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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Back in news: Right to be Forgotten

    The Centre has informed the Delhi High Court that the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 contains provisions related to the ‘right to be forgotten’.

    Right to be Forgotten

    • ‘Right to be forgotten’ is a fairly new concept in India where an individual could seek to remove or delete online posts which may contain an embarrassing picture, video or news articles mentioning them.
    • It comes under the right to privacy which has been held to be a fundamental right by the Supreme Court under Article 21.
    • In 2017, the Right to Privacy was declared a fundamental right by the Supreme Court in its landmark verdict.

    Why in news?

    • The Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 contains provisions related to the doctrine of ‘right to be forgotten’.
    • It highlighted two judgments passed by the Orissa High Court and the Karnataka High Court where they have accepted the doctrine of the ‘right to be forgotten’ as an essential part of the ‘right to privacy’.

    Mention in PDP Bill

    • The PDP bill aims to set out provisions meant for the protection of the personal data of individuals.
    • Clause 20 under Chapter V of this bill titled “Rights of Data Principal” mentions the “Right to be Forgotten.”
    • It states that the “data principal (the person to whom the data is related) shall have the right to restrict or prevent the continuing disclosure of his personal data by a data fiduciary”.
    • A data fiduciary means any person, including the State, a company, any juristic entity, or any individual who alone or in conjunction with others determines the purpose and means of the processing of personal data.

    Implications

    • Under the Right to be forgotten, users can de-link, limit, delete or correct the disclosure of their personal information held by data fiduciaries.

    Other similar provisions

    • Section 69A of the IT Act does provide for removal of “certain unlawful information” from an intermediary platform.
    • It primarily applies to ‘national security and public order related issues’ only.

    Also read:

    Draft Personal Data Protection Bill, 2021

     

     

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

     

     

  • WTO rules against India’s Sugar Subsidies

    A World Trade Organization panel ruled that India violated international trade rules when it offered excessive subsidies for the production and export of sugar and sugarcane.

    What did WTO say?

    • Under WTO rules, India’s sugar subsidies are capped at a de minimis limit of 10% of the value of production.
    • India’s policies were inconsistent with WTO rules that govern the levels at which nations can subsidize domestic agricultural production.
    • WTO has asked it to withdraw its prohibited subsidies under the Production Assistance, the Buffer Stock, and the Marketing and Transportation Schemes within 120 days.

    What was the complaint against India?

    Australia, Brazil, and Guatemala said India’s domestic support and export subsidy measures appeared to be inconsistent with various articles against WTO’s:

    1. Agreement on Agriculture
    2. Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)
    3. Article XVI (which concerns subsidies) of the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT)
    • Domestic Support: All three countries complained that India provides domestic support to sugarcane producers that exceed the de minimis level of 10% of the total value of sugarcane production.
    • Various subsidies: They also raised the issue of India’s alleged export subsidies, subsidies under the production assistance and buffer stock schemes, and the marketing and transportation scheme.
    • Notifying support: Australia accused India of “failing” to notify its annual domestic support for sugarcane and sugar subsequent to 1995-96, and its export subsidies since 2009-10.

    India’s reply to WTO panel

    • India rejected the panel’s findings as “erroneous”, “unreasoned”, and “not supported by the WTO rules”.
    • It argued that the requirements of Article 3 of the SCM Agreement are not yet applicable to India.
    • It has a phase-out period of 8 years to eliminate export subsidies under the agreement.
    • India also argued that its mandatory minimum prices are not paid by the governments but by sugar mills, and hence do not constitute market price support.

    Must read:

    Sugarcane Pricing in India

     

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

  • Conflation between duties and rights

    Context

    There has been growing advocacy for the integration of duty with rights. On Constitution Day last month, many Union Ministers used the occasion to underline this proposal.

    What do rights come with duty mean?

