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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • How are courts protecting personality rights?

    Introduction

    Personality rights, the right to control one’s name, image, likeness, and voice, have become a critical issue in India’s courts. With AI enabling deepfakes, voice cloning, and digital impersonation, Bollywood celebrities like Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, Anil Kapoor, and Jackie Shroff have approached courts to restrain unauthorised commercial exploitation of their persona. While these judicial interventions protect individual dignity and brand equity, they also raise complex questions about the balance between Article 21 (privacy and autonomy) and Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression).

    Why is this in the news?

    The Delhi High Court recently issued orders protecting Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan from AI-generated misuse of their images and voices. This is significant because:

    1. Novel threat: It highlights how AI deepfakes and voice cloning are creating unprecedented risks for identity and privacy.
    2. Judicial trend: Courts are extending personality rights protections to celebrities such as Karan Johar, Amitabh Bachchan, Anil Kapoor, Jackie Shroff, and Arijit Singh.
    3. Big problem: Without regulation, AI-driven impersonation undermines trust, dilutes brand equity, and strips individuals of control over their identity.
    4. Turning point: Courts are now explicitly linking personality rights to Article 21 of the Constitution, signalling a constitutional recognition of digital dignity.

    How are personality rights defined in India?

    1. Safeguards: Personality rights protect name, likeness, image, voice, signature, and other unique traits.
    2. Legal foundation: Rooted in common law doctrines of privacy, publicity, and defamation, supported by judicial precedents.

    Statutory framework:

    1. Copyright Act, 1957: Sections 38A & 38B grant performers exclusive and moral rights over their performances.
    2. Trade Marks Act, 1999: Allows registration of names/signatures as trademarks (e.g., Shah Rukh Khan, Priyanka Chopra).
    3. Tort of Passing Off: Prevents misrepresentation of a celebrity’s persona as endorsement.

    How have courts shaped personality rights?

    1. R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994): Supreme Court recognised the right to control one’s identity, grounding it in privacy under Article 21.
    2. Rajinikanth case (2015): Madras HC restrained unauthorised use of the actor’s persona in a film.
    3. Anil Kapoor case (2023): Delhi HC granted wide-ranging protection, clarifying that free speech covers parody/satire but not commercial misuse.
    4. Jackie Shroff case (2024): Court restrained misuse of his persona on e-commerce and AI platforms.
    5. Arijit Singh case (2024): Bombay HC recognised risks of voice cloning through AI.

    Do personality rights restrict free expression?

    Free speech scope: Article 19(1)(a) allows criticism, parody, satire, and lampooning of public figures.

    Judicial caution:

    1. DM Entertainment v. Baby Gift House (2010): Caricatures and parodies do not usually infringe publicity rights.
    2. Digital Collectibles v. Galactus Funware (2023): Material already in the public domain may be used without implying endorsement.
    3. Balancing test: Courts strike a balance between creative freedom and protection of dignity/brand equity.

    Why is regulation urgently needed?

    1. Fragmented protections: Enforcement is currently piecemeal, relying on case law.
    2. Digital threats: Generative AI expands risks of impersonation and deepfakes.
    3. Disproportionate impact: Ordinary citizens, especially women targeted through revenge porn, face greater harm.
    4. Policy need: Experts call for a comprehensive legislative framework to clearly define exceptions and ensure free speech is not chilled.

    Conclusion

    The judiciary is laying down crucial guardrails for personality rights in the digital age, particularly against AI-driven impersonation. However, without a clear legislative framework, judicial interventions remain reactive. The challenge lies in balancing dignity and privacy with freedom of speech, ensuring that protections do not turn into censorship while still safeguarding individuals, from Bollywood celebrities to ordinary citizens, against misuse of their identity.

    [UPSC 2024] Right to privacy is intrinsic to life and personal liberty and is inherently protected under Article 21 of the constitution. Explain. In this reference discuss the law relating to D.N.A. testing of child in the womb to establish its paternity.

    Linkage: The PYQ on Right to Privacy under Article 21 examines autonomy over personal identity, like in DNA testing. This article is relevant as it shows courts extending privacy into personality rights against AI misuse, with case laws and statutes providing examples to balance privacy and free speech in UPSC answers.

    Value Addition

    Global Context & Reports

    1. WIPO Intellectual Property Report (2022): Notes rapid rise of personality/IP litigation due to digital commerce.
    2. UNESCO Report on AI & Ethics (2021): Warns against deepfakes undermining democratic discourse and human dignity.
    3. US “Right of Publicity” Laws: Celebrities can sue for unauthorised commercial use of their persona, providing comparative perspective.
    4. EU GDPR (2018): Protects personal data, extending indirectly to digital identity misuse.

     

  • Sixth Schedule demand for Ladakh

    Why in the News?

    The recent protests in Ladakh led by activist Sonam Wangchuk, which turned violent, have been driven by demands for inclusion under the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution and a call for statehood.

    Background: Ladakh’s Governance Post Article 370 Repeal

    • Union Territory Recognition: After the 2019 repeal of Article 370, Ladakh became a Union Territory without legislature, unlike Jammu & Kashmir.
    • Local Demands: The Apex Body Leh (ABL) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) have consistently demanded Sixth Schedule inclusion for autonomy and protection of tribal interests.

    Centre’s earlier offer:  

    • Article 371-like Protections: Ministry of Home Affairs proposed safeguards similar to NE states, addressing land, jobs, and cultural protection.
    • Exclusion from Sixth Schedule: Centre ruled out Sixth Schedule inclusion, preferring alternative mechanisms for autonomy.

    What is the Sixth Schedule?

    • Constitutional Basis: Mentioned under Article 244 in Part X of the Constitution.
    • Coverage: Applies only to Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram (ATM²).
    • Relation to Fifth Schedule: The Fifth Schedule covers scheduled areas in other states except these four.

