as excessive by a significant number of police officers. Eg: 18% admitted it’s commonly done, and another 28% said it happens occasionally.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government? 

    • Implementation of Guidelines by Supreme Court: The government follows the D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal (1996) guidelines issued by the Supreme Court to prevent custodial violence. Eg: Police are required to inform relatives of an arrest and maintain arrest records.
    • Enactment of Human Rights Protection Laws: The government established legal bodies to monitor human rights violations. Eg: The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 led to the creation of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).
    • Police Reforms and Training Programs: Reforms aim to modernize police functioning and encourage ethical conduct through training. Eg: The National Police Mission promotes citizen-centric policing and sensitization on human rights.

    Way forward: 

    • Independent Investigation and Accountability Mechanisms: Establish robust, independent bodies at the state level to investigate complaints of custodial violence and misconduct. Eg: Set up Police Complaints Authorities (PCA) with judicial oversight to ensure fair and transparent inquiries into custodial torture.
    • Comprehensive Sensitisation and Legal Training: Mandate regular training for police personnel on human rights, ethical investigation practices, and legal procedures. Eg: Include modules on constitutional rights, custodial safeguards, and mental health awareness in police academies and refresher courses.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2019] The police reforms in India have been left halfway due to lack of political will. Critically analyse.

    Linkage: The ongoing justification of coercive tactics, even in minor crimes, shows ineffective implementation of police reforms in India. It remains incomplete, largely due to a lack of political will, weak implementation, and cultural resistance within the force.

  • Only 12% of HC judges disclosed assets, data show

    Why in the News?

    Out of 769 judges serving in 25 High Courts, only 95 (12.35%) have disclosed their assets publicly. Courts like Kerala (93.18%) and Himachal Pradesh (91.66%) lead in transparency, while Madras (5 of 65) and Chhattisgarh (1 of 16) lag significantly.

    Only 12% of HC judges disclosed assets, data show

    Why is judicial asset disclosure vital for accountability and transparency in India?

    • Promotes Public Trust in the Judiciary: Transparency about judges’ financial status builds confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the judiciary. Eg: The Kerala High Court, where 93.18% of judges disclosed their assets, is often cited for maintaining high standards of judicial transparency.
    • Acts as a Deterrent Against Corruption: Mandatory and public asset declarations reduce the scope for corrupt practices by subjecting judges to public scrutiny. Eg: The recent discovery of partially burnt currency notes at a High Court judge’s residence intensified concerns over hidden wealth and lack of oversight.
    • Ensures Accountability of Public Office Holders: Judges are public servants paid from taxpayer money, and like elected representatives, must be held financially accountable. Eg: The Supreme Court’s past judgment requiring MPs/MLAs to declare assets reflects this principle — the same logic applies to the judiciary.
    • Reduces Risk of Conflict of Interest: Regular disclosures help identify any undue financial interest that could influence judicial decisions. Eg: A judge ruling on a corporate dispute may be biased if they own shares in one of the companies involved — disclosures would reveal this.
    • Strengthens Institutional Transparency and Ethics: It sets an ethical benchmark for the judiciary and other branches of government, promoting clean and transparent governance. Eg: The Supreme Court’s recent Full Court resolution (April 2025) to make all judges’ assets public reflects a significant move toward institutional integrity.

    How can the Supreme Court’s asset disclosure push drive wider judicial reforms?

    • Sets a Precedent for High Courts: The Supreme Court’s collective decision encourages other High Courts to adopt similar transparency measures, creating a ripple effect across the judiciary. Eg: After the Supreme Court’s Full Court resolution (April 2025), pressure has increased on High Courts like Madras and Chhattisgarh, where disclosure rates remain low.
    • Catalyzes Legislative and Policy Reforms: The move strengthens the case for mandatory annual disclosures through legislation, as recommended by parliamentary committees. Eg: The 2023 Parliamentary Standing Committee Report called for laws requiring asset declarations by all judges — the Supreme Court’s step gives it momentum.
    • Promotes a Culture of Judicial Accountability and Ethics: Voluntary public disclosures help build a culture of openness, paving the way for broader reforms like transparent appointments, performance reviews, and grievance redressal. Eg: Similar transparency efforts contributed to the creation of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) debate and ongoing calls for reforming the collegium system.

    Who are the key institutions responsible for enforcing judges’ asset disclosure?