    • It is a basic proposition that all rights come with duties.
    • But those duties are quite distinct from the meaning ascribed to them in the popular discourse.
    • When a person holds a right, she is owed an obligation by a duty-bearer.
    • For example, when citizens are promised a right against discrimination, the government is obliged to ensure that it treats everybody with equal care and concern.
    • Similarly, the guarantee of a right to freedom of speech enjoins the state to refrain from interfering with that liberty.

    Integrating rights with duties

    • Proponents of integration of duty with rights aim to treat otherwise non-binding obligations — the “fundamental duties” as Article 51A describes them on a par with, if not superior to, the various fundamental rights that the Constitution guarantees.
    • In an inversion of the well-known dictum, they see duties, and not rights, as trumps.
    • On Constitution Day last month, many Union Ministers used the occasion to underline this proposal.
    • The government puts forward an idea that our rights ought to be made conditional on the performance of a set of extraneous obligations.

    Issues with the proposal

    • This suggestion is plainly in the teeth of the Constitution’s text, language, and history.
    • To the framers of the Constitution, the very idea of deliberating over whether these rights ought to be provisional, and on whether these rights ought to be made subject to the performance of some alien duty, was against the republic’s vision.
    • Imposing duties a legislative prerogative: The Constitution’s framers saw the placing of mandates on individual responsibilities as nothing more than a legislative prerogative.
    • For example, the legislature could impose a duty on individuals to pay a tax on their income, and this duty could be enforced in a variety of ways.
    • If the tax imposed and the sanctions prescribed were reasonable, the obligations placed on the citizen will be constitutionally valid.
    • In this manner, Parliament and the State legislatures have imposed a plethora of duties — duties to care for the elderly and for children; duties to pay tolls and levies; duties against causing harm to others; duties to treat the environment with care, the list is endless.
    • Against Constitution: What is critical, though, is that these laws cannot make a person’s fundamental right contingent on the performance of a duty that they impose.
    • A legislation that does so will violate the Constitution.

    Background

    • The fundamental duties that are now contained in Article 51A were introduced through the 42nd constitutional amendment.
    • The Swaran Singh Committee, which was set up during the Emergency, and which recommended the insertion of the clause, also suggested that a failure to comply with a duty ought to result in punishment.
    • Ultimately, the amendment was introduced after the binding nature of the clause was removed.
    • In its finally adopted form, Article 51A encouraged citizens to perform several duties.

    Way forward

    • Know the precise nature of duties the rights create: The philosopher Onora O’Neill has argued with some force that we would do well to discuss the precise nature of duties that rights create.
    • Unless we do so, our charters of human rights may not by themselves be enough.
    • For example, we may want to ask ourselves if the promise of a right to free expression imposes on the state something more than a duty to forebear from making an unwarranted restriction on that liberty.
    •  Does it require the state to also work towards creating an equal society where each person finds herself in a position to express herself freely?

    Consider the question “How fundamental duties are related to the fundamental rights in the context of the Indian Constitution? What are the issues with making the enforcement of rights contingent on adhering to the duties?”

    Conclusion

    When we speak about the importance of obligations, it is these questions that must animate our discussions. Should we instead allow the language of fundamental duties to subsume our political debates, we would only be placing in jeopardy the moral principles at the heart of India’s republic.

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

  • A case for in inclusion of Ladakh under Sixth Schedule

    A ruling party MP from Ladakh has demanded that the region be included in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution to safeguard land, employment, and cultural identity of the local population.

    What is the Sixth Schedule?

    • The Sixth Schedule under Article 244 provides for the formation of autonomous administrative divisions — Autonomous District Councils (ADCs).
    • ADCs have some legislative, judicial, and administrative autonomy within a state.
    • The Sixth Schedule applies to the NE states of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram (three Councils each), and Tripura (one Council).

    Composition of ADCs

    • ADCs have up to 30 members with a term of five years.
    • It can make laws, rules and regulations with regard to land, forest, water, agriculture, village councils, health, sanitation, village- and town-level policing, inheritance, marriage and divorce, social customs and mining, etc.
    • The Bodoland Territorial Council in Assam is an exception with more than 40 members and the right to make laws on 39 issues.