    Salient Features of the Sixth Schedule:

    • Autonomous Districts: Tribal areas are designated as autonomous districts; Governor empowered to create, reorganize, or alter boundaries.
    • District & Regional Councils:
      • Each district council has 30 members (26 elected, 4 nominated).
      • Councils can legislate on land, forest management, shifting cultivation, village administration, inheritance of property, marriage/divorce, and social customs.
      • They run schools, healthcare, markets, and village courts, and can levy certain taxes.
    • Law Application: Acts of Parliament/State may not apply directly or apply with Governor/President’s modifications.
    • Governor’s Authority: Can appoint commissions, examine issues of districts, and dissolve councils based on recommendations.
    • Areas under the Sixth Schedule:
      • Assam: Karbi Anglong, North Cachar Hills, Bodoland Territorial Areas District.
      • Meghalaya: Khasi Hills, Jaintia Hills, Garo Hills.
      • Tripura: Tripura Tribal Areas District.
      • Mizoram: Chakma, Mara, Lai districts.
    [UPSC 2023] With reference to ‘Scheduled Areas’ in India, consider the following statements :

    1. Within a State, the notification of an area as Scheduled Area takes place through an Order of the President.

    2. The largest administrative unit forming the Scheduled Area is the District and the lowest is the cluster of villages in the Block.

    3. The Chief Ministers of the concerned States are required to submit annual reports to the Union Home Ministry on the administration of Scheduled Areas in the States.

    How many of the above statements are correct?

    Options: (a) Only one * (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None

     

  • [24th September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Criminal Defamation is incompatible with democratic debate

    PYQ Relevance

    [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: The 2014 PYQ on freedom of speech, hate speech, and films directly links with criminal defamation as both test the limits of Article 19(1)(a) under Article 19(2). Just as films and hate speech face special restrictions, criminal defamation raises the question of whether jail for reputational harm is a proportionate curb on free expression.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The debate around criminal defamation in India has resurfaced with the Supreme Court itself acknowledging the growing misuse of the law. What began as a safeguard for reputation has increasingly turned into a tool of intimidation, propaganda, and political retribution. This article examines why criminal defamation is incompatible with democratic debate, the disproportionate nature of its penalties, and how its misuse has shaped India’s political and media landscape. We will also provide value additions, practice questions, and related UPSC linkages.

    Introduction

    In 2016, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of criminal defamation in the Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India case, equating reputation with the right to life. However, recent developments show that this reasoning has produced more problems than it has solved. On September 22, Justice M.M. Sundresh expressed concern over the growing use of criminal defamation by political actors and private individuals as a shield against criticism and as a weapon of retribution. With imprisonment prescribed as a penalty, the law now threatens democratic debate, fosters self-censorship, and risks turning the judiciary into a tool for silencing dissent.

    Criminal Defamation in the News

    The issue has returned to the spotlight because of rising judicial unease over its misuse. Justice M.M. Sundresh’s recent remarks highlight how criminal defamation cases are no longer rare or exceptional but routine weapons used by politicians, business interests, and individuals to stifle criticism. From Rahul Gandhi and Shashi Tharoor to journalists and opposition leaders, many face disproportionate litigation that results in prolonged trials, loss of political time, and harassment. This represents not just isolated misuse but a systemic problem that undermines free speech and democratic accountability.

    Defamation (criminal) — statutory text & essentials

    1. Statutory definition: Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code defines defamation as making or publishing an imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, that person’s reputation.
    2. Punishment: Section 500 prescribes simple imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both.
    3. Exceptions: Section 499 contains ten exceptions (e.g., truth for public good, fair comment on public conduct, parliamentary proceedings, etc.) — these are crucial in practice and often determinative in defamation disputes.

    • Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023:

      • Section 354(2) – punishment up to 2 years simple imprisonment, or fine, or both, or community service.
      • Section 356 – covers words, signs, or visible representations harming reputation.
    • Scope: Applies to individuals, companies, and deceased persons if family reputation is harmed.
    • Essential Elements: False statement, harm to reputation, communication to third party, and intent/knowledge of likely harm.
    • Nature of Offence: Non-cognizable and bailable – requires a warrant for arrest; bail available.
    • Digital Extension: Covers defamatory posts on social media, websites, and messaging platforms.
    • Defences/Exceptions: Truth in public interest, fair comment on public servants, judicial proceedings, public performances, and cautionary statements made in good faith.

    Supreme Court timeline (select landmark decisions on defamation) 

    1. S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989): refined the reasonable-restriction test under Article 19(2); held that state action to restrain expression must demonstrate proximate danger (not remote/conjectural). Important when courts assess whether alleged speech is dangerously likely to cause harm.
    2. R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (Auto-Shankar case) (1994): balanced freedom of press with right to privacy; held privacy has constitutional status but public interest/public record may limit privacy claims. Relevant to defamation where publication concerns public servants/official acts.
    3. Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016): Supreme Court upheld constitutionality of Sections 499 and 500, treating reputation as part of human dignity under Article 21 and holding criminal defamation a reasonable restriction on Article 19(1)(a). This remains the leading authority sustaining criminal defamation in India

    Why is criminal defamation disproportionate?

    1. Imprisonment for speech: Criminal defamation proposes jail time for reputational injury, which is disproportionate compared to civil remedies like damages or injunctions.
    2. Nature of harm: Unlike physical injury, reputational harm can be addressed through compensation and retractions, not imprisonment.
    3. Global comparison: Many countries such as the U.K. have abolished criminal defamation laws as incompatible with democratic debate.

    How has the law been misused in politics and media?

    1. Weaponisation of complaints: Political actors distort or take statements out of context, using the threat of jail to suppress opponents. Examples:
      • Editors of The Hindu faced cases under Jayalalithaa’s government.
      • Rahul Gandhi faced criminal defamation for remarks against political leaders.
      • Nitin Gadkari and Arun Jaitley’s cases against Arvind Kejriwal and AAP tied up governance in litigation.
    2. Judicial burden: Lower courts often issue summons without assessing whether the speech crosses the threshold of defamation.

    What is the impact on journalism and public debate?

    1. Intimidation of journalists: Local reporters face harassment from politicians and business groups, including threats of arrest and travel to distant courts.
    2. Self-censorship: The chilling effect forces media houses and individuals to avoid criticism of powerful actors.
    3. Distortion of democratic debate: Criminal defamation converts political disagreements into legal battles, weakening accountability and transparency.