    • The Supreme Court of India: As the apex judicial authority, the Supreme Court plays a norm-setting role, influencing High Courts through its own practices and resolutions. Eg: The Full Court resolution of April 2025, where all 33 Supreme Court judges agreed to make their asset declarations public, sets a national benchmark for judicial transparency.
    • High Courts and Their Chief Justices: Each High Court is responsible for framing internal guidelines and encouraging or mandating its judges to disclose assets. Eg: The Kerala High Court, where 41 out of 44 judges have declared their assets, demonstrates effective internal leadership and commitment to transparency.
    • Parliament and Parliamentary Standing Committees: Through legislative oversight and recommendations, Parliament can initiate legal mandates for asset disclosures and hold the judiciary accountable in the public interest. Eg: The 2023 Standing Committee Report on Judicial Reforms recommended that the government make annual property disclosures by all judges a statutory requirement.

    Way forward: 

    • Enact a Statutory Framework for Mandatory Annual Disclosures: The government should introduce legislation making annual asset and liability declarations mandatory for all judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. This would ensure uniformity, legal backing, and prevent selective or voluntary compliance.
    • Establish an Independent Oversight Mechanism for Verification and Monitoring: Set up an independent judicial accountability commission or ethics body to verify disclosures, monitor compliance, and address grievances related to judicial integrity.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2021] “An independent and empowered social audit mechanism is an absolute must in every sphere of public service, including the judiciary, to ensure performance, accountability and ethical conduct. Elaborate

    Linkage:  Disclosure of assets is important to ensure that judges act responsibly and ethically. It helps build trust among the people and also supports the authority of the Constitution.

  • SAHYOG must adhere to the safeguards and procedures in Section 69A of IT Act

    Why in the News?

    Social media platform X told the Delhi High Court that it cannot be forced to join the government’s SAHYOG portal, raising concerns that the portal might be misused to restrict online content.

    What is the SAHYOG portal?

    • The SAHYOG portal is an initiative by India’s Ministry of Home Affairs designed to streamline the process of identifying and removing unlawful online content. 
    • It serves as a centralized platform that connects authorized government agencies with online intermediaries, such as social media platforms, to facilitate the automated issuance of notices under the Information Technology Act, 2000.

    How does the government justify the creation of SAHYOG portal?

    • Enhancing Law Enforcement Efficiency: The government argues that SAHYOG enables faster coordination between law enforcement agencies, social media platforms, and telecom providers to remove unlawful content swiftly. Example: During communal riots, law enforcement can quickly flag and remove misinformation that could incite violence.
    • Legal Obligation Under IT Act: The government justifies SAHYOG under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, which mandates that intermediaries remove content upon receiving government notification to retain their safe harbour protection. Example: If a government agency reports a post promoting terrorism, the platform must take it down to comply with the law.
    • Court-Mandated Need for Real-Time Action: The government cites the Delhi High Court’s observation in Shabana vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors., which highlighted the necessity of a real-time content removal mechanism to handle urgent cases. Example: In cases of child exploitation content, immediate action through SAHYOG ensures rapid takedown and prevents further harm.

    Why has X (formerly Twitter) challenged the SAHYOG portal in the Delhi High Court?

    • Existence of an Independent Mechanism: X asserts that it has its own system to process valid legal requests for content removal and cannot be compelled to join the SAHYOG portal.
    • Legal Concerns Over Parallel Mechanisms: The company argues that the SAHYOG portal creates a parallel content removal mechanism without the stringent legal safeguards outlined in Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
    • Potential for Unchecked Censorship: X is concerned that the portal could lead to unrestrained censorship by allowing multiple government officials to issue content removal orders without proper oversight.

    How does Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act differ from Section 69A in terms of content takedown provisions?

    Aspect Section 79(3)(b) Section 69A
    Nature of Obligation
    • Intermediaries (social media platforms, websites) must remove content if they have “actual knowledge” of illegality or receive a court/government order.
    • The government can directly block content if it threatens national security, public order, or sovereignty.
    Who Issues Takedown Orders?
    • Takedown is required based on court orders or government notifications; intermediaries must act or lose their safe harbor protection.
    • Only the central government can order content blocking through a confidential process.
    Legal Safeguards & Due Process
    • Provides some scope for judicial review, as takedown requests are often based on court rulings.
    • Decisions are made secretly by a government committee, limiting transparency and legal recourse.
    Scope of Application
    • Applies broadly to any illegal content, including defamation, copyright violations, and hate speech.
    • Targets content affecting national security, public order, or friendly relations with foreign states.
    Example Scenarios
    • If a court finds a defamatory post on social media, the platform must remove it.
    • The government can block TikTok or ban certain tweets for national security concerns (e.g., India’s TikTok ban in 2020).