    Why does Ladakh want to be part of the Sixth Schedule?

    • Local aspirations: There was much enthusiasm initially, mostly in Leh, after the repeal of Art. 370 which created two new UTs.
    • Negligence in erstwhile J&K state: Buddhist-dominated Leh district had long demanded UT status because it felt neglected by the erstwhile state government.
    • Denial of Legislature: The enthusiasm waned as it was understood that while the UT of J&K would have a legislature, the UT of Ladakh would not.
    • Inadequate representation: The administration of the region is now completely in the hands of bureaucrats with only 1 MP.
    • New domicile criteria: The changed domicile policy in Jammu and Kashmir has raised fears in the region about its own land, employment, demography, and cultural identity.
    • Statehood demands: A coalition of social, religious, and political representatives in Leh and Kargil has demanded full statehood for Ladakh.

    Cultural significance of Ladakh

    • Ladakh is historically perceived as a cosmopolitan region with centuries of multiple cultural settings.
    • It was an Asian pivot – the people here traversed diverse cultural boundaries and engaged with ideas.

    Can Ladakh be included in Sixth Schedule?

    • NCST Recommends: In September 2019, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes recommended the inclusion of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule.
    • Distinct culture: It was predominantly tribal (more than 97%), people from other parts of the country had been restricted from purchasing or acquiring land there, and its distinct cultural heritage needed preservation.

    Legal hurdles

    • Fifth schedule as an alternative: The Constitution is very clear, Sixth Schedule is for the Northeast. For tribal areas in the rest of the country, there is the Fifth Schedule.
    • Exclusive provision for NE: Notably, no region outside the Northeast has been included in the Sixth Schedule.
    • Requires Constitutional Amendment: It remains the prerogative of the government. For this, a constitutional amendment is required.

    Government’s response in this regard

    • The Centre woke up to the anxieties of the region when, a year after the abrogation of Article 370, when all political parties announced a boycott of the LAHDC-Leh elections.
    • The political factions in Ladakh were promised “Sixth Schedule-like” protections by the Home Minister.
    • The MHA has in Jan announced that a committee under then MoS Home G Kishan Reddy would be formed to address the issues related to language of Ladakh, culture of Ladakh and conservation of land in Ladakh.
    • It had assured representatives of Kargil and Leh that the government was committed to look into their concerns.

    Try this question from CSP 2015:

    Q.The provisions in Fifth Schedule and Sixth Schedule in the Constitution of India are made in order to-

    (a) protect the interests of Scheduled Tribes

    (b) determine the boundaries between States

    (c) determine the powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats

    (d) protect the interests of all the border States

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”0xt8a7bveb” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

     

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

  • Fathoming the new world disorder

    Context

    It may be too early to say how the American withdrawal from Afghanistan would shape regional geopolitics in Asia and the great power contest between the United States and its competitors. But it is certainly one of those developments that will have a far-reaching impact on global politics.

    Two narratives about the US withdrawal from Afghanistan

    • There are two dominant narratives about the American withdrawal.
    • Realignment in foreign policy: The first narrative is that the U.S. exited the country on its own will as it is undertaking a larger realignment in its foreign policy.
    • Failure to win the war: The other one is that the U.S. failed to win the war in Afghanistan and, like in the case of Vietnam, was forced to withdraw from the country.
    • Focus on China: The reorientation that is under way in American foreign policy, focused on China, certainly played a role in the Afghan withdrawal.
    • But that does not obscure the fact that the world’s most powerful military and economic power failed to win the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban even after fighting them for 20 years.

    Erosion of the US’s ability in shaping geopolitical outcomes

    •  The gradual erosion of the U.S.’s ability in shaping geopolitical outcomes in faraway regions has already shaken up the structures of American unipolarity.
    • Withdrawal from