    Are civil remedies a better alternative?

    1. Civil courts as recourse: Aggrieved individuals can seek damages, injunctions, or retractions through civil suits.
    2. Balanced protection: Civil remedies protect reputation without curbing free expression.
    3. Reduced misuse: Without the threat of imprisonment, civil proceedings reduce the scope of intimidation.

    Comparative perspective and lessons for India

    1. U.K. model: Abolished criminal defamation, relying instead on civil law to handle reputational disputes.
    2. Global democratic practice: Democracies increasingly view criminal defamation as incompatible with free speech.
    3. India’s opportunity: Reforms are needed to align India’s legal framework with global standards and democratic values.

    Conclusion

    Criminal defamation in India has shifted from being a safeguard for dignity to a political weapon that curtails free expression and democratic accountability. Justice Sundresh’s remarks signal a broader judicial recognition that the law’s misuse has become systemic. Moving toward civil remedies while abolishing criminal defamation is necessary for strengthening free speech, protecting journalists, and ensuring political debates remain democratic rather than litigative. India must now act to strike the right balance between dignity and liberty.

  • Lessons from India’s Vaccination Drive

    Introduction

    Vaccination is among the most effective and cost-efficient public health measures, credited with saving millions of lives globally. India, with its Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP), runs the world’s largest vaccination campaign annually, covering over 2.6 crore infants and 2.9 crore pregnant women. From eliminating polio and maternal/neonatal tetanus to spearheading COVID-19 vaccine development, India has emerged as a global leader in immunisation. Yet, challenges remain in ensuring last-mile delivery, tackling vaccine hesitancy, and integrating disease surveillance with vaccination systems.

    Expanding Reach through Mission Indradhanush

    1. Mission Indradhanush (MI): Launched in 2014 to achieve 90% full immunisation coverage, up from 62% in 2014 (NFHS-4).
    2. Intensified Mission Indradhanush (IMI): Began in 2017, targeting low-coverage and missed populations.
    3. Impact: By 2023, 12 phases of MI/IMI had vaccinated 5.46 crore children and 1.32 crore pregnant women.
    4. Integration: Linked with Gram Swaraj Abhiyan and Extended Gram Swaraj Abhiyan for greater outreach.

    What Has India Achieved through UIP?

    1. Decline in Mortality: Under-5 mortality dropped from 45 to 31 per 1,000 live births (2014–2021, SRS 2021).
    2. Expanded Vaccination Basket: 6 new vaccines added in the last decade (e.g., Rotavirus, Pneumococcal Conjugate, Measles-Rubella).

    Disease Elimination Milestones:

    1. Polio-free since 2011.
    2. Maternal and neonatal tetanus eliminated in 2015.
    3. Yaws eradicated in 2016.
    4. Recognition: Measles and Rubella Champion Award (2024).

    What Challenges Continue to Plague India’s Vaccination Efforts?

    1. Remote Populations: Hard-to-reach and migratory groups remain under-covered.
    2. Vaccine Hesitancy: Clusters with low awareness and misinformation hinder uptake.
    3. Pandemic Disruption: COVID-19 disrupted routine services, leading to measles outbreaks (2022–2024).
    4. Immunity Gaps: Outbreaks showed clustering of unimmunised children.

    How Has Technology Transformed Vaccine Delivery?

    Digital Platforms:

    1. U-WIN: End-to-end vaccination record tracking, modeled on Co-WIN.
    2. eVIN & Cold Chain MIS: Real-time vaccine stock and logistics monitoring.
    3. SAFE-VAC: Vaccine safety reporting.

    Pandemic Success:

    1. COVID-19 vaccination began Jan 16, 2021.
    2. By Jan 2023: 220 crore doses, 97% with one dose, 90% with both.
    3. Equity & Outreach: Enabled “anytime-anywhere” access for migratory groups.

    What Lessons Has India Shared with the World?

    1. Vaccine Maitri: Supported low- and middle-income countries, reflecting Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam.
    2. Domestic Manufacturing: Self-reliance through Make in India strategy.
    3. Global Leadership: World’s largest vaccine manufacturing hub, shaping global vaccine futures.

    Conclusion

    India’s vaccination drive demonstrates the transformative power of political will, technological innovation, and community participation. While achievements like polio eradication, COVID-19 vaccine success, and award-winning Measles-Rubella campaigns inspire global emulation, challenges of equity, hesitancy, and surveillance integration demand continued attention. The future lies in adopting a One-Health approach and strengthening linkages between disease surveillance and immunisation to ensure pandemic preparedness and universal vaccine coverage.

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2022] What is the basic principle behind vaccine development? How do vaccines work? What approaches were adopted by the Indian vaccine manufacturers to produce COVID-19 vaccines?

    Linkage: This question is important for UPSC as it tests both the scientific principle of vaccine development and India’s capacity to innovate during crises like COVID-19. The article links by showing how vaccines, once developed, were scaled through UIP, Mission Indradhanush, and digital tools like U-WIN, reflecting the bridge between science and governance. It also highlights India’s global role via Vaccine Maitri and WHO recognition, making it a holistic case study for GS 3: Science & Technology and Public Health.

    Value Addition

    Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP)

    1. Definition: World’s largest immunisation programme, launched in 1985, providing free vaccines against 12 vaccine-preventable diseases.
    2. Coverage: Annually vaccinates 2.6 crore infants and 2.9 crore pregnant women.
    3. Relevance: Illustrates inclusive public health coverage, state capacity, and preventive healthcare.

    Mission Indradhanush (MI) / Intensified Mission Indradhanush (IMI)

    1. MI (2014): Launched to increase full immunisation coverage from 62% (NFHS-4, 2015–16) to 90%.
    2. IMI (2017): Focused on low-coverage areas and “left-out” children/women.
    3. Outcome: By 2023, 5.46 crore children and 1.32 crore pregnant women vaccinated under 12 phases.
    4. Relevance: Example of targeted governance and convergence with Gram Swaraj Abhiyan.