     

    Who are the key stakeholders involved in the SAHYOG portal’s implementation and legal challenge?

    • Government Authorities: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) developed the SAHYOG portal to enhance coordination between law enforcement agencies and social media platforms for combating cybercrime. The portal aims to automate the process of sending notices to intermediaries for the removal or disabling of unlawful online content.
    • Social Media Platforms (Intermediaries): Companies like X Corp (formerly Twitter) are directly impacted by the portal’s operations. X Corp has legally challenged the government’s use of the SAHYOG portal, arguing that it functions as a censorship tool by bypassing established legal safeguards and infringing upon constitutional rights such as freedom of speech.
    • Judiciary: The Delhi High Court plays a pivotal role in adjudicating disputes related to the SAHYOG portal. It has urged various states, union territories, and intermediaries to join the portal to effectively combat cybercrime, while also addressing grievances from law enforcement agencies regarding data access from intermediaries.

    Where does the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India come into play in the debate over SAHYOG?

    • Precedent on Online Free Speech & Due Process: The Shreya Singhal ruling struck down Section 66A of the IT Act for being vague and overbroad, while upholding Section 69A with due process requirements, including hearings for content creators. Example: A journalist’s tweet flagged via SAHYOG may be removed without an opportunity to challenge it, violating Shreya Singhal principles.
    • Judicial Safeguards & Preventing Arbitrary Censorship: Shreya Singhal upheld Section 69A but mandated transparent procedures, review committees, and justifications for content blocking. Example: If SAHYOG bulk blocks dissenting voices without an independent review, it could breach Shreya Singhal safeguards.

    Way forward: 

    • Ensure Judicial Oversight & Accountability – Implement an independent review mechanism to prevent arbitrary censorship and align with the Shreya Singhal ruling.
    • Enhance Transparency & Due Process – Mandate clear guidelines, periodic transparency reports, and an appeal system for content takedown decisions.

    Mains PYQ:

    Question: Discuss Section 66A of IT Act, with reference to its alleged violation of Article 19 of the Constitution. [UPSC 2013]

    Linkage: This question linked with regulation of online content and the potential restrictions on freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution. This is relevant because content takedown provisions are also a form of regulating online speech and need to be consistent with constitutional rights. 

  • The challenge of policing digital giants

    Why in the News?

    On November 18, 2024, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a fine of ₹213.14 crore on Meta Platforms, Inc., for abusing its dominant position through WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy. This landmark decision underscores the growing intersection of competition law and data privacy, marking a significant step in regulating digital markets in India.

    What were the key findings of the Competition Commission of India (CCI)?

    • Abuse of Dominant Position in OTT Messaging & Online Advertising: CCI found that WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy update forced users to mandatorily consent to data sharing with Meta (Facebook, Instagram), strengthening WhatsApp’s dominance.  
    • Unfair Data Collection & Competitive Advantage: Meta leveraged WhatsApp’s vast user base to collect personal data, creating an unfair advantage in digital advertising by refining targeted ads.
    • Potential Harm to Consumer Privacy & Competition: The policy update allowed cross-platform data sharing, which CCI considered an unfair trade practice that compromised user privacy and created barriers for rival messaging apps.  
    • Violation of Fair Market Practices & Entry Barriers: The data-sharing policy made it difficult for new entrants to compete, as they lacked access to similar user insights, reinforcing Meta’s market position. Example: Startups like Telegram faced challenges in growing due to WhatsApp’s entrenched market power and data-driven network effects.
    • Imposition of Fine & Behavioral Remedies: CCI fined Meta ₹213.14 crore and imposed a five-year ban on sharing WhatsApp user data with Facebook and Instagram for advertising purposes. Example: This aimed to limit Meta’s ability to exploit its dominant position and create a level playing field in India’s digital ecosystem.

    Why did the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) grant a stay on CCI’s five-year ban and penalty imposed on Meta?