    Zero-dose Outreach

    1. Definition: Identifying and reaching children who have received no vaccines at all (first contact point for immunisation).
    2. Importance: Critical for equity in healthcare since such children often belong to marginalised, remote, or migratory populations.
    3. Relevance: Reflects SDG-3 (Good Health and Well-being) and commitment to leaving no one behind.

    U-WIN / eVIN / SAFE-VAC

    1. U-WIN: Successor to Co-WIN, a digital platform for real-time tracking of vaccination for pregnant women and children up to 16 years; enables portability for migrants.
    2. eVIN (Electronic Vaccine Intelligence Network): Ensures real-time monitoring of vaccine stocks.
    3. SAFE-VAC: Module for adverse events reporting and ensuring vaccine safety.
    4. Relevance: Showcases digital governance in health → transparent, accountable, efficient delivery.

    One-Health Approach

    1. Concept: Integrates surveillance of human, animal, and environmental health systems.
    2. Need: 75% of emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic (e.g., COVID-19).
    3. Application: Strengthens pandemic preparedness and ties immunisation with wider health surveillance.
    4. Relevance: A forward-looking framework for epidemic resilience and sustainable public health.

    Vaccine Maitri

    1. Definition: India’s global vaccine diplomacy initiative during COVID-19, supplying vaccines to 100+ countries.
    2. Impact: Cemented India’s role as “Pharmacy of the World”; strengthened ties with developing countries.
    3. Relevance: Example of health diplomacy, South-South cooperation, and global public good.

    Reports & Data

    NFHS-4 (2015–16)

    1. Report Name: National Family Health Survey – Round 4.
    2. Finding: India’s full immunisation coverage was 62% in 2014.
    3. Significance: Provided the baseline for Mission Indradhanush.
    4. Relevance: Evidence-based policymaking; highlights gaps in equity and access.

    Sample Registration System (SRS) 2021

    1. Significance: Clear evidence of immunisation’s role in improving child survival.
    2. Relevance: Shows how preventive healthcare directly impacts SDG-3 (Health & Well-being).

    Measles-Rubella (MR) Campaign (2017–19)

    1. Coverage: 34.8 crore children aged 9 months–15 years vaccinated.
    2. Significance: Largest catch-up campaign globally.
    3. Relevance: Example of mass public mobilisation and vaccine diplomacy readiness.

    Key Concepts:

    Zero-dose Outreach

    1. Definition: Identifying and immunising children who have not received a single vaccine.
    2. Importance: They represent the most vulnerable clusters (remote, migratory, socio-economically deprived).
    3. UPSC Link: Equity in health, SDG-3, “Leaving no one behind”.

    One-Health Lens

    1. Definition: Integrated surveillance of human, animal, and environmental health.
    2. Why: 75% of emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic (e.g., COVID-19, Nipah).
    3. Application: Prevents epidemics by connecting immunisation with disease surveillance across ecosystems.
    4. UPSC Link: Pandemic preparedness, sustainable health governance.

  • [23rd September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The growing relevance of traditional medicine

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2019] How is the Government of India protecting traditional knowledge of medicine from patenting by pharmaceutical companies?

    Linkage: The question on protecting traditional knowledge from patenting directly links with India’s global Ayurveda outreach and the WHO Global Traditional Medicine Centre, which focus on safeguarding and validating traditional systems. The article highlights India’s investment in research, standardisation, and international cooperation to integrate and protect Ayurveda while projecting it globally.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The significance of traditional medicine has moved far beyond being an alternative to modern healthcare. With its widespread practice across 170 countries, increasing global market share, and India’s leadership through AYUSH, traditional medicine now represents a paradigm shift from reactive to preventive healthcare. This article explores the transformation of traditional medicine, India’s global leadership, scientific validation, and its contemporary relevance in addressing both lifestyle diseases and climate change.

    Introduction

    Traditional medicine, once considered peripheral to mainstream health systems, is increasingly being recognised as central to global health. The World Health Organization reports that 88% of its member-states practise traditional medicine, making it a cornerstone of healthcare for billions. India, with its vibrant AYUSH sector, is at the forefront of this transformation — combining ancient wisdom with modern science, and positioning itself as a global leader in preventive, sustainable, and inclusive healthcare.

    Why is traditional medicine in the news?

    The growing relevance of Ayurveda and related systems has been highlighted due to multiple firsts and major developments. The WHO Global Traditional Medicine Centre in India marks a historic milestone, anchoring India as a hub for global research and innovation in this field. The AYUSH industry’s eight-fold growth within a decade, and exports reaching $1.54 billion to 150 countries, reflect the scale of transformation. With the 2025 theme of “Ayurveda for People & Planet”, traditional medicine is being reframed not just as healthcare but as a holistic movement addressing lifestyle diseases, biodiversity conservation, and climate change.

    How significant is the global presence of traditional medicine?

    1. WHO report: 170 of 194 countries (88%) practise traditional medicine.
    2. Primary healthcare: For billions in low- and middle-income countries, it remains the first line of treatment due to affordability and accessibility.
    3. Market size: Global traditional medicine market projected to hit $583 billion by 2025, growing at 10–20% annually.
    4. Country data: China’s TCM valued at $122.4 billion, Australia’s herbal medicine at $3.97 billion, India’s AYUSH sector at $43.4 billion.

    What has been India’s transformation in AYUSH?

    1. Industrial growth: Over 92,000 MSMEs drive the AYUSH sector. Revenues expanded from ₹21,697 crore (2014-15) to ₹1.37 lakh crore today.
    2. Services sector: Generated ₹1.67 lakh crore in revenue.
    3. Exports: AYUSH and herbal products worth $1.54 billion reach over 150 countries.
    4. Recognition abroad: Ayurveda now has formal recognition as a medical system in multiple nations.
    5. Public awareness: NSSO (2022-23) survey — 95% rural, 96% urban awareness; over half of India used AYUSH in the past year.

    How is India promoting scientific validation and global outreach?

    1. Research institutions: AIIMS Ayurveda, National Institute of Ayurveda, and CCRAS focus on drug standardisation, clinical validation, and integrative care models.
    2. International cooperation: 25 bilateral agreements, 52 institutional partnerships, 43 AYUSH cells in 39 countries, 15 academic chairs abroad.
    3. WHO Centre: WHO Global Traditional Medicine Centre in India integrates traditional knowledge with AI, big data, and digital health.
    4. AI integration: WHO publication highlights AI’s role in predictive care and strengthening clinical validation.

    Why is Ayurveda relevant to global challenges today?

    1. Philosophy of balance: Between body–mind, human–nature, consumption–conservation.
    2. Lifestyle diseases: Offers preventive care against rising global non-communicable diseases.
    3. Climate change: Promotes sustainability and biodiversity conservation.
    4. Beyond humans: Extends to veterinary care and plant health.
    5. Theme 2025: “Ayurveda for People & Planet” underlines Ayurveda as both a wellness system and a planetary health framework.

    Conclusion

    Traditional medicine, led by Ayurveda, has transitioned from being an ancient practice to a modern global movement. India’s leadership, backed by research, exports, and global outreach, has made it central to the evolving global health architecture. As the world faces lifestyle disorders and ecological crises, Ayurveda’s holistic framework offers sustainable solutions for both people and the planet.

  • With US withdrawing from multilateralism, India has both risks and opportunities

    Introduction

    The United Nations (UN) was envisioned in 1945 as the cornerstone of a rules-based global order. Yet, 80 years later, it faces one of its gravest challenges. US President Donald Trump’s second term has unleashed a sweeping retreat from multilateralism, leaving the UN structurally weakened and financially strained. His push for sovereignty-driven unilateralism, withdrawal from critical agreements and institutions, and deep funding cuts have left a vacuum increasingly filled by China. For India, this turbulence is both a threat and an opportunity to shape a new multilateralism.

    Trump’s Shift from Multilateralism to Unilateralism

    1. America First Doctrine: Trump has framed sovereignty as the fundamental principle of international relations, rejecting supra-nationalism.
    2. UN Critique: He claims to have done “a better job than the UN Security Council” in maintaining peace, boasting of “ending seven wars” within eight months of his second term.
    3. First-term precedent: Withdrawals from the Paris Agreement, UNESCO, Human Rights Council, Iran Nuclear Deal signalled this trend.
    4. Second-term escalation: Guided by Project 2025 (Heritage Foundation manifesto), Trump has cut >80% of US contributions to UN operations, including peacekeeping and global health.

    How is the UN Being Undermined?

    1. Massive Funding Cuts: US contributions slashed from 22% to a fraction, crippling UN’s financial base.
    2. Institutional Withdrawals: Exit from WHO, UNESCO, Human Rights Council and halting support for the Paris Agreement & Climate Loss and Damage Fund.
    3. Policy Rejection: No support for sustainable development or climate mitigation under Trump’s agenda.
    4. Domestic Politics Spillover: Appeals to his populist base that frames liberals as “war party” and paints the UN as an obstruction.

    China’s Expanding Role in Global Governance

    1. Strategic Positioning: Beijing systematically places its nationals in influential leadership, technical, and administrative posts.
    2. New Initiatives: Promotes “Global Development, Global Security, Global Civilisation, Global Governance” — aligned with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
    3. Funding Power: Contributes around $680 million (~20% of UN budget), second only to the US.
    4. Outcome: While not yet supplanting US dominance, Chinese activism is making Beijing an indispensable player.

    Decline of Multilateralism: A Structural Problem

    1. Historical High Point: Around 2000 with WTO launch & Millennium Development Goals.
    2. Erosion Factors: Populist nationalism, US-China rivalry, US-Russia vetoes paralyzing UNSC, and transatlantic divisions.
    3. Current Paralysis: Even humanitarian crises are stalled by veto politics.
    4. Reform Blockage: Calls for UNSC expansion remain frozen, while agencies face financial crisis and inefficiencies.

    India’s Opportunities and Responsibilities

    1. Financial Contribution Gap: India contributes $38 million (<1%), far below its stature as the world’s 4th largest economy.
    2. Comparative Figures: US: $820 million (22%), China: $680 million (20%).
    3. Strategic Priorities: Instead of old demands (like UNSC expansion), India should focus on:
      1. AI governance
      2. North-South coalitions
      3. UN reforms for efficiency
    4. Moral Leadership: As a long-standing Global South champion, India must pay more and lead more to shape new rules.

    Conclusion

    The UN at 80 stands fragile, buffeted by American retreat and Chinese ambition. Trump’s second-term disruption has turned long-standing weaknesses into systemic crises. Yet, neither the US nor China enjoys universal legitimacy. For India, the moment is decisive: it can no longer lament but must shoulder the responsibility of building a multilateralism that works in an age of rivalry and rapid change.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2019] Too little cash, too much politics, leaves UNESCO fighting for life. Discuss the statement in the light of US’ withdrawal and its accusation of the cultural body as being ‘anti-Israel bias’.

    Linkage: It highlights how US funding withdrawal and political accusations cripple UN agencies like UNESCO, leaving them under-resourced and delegitimised. Similarly, Trump’s second-term cuts — over 80% reduction in US contributions and exits from WHO, UNESCO, HRC — show how financial muscle and politics erode multilateral institutions.

  • Trans People deserve better

    Introduction

    The struggles of India’s transgender community highlight the deep chasm between constitutional guarantees of equality and the lived reality of marginalisation. Despite progressive measures such as the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, welfare schemes, and quotas in education and employment, access to these rights often remains obstructed by bureaucracy, social prejudice, and tokenism. The issue is not confined to a minority group alone; it reflects a larger national loss of talent, creativity, and human capital. Denial of dignity and opportunities to gender minorities undermines India’s democratic fabric, making it imperative that policies move beyond symbolic gestures towards genuine representation, enforceable protections, and inclusive development. This article is a stark reminder that policy is not paperwork, but life itself.