    • Prima Facie Case for Meta: NCLAT found grounds to review CCI’s decision, indicating that Meta’s appeal had merit and required further examination. Example: Meta argued that its privacy policy update did not force users but offered them a choice, which needed deeper legal scrutiny.
    • Irreparable Harm to Meta’s Business: The five-year ban on sharing WhatsApp user data with Facebook and Instagram could cause significant financial and operational disruption to Meta’s business. Example: Meta claimed that restricting data integration would affect its targeted advertising model, reducing its revenue from India.
    • Dominance and anti-competitive effects: NCLAT noted that CCI’s conclusions on abuse of dominance and anti-competitive effects required further legal and economic analysis before enforcement. Example: The tribunal wanted to assess whether the policy update genuinely harmed consumers or merely provided better services through personalized ads.
    • Balance of Convenience: The tribunal ruled that temporarily halting the penalty and data-sharing ban would not cause immediate harm to consumers but would protect Meta from disproportionate damages while the case was under review. Example: If Meta had to immediately comply but later won the appeal, reversing the business impact would be difficult.
    • Conditional Relief with Partial Penalty Payment: NCLAT granted the stay but directed Meta to deposit 50% of the ₹213.14 crore penalty, ensuring some accountability while legal proceedings continued. Example: This allowed Meta to continue operations without full compliance but ensured it remained engaged in the legal process.

    How does data play a role in creating and sustaining dominance in digital markets?

    • Data-Driven Network Effects: More users generate more data, which improves algorithms and services, attracting even more users, creating a self-reinforcing loop. Example: Google’s search engine improves as more users search, making its results better than competitors, reinforcing its market dominance.
    • Competitive Barrier Through Data Aggregation: Large tech firms collect massive user data across multiple services, making it hard for new entrants to compete due to a lack of comparable datasets. Example: Meta collects data from Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, allowing it to offer highly personalized ads, making it difficult for smaller ad platforms to compete.
    • Monetization & Market Lock-In: Companies use vast data pools to refine targeted advertising, personalize user experiences, and create dependencies, discouraging users from switching. Example: Amazon leverages consumer purchase data to optimize product recommendations, making it harder for new e-commerce platforms to attract customers.

    Which global regulatory actions have been taken against Meta and Google for their anti-competitive practices?

    • Heavy Antitrust Fines: Governments have imposed billions in fines on Meta and Google for abusing their market dominance. Example: The European Commission fined Google €8 billion across three cases, including unfair dominance in mobile operating systems (Android) and online advertising.
      • Similarly, the Bundeskartellamt (Germany’s Federal Cartel Office) found Meta guilty of merging user data without consent, violating EU competition law and GDPR.
    • Structural and Behavioral Restrictions: Authorities have enforced regulatory measures like breaking up monopolistic control, imposing interoperability, and preventing self-preferencing. Example: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a lawsuit against Meta for acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp to eliminate competition.
      • The Digital Markets Act (DMA) in the EU now mandates that dominant firms like Meta and Google ensure fair access to platforms, prevent self-preferencing, and allow third-party data-sharing.

    What should be amendments in India’s Competition Act, 2002 to address data-centric monopolies? (Way forward)

    • Recognizing “Data Monopolization” as a Form of Market Power: The Act should explicitly define data dominance as a key factor in determining market power and abuse of dominance.
      • Example: The EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) considers large data control a sign of dominance. India could adopt similar provisions to regulate companies like Meta and Google that leverage massive user data to eliminate competition.
    • Mandatory Interoperability and Data-Sharing Regulations: The Act should mandate interoperability and restrict exclusive data-sharing agreements that create entry barriers for competitors.
      • Example: In Germany, Meta was restricted from combining user data across platforms without explicit consent. Similarly, India could prevent dominant firms from self-preferencing their services and enforce data portability rules to promote fair competition.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q How have digital initiatives in India contributed to the functioning of the educational system in the country? Elaborate your answer.” (UPSC 2020)

    Reason: This question underscores the significant impact of digital platforms on key sectors. The influence of digital giants extends to education (e.g., online learning platforms, content distribution), highlighting their pervasive role and the need for understanding and potentially regulating their impact.

  • More signs of overhauling the compliance framework

    Why in the News?

    Despite ongoing efforts to fight corruption, bureaucratic delays and bribery continue to be major obstacles to business growth in India.

    What are the key sectors in India most affected by corruption and red-tapism, according to the “India Business Corruption Survey 2024”?