    Legal & Policy Framework for Transgender Rights in India:

    Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019

    1. Comprehensive protections – The Act prohibits discrimination against transgender persons in education, employment, healthcare, housing, and access to public services.
    2. Legal recognition – It affirms the right of individuals to be recognised as transgender and ensures access to identity documents in accordance with their self-perceived gender.
    3. Obligations on institutions – Schools, workplaces, and healthcare institutions are legally bound to create safe, inclusive environments, though implementation remains weak.
    4. Critical limitation – While progressive, the Act has faced criticism for requiring medical boards’ involvement in recognising gender, which many activists argue undermines the principle of self-identification upheld in NALSA v. Union of India (2014).

    NITI Aayog’s SDG India Index

    1. Measuring inclusivity – The Index tracks progress towards Sustainable Development Goals, with transgender inclusion mapped to SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).
    2. Policy relevance – States are ranked on inclusivity measures, encouraging competitive federalism to adopt progressive policies.
    3. Limitations – Despite formal inclusion in metrics, ground-level impact remains limited, with most States lagging in transgender-specific initiatives.

    National Portal for Transgender Persons (2020)

    1. Ease of certification – A digital platform was launched to streamline self-identification and certification of transgender persons without cumbersome physical verification.
    2. Access to welfare schemes – The portal links beneficiaries to scholarships, healthcare support, and livelihood initiatives.
    3. Barrier reduction – Aimed to reduce harassment and delays in government offices, but digital literacy and awareness remain challenges.

    Government Schemes and Initiatives:

    SMILE Scheme (2022)

    1. Full form: Support for Marginalised Individuals for Livelihood and Enterprise.
    2. Livelihood support – Offers vocational training, financial assistance, and rehabilitation to transgender persons and others in vulnerable conditions (e.g., beggars).
    3. Holistic rehabilitation – Focus on dignity through sustainable income opportunities, not just short-term aid.

    Garima Greh (Shelter Homes for Transgender Persons)

    1. Safe housing – Provides temporary shelter to transgender persons in need, particularly those facing family rejection or homelessness.
    2. Rehabilitation support – Along with accommodation, offers skill-building, counselling, and reintegration programmes.
    3. Geographical spread – Shelters are being established in multiple States, though demand far outstrips supply.

    National Transgender Welfare Board

    1. Advisory role – Created to guide and monitor welfare schemes, policies, and rights protection for transgender persons.
    2. Policy advocacy – Acts as a bridge between community needs and government initiatives.
    3. Challenge – Effectiveness has been questioned due to limited representation from grassroots transgender voices.

    Why do policies remain hollow for transgender persons?

    1. Hollow quotas – Promises on paper, but weak implementation and bureaucratic humiliation in accessing them.
    2. Selective dispersal – Corruption and leakages mean benefits rarely reach genuine beneficiaries.
    3. Urban-rural gap – Schemes concentrated in cities, leaving rural transgender communities excluded.
    4. Insensitive officials – Lack of sensitisation among staff, police, and service providers reinforces stigma.
    5. Economic marginalisation – Limited job opportunities push many into begging or unsafe livelihoods.
    6. Weak accountability – No penalties for institutions failing to ensure inclusivity.
    7. Data deficit – Census undercounts transgender population, weakening policy design.
    8. Fragmented ecosystem – Welfare spread across ministries with poor coordination and monitoring.

    Why is access to basic needs still a challenge?

    1. Considerable Population– Over 4.87 lakh individuals identified as transgender, under the ‘Other’ gender category as per the 2011 census.
    2. Housing discrimination – Landlords refuse to rent, neighbours ostracise, and societies erect silent barricades, denying stability.
    3. Public ridicule – Buses, markets, and streets are unsafe; everyday survival requires courage against humiliation.
    4. Hunger and survival – With families abandoning them, many trans persons face destitution, leaving them vulnerable to unsafe livelihoods.

    How does exclusion repeat historical injustices?

    1. Historical parallels – Denial of rights to African-Americans and women earlier hollowed democracies; similarly, denying rights to trans persons repeats history’s mistakes.
    2. Loss of talent – Every trans child forced out of school means a lost scientist; every denied home displaces an artist; every humiliation silences a leader.

    Why is representation in politics critical?

    1. Beyond symbolism – Representation is structural, not tokenistic. Without trans voices in legislatures, policies reproduce privilege and blind spots.
    2. Absence in institutions – No trans person has been appointed to media boards despite censor boards clearing derogatory content against them.

    What are the urgent priorities for reform?

    1. Education – Scholarships, inclusive curricula, and anti-bullying measures are essential to prevent dropouts.
    2. Healthcare – Affordable, state-supported gender transition and mental health care; transition is survival, not cosmetic.
    3. Employment & housing – Anti-discrimination laws must be enforced with penalties, ensuring workplace inclusion and rental protections.

    Way Forward

    1. Enforceable protections – Move from symbolic promises to penalties for violations in housing, jobs, and education.
    2. Political representation – Reserved seats or political pathways must ensure gender minorities are participants in policymaking.
    3. Educational reform – Gender-sensitive curricula and anti-bullying frameworks to prevent dropouts.
    4. Cultural shift – Mainstream media, schools, and workplaces must promote respect and positive representation, not ridicule.
    5. Holistic inclusion – From healthcare to public spaces, dignity must be guaranteed as a right, not charity.

    Conclusion

    The resilience of transgender persons cannot substitute for rights. A nation that sidelines its gender minorities sidelines its own conscience and potential. Policy must no longer be about trans persons but must be shaped with them. The denial of dignity is not a transgender issue—it is a national issue of justice, equality, and democratic maturity. India’s claim to global leadership will remain hollow until all its citizens, regardless of gender identity, can live with dignity.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2019] Development and welfare schemes for the vulnerable, by its nature, are discriminatory in approach.” Do you agree? Give reasons for your answer.

    Linkage: This article’s critique of hollow quotas and tokenistic welfare for transgender persons directly links to the PYQ by showing how schemes meant for the vulnerable, instead of empowering, often reinforce exclusion and discrimination.

  • Criminal Defamation in India

    Why in the News?

    Justice M.M. Sundresh of the Supreme Court remarked that the time has come to decriminalise defamation, reflecting concern over its growing misuse.

    Free Speech and Defamation: Constitutional Provisions

    • Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech & expression.
    • Article 19(2): Allows reasonable restrictions in the interests of:
      • Sovereignty & integrity of India.
      • Security of the State.
      • Friendly relations with foreign States.
      • Public order, decency or morality.
      • Contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence.
    • Article 21: Right to reputation is part of right to life (Subramanian Swamy v. UOI, 2016).

    What is Criminal Defamation?

    • Overview: Offence of harming a person’s character, fame, or reputation with false and malicious statements.

    • Forms:

      1. Libel: False defamatory statement in writing.
      2. Slander: False defamatory statement spoken orally.
    • Indian Context: Both libel & slander are criminal offences if made publicly.
    • Earlier IPC Section 499: Criminalised communication of false info harming reputation; punishment under IPC Section 500 – up to 2 years imprisonment.

    • Law under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023:

      • Section 354(2) – punishment up to 2 years simple imprisonment, or fine, or both, or community service.
      • Section 356 – covers words, signs, or visible representations harming reputation.
    • Scope: Applies to individuals, companies, and deceased persons if family reputation is harmed.
    • Essential Elements: False statement, harm to reputation, communication to third party, and intent/knowledge of likely harm.
    • Nature of Offence: Non-cognizable and bailable – requires a warrant for arrest; bail available.
    • Digital Extension: Covers defamatory posts on social media, websites, and messaging platforms.
    • Defences/Exceptions: Truth in public interest, fair comment on public servants, judicial proceedings, public performances, and cautionary statements made in good faith.

    Judicial Pronouncements related to Defamation:

    • Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016): SC upheld constitutionality of IPC Sections 499 & 500; held that reputation is part of Article 21; criminal defamation valid under Article 19(2) restrictions.
    • Kaushal Kishore v. Union of India (2017): SC held no extra restrictions on free speech beyond Article 19(2).
    • Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): SC struck down Section 66A of IT Act, calling it vague and violative of free speech.
    • Imran Pratapgarhi Case (March 2025): Court adopted the “reasonable person” test (Clapham omnibus standard), not that of overly sensitive individuals.
    • Recent Stays: SC stayed multiple cases (incl. against Rahul Gandhi and Shashi Tharoor) stressing courts should not be tools for political vendetta.
    [UPSC 2014] What do you understand by the concept of “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.

    [UPSC 2021] ‘Right to Privacy’ is protected under which Article of the Constitution of India?

    Options: (a) Article 15 (b) Article 19 (c) Article 21 * (d) Article 29

     

  • U.K, Australia and Canada recognise Palestine state in seismic shift

    Introduction

    On September 22, 2025, Britain, Australia, and Canada formally recognised Palestine as a sovereign state, a step that Portugal and potentially France are expected to follow at the UN General Assembly. This unprecedented shift, especially by G-7 members like the U.K. and Canada, alters decades of Western foreign policy and signals mounting pressure on Israel after nearly two years of the Gaza war that began with Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack. While hailed as historic by Palestinians, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the move as an “absurd reward for terrorism.”

    Why is this development historic?

    1. First G-7 recognition: U.K. and Canada became the first G-7 nations to officially recognise Palestine, breaking with the long-standing Western alignment with Israel.
    2. Sharp contrast with past policy: For decades, Western countries had deferred recognition pending a negotiated two-state solution; this marks a direct policy shift.
    3. Conflict backdrop: The recognition comes amid international outrage over prolonged violence in Gaza since 2023, highlighting the urgency for peace.
    4. Special burden: The U.K.’s Deputy PM admitted Britain carries a “special responsibility” due to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which paved the way for Israel’s creation.

    Why did the U.K., Australia, and Canada take this step?

    1. Reviving peace hopes: Leaders like Keir Starmer emphasised the recognition as a way to keep the two-state solution alive.
    2. International pressure: Growing calls for humanitarian accountability in Gaza pushed these governments to act.
    3. Alignment with Europe: Portugal announced recognition the same day, and France is expected to follow, indicating a coordinated Western European push.

    What has been Israel’s reaction?

    1. Harsh opposition: PM Netanyahu warned that calls for Palestinian statehood “endanger Israel’s existence.”
    2. Terrorism narrative: Israel frames recognition as a “reward for terrorism” in reference to Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack.
    3. UN strategy: Netanyahu vowed to fight this recognition diplomatically at the ongoing UN General Assembly.

    What role does history play in this debate?

    1. Balfour Declaration, 1917: U.K.’s role in facilitating Israel’s creation still casts a shadow over West Asia’s conflict.
    2. Decades of stalemate: Palestinian statehood has been promised but deferred since the Oslo Accords of the 1990s.
    3. Burden of colonial legacy: Britain’s recognition is seen as part-redressal for its historical role.

    How does this reshape global geopolitics?

    1. U.S.–Western divide: Recognition creates divergence between U.S. policy (still opposed) and its closest allies like the U.K. and Canada, weakening the coherence of the Western bloc.
    2. Global South solidarity: Developing nations, many of whom already recognise Palestine, view this as overdue Western alignment, strengthening South–North convergence on justice and decolonisation.
    3. UN spotlight: With the General Assembly opening, Palestine’s legitimacy is expected to dominate the global agenda, elevating the conflict as a test case for multilateralism.
    4. Regional fault lines: Arab states may gain renewed diplomatic leverage, while Israel risks isolation beyond its traditional U.S. support base, potentially altering Middle East power balances.
    5. Strategic recalibration for India and Asia: Asian powers like India and China will have to navigate between historical solidarity with Palestine and strong bilateral partnerships with Israel, testing their strategic autonomy.
    6. Narrative of international law and legitimacy: Recognition by major Western democracies strengthens the normative argument for Palestinian statehood, challenging Israel’s framing of the issue as a security-only concern.

    Conclusion

    The recognition of Palestine by the U.K., Australia, and Canada is more than symbolic; it could catalyse a chain reaction of Western nations acknowledging Palestinian sovereignty. While it reignites hope for a two-state solution, it also risks deepening fault lines with Israel and the U.S.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2018] India’s relations with Israel have, of late, acquired a depth and diversity, which cannot be rolled back.” Discuss

    Linkage: The recognition of Palestine by U.K., Australia, and Canada highlights how global powers are recalibrating their West Asia policies, creating new pressures on countries like India. While India recognised Palestine in 1988, it has simultaneously built deep and diverse ties with Israel in defence, agriculture, and technology. This mirrors the PYQ’s core theme—India’s Israel relationship is now structurally entrenched, even as balancing Palestine’s cause remains a diplomatic necessity.

  • [20th September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The Saudi-Pakistan pact is a dodgy insurance policy

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] In what ways would the ongoing US–Iran Nuclear Pact controversy affect the national interest of India? How should India respond to this situation?

    Linkage: The Saudi–Pakistan SMDA, like the earlier US–Iran Nuclear Pact controversy, reshapes West Asian alignments and directly impacts India’s energy security, diaspora safety, and regional stability. Just as India had to balance between Iran, the U.S., and Gulf partners in 2018, it must now carefully hedge between Riyadh and Islamabad while safeguarding its own strategic interests.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement (SMDA) signed between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in September 2025 has been described as a pact of optics rather than substance. Its timing, context, and asymmetrical calculations raise questions on whether it strengthens West Asian security or merely signals short-term adjustments. For UPSC aspirants, this episode provides insights into the shifting geopolitics of South West Asia, Pakistan’s strategic opportunism, Saudi Arabia’s security dilemmas, and India’s balancing role.

    Introduction

    On 17 September 2025, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Pakistani Premier Shahbaz Sharif signed the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement (SMDA) in Riyadh, with Field Marshal Asim Munir in attendance. While presented as a landmark pact, its real significance lies in the optics of security reassurance amid the shifting sands of Middle Eastern politics. Both nations have a chequered past of military cooperation, rooted in shared faith but divided by divergent threat perceptions. The agreement’s asymmetrical benefits, U.S. undertones, and implications for India make it geopolitically consequential.

    Why is the SMDA in the news and why is it significant?

    1. First major pact in decades: The last high-point of Saudi–Pakistan defence ties was in the 1979–89 period, when 20,000 Pakistani troops protected Saudi Arabia and the Holy Harams.
    2. Optical reassurance: The SMDA is viewed more as a symbolic gesture than a substantive alliance, designed to show unity amidst rising threats from Iran, Yemen, and Israel.
    3. Geopolitical urgency: Triggered by the September 9 Israeli air strike in Doha (Qatar), the pact signals waning U.S. credibility as a security guarantor for the Gulf.
    4. Big deal: Pakistan is now a declared nuclear state, raising speculation of nuclear cooperation with Riyadh, though practical transfer remains improbable.

    What has been the history of Saudi-Pakistan defence cooperation?

    1. Golden phase (1979–89): 20,000 Pakistani soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia to protect the monarchy and act against Iran and Yemen.
    2. Saudi view: Treated Pakistani forces as paid Praetorian Guards, limiting their autonomy.
    3. Pakistani view: Resented lack of command; exclusion of Shia troops created tensions.
    4. 1990 onwards: Pakistan refused Saudi requests during major crises (Iraq’s Kuwait invasion, Yemeni war), limiting its role to protecting the Holy Harams.

    How has the United States influenced the SMDA?

    1. Pentagon as the guarantor: U.S. historically underpinned Saudi–Pak defence ties “over-the-horizon.”
    2. Trump’s role: In June 2025, Field Marshal Munir’s “private lunch” with Trump in Washington signalled Washington’s blessing.
    3. Israeli factor: Saudi Arabia wanted a U.S. defence pact and nuclear technology in exchange for recognising Israel. The Hamas attack on Israel in Oct 2023 derailed the plan, leaving the SMDA as a consolation prize.
    4. Credibility gap: The U.S. failure to defend Qatar against Israeli strikes exposed fragility in Gulf security guarantees.

    What are Riyadh’s calculations from the SMDA?

    1. Avoid Arab troops: Past experience with Arab/Turkish troops created risks of “political pollination.
    2. Massive arms imports: Saudi Arabia has ordered $100 billion worth of U.S. weapons in 2025.
    3. Nuclear hedge: Pakistan’s nuclear capability could deter Iran if it goes nuclear.
    4. Chinese factor: Pakistan’s ties with China may complicate Riyadh’s trust.
    5. Realistic expectation: Riyadh foresees smaller Pakistani footprints than before, given past frictions.

    What are Islamabad’s calculations from the SMDA?

    1. Asymmetrical gains: No intention to fight Saudi wars against Iran, Yemen, or Israel.
    2. Strategic opportunism: Exploit Saudi insecurity to gain funds, oil, defence hardware, and training.
    3. Personal aggrandisement:Pakistan’s military elite aim to monetise “IOUs” from Riyadh and Washington.
    4. Regional calculus: Hopes trilateral axis will offset its strategic disadvantage against India.

    What does the SMDA mean for India?

    1. Energy linkages: India is the third-largest oil importer and among Saudi’s top trade partners.
    2. Diaspora factor: Largest expatriate community in Saudi Arabia, valued for skills and neutrality.
    3. Diplomatic capital: Post-2014 outreach has created defence and intelligence-sharing frameworks.
    4. Saudi balancing act: Riyadh assured Reuters that ties with India remain “robust,” acknowledging India’s nuclear status and geoeconomic heft.
    5. Implication: India must remain vigilant, building greater Arabian Sea synergies to counterbalance tactical moves by Pakistan.

    Conclusion

    The Saudi–Pakistan pact is less a robust security alliance and more a political insurance policy, crafted in haste amid shifting regional dynamics. While it temporarily reassures Riyadh and monetarily benefits Islamabad, its sustainability remains doubtful due to divergent threat perceptions, nuclear sensitivities, and overlapping U.S.–China rivalries. For India, the SMDA underscores the need to strengthen its energy diplomacy, diaspora leverage, and strategic partnerships with Riyadh, while maintaining watchfulness over Pakistan’s manoeuvres.