    •  Persistent Corruption and Bureaucratic Hurdles: Despite ongoing reforms, the India Business Corruption Survey 2024 reveals that 66% of businesses admit to paying bribes, with 54% coerced into doing so to expedite processes or secure necessary permits.
      • Sectors like GST, income tax, and property registration remain particularly vulnerable to corrupt practices, posing significant challenges to business growth.
    • Deterrent to Foreign Investment: According to the EY-FICCI survey, 80% of respondents view corruption as a major obstacle to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in India. This highlights the urgent need for comprehensive reforms to establish a transparent and predictable regulatory environment conducive to both domestic and international business.
    • Incomplete Compliance Reforms: While the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 and the proposed Jan Vishwas 2.0 aim to decriminalise a combined total of around 280 provisions, over 20,000 provisions with imprisonment clauses remain unaddressed.

    What are the four new labour codes?

    • Code on Wages (2019): Standardizes wage-related laws, including minimum wages, timely payments, and equal pay for equal work.
    • Industrial Relations Code (2020): Simplifies rules on trade unions, industrial disputes, and employment terms, allowing fixed-term employment.
    • Occupational Safety, Health, and Working Conditions Code (2020): Ensures safe working environments, better health standards, and welfare for all workers across industries.
    • Code on Social Security (2020): Expands social security benefits like provident funds, insurance, and maternity benefits, including gig and platform workers.

    Why is the implementation of the four new labour codes crucial for India’s business environment?

    • Simplification of Labour Laws: The four labour codes consolidate 29 existing laws, reducing complexity and making it easier for businesses to understand and comply with legal requirements. For instance, companies no longer need to navigate multiple regulations for wages, as the Code on Wages standardizes definitions and payment rules across sectors.
    • Enhancing Ease of Doing Business: By reducing regulatory overlaps and streamlining compliance, the labour codes cut down bureaucratic delays and corruption risks. For example, under the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, a single license can cover multiple locations, simplifying operations for large businesses.
    • Greater Workforce Flexibility: The new codes allow for fixed-term employment, enabling businesses to manage workforce needs based on demand without lengthy contractual obligations. For instance, manufacturing firms can now hire temporary workers for seasonal production spikes without facing penalties under outdated laws.
    • Ensuring Social Security for Workers: The Social Security Code extends benefits like provident funds and health insurance to gig and platform workers, expanding the safety net. For example, delivery personnel working for online platforms now qualify for social welfare schemes, improving job security and worker welfare.

    How can a digital-first approach, such as the ‘One Nation, One Business’ identity system, reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies and corruption in India?

    • Simplified Business Registrations and Compliance: Currently, businesses need multiple identifiers like PAN, GSTIN, CIN, and state-specific licenses, leading to duplication and delays.
      • A ‘One Nation, One Business’ system would unify these into a single digital identity, reducing the need for repetitive filings and lowering the chances of officials demanding bribes for faster processing.
    • Reduced Human Discretion and Corruption: Digital systems provide automated checks and real-time tracking of applications, minimizing manual intervention.
      • Businesses applying for pollution control certificates or labour permits could do so online, reducing face-to-face interactions where unofficial payments are often demanded to expedite approvals.
    • Faster Approvals and Increased Transparency: A unified digital platform, similar to DigiLocker, could store pre-verified documents accessible to all regulatory bodies.
      • This would enable faster processing of approvals like property registrations or drug licenses, reducing the delays and informal payments typically required to move applications through bureaucratic bottlenecks.

    What lessons can India learn from global governance models, such as the United States’ Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)?

    • Streamlined Regulatory Processes: The DOGE focuses on simplifying government procedures by reducing redundant regulations and consolidating compliance requirements.
      • India could adopt a similar approach by rationalizing overlapping laws and implementing a single-window clearance system to minimize delays and reduce the scope for corruption.
    • Enhanced Digital Integration: The DOGE promotes digital platforms for real-time monitoring and automated decision-making. India could enhance its Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) by integrating regulatory databases.
    • Performance Accountability: The DOGE enforces outcome-based assessments to measure the efficiency of public officials. India could implement performance metrics for government departments.

    Way forward: 

    • Adopt a Unified Digital Governance Framework: Implement a National Business Identity System to integrate all regulatory processes (e.g., taxation, labour compliance, environmental clearances) under a single digital platform.
    • Strengthen Institutional Accountability and Oversight: Establish an Independent Regulatory Oversight Body to monitor public service delivery using performance-based metrics.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q In the integrity index of Transparency International, India stands very low. Discuss briefly the legal, political, economic, social and cultural factors that have caused the decline of public morality in India. (UPSC IAS/2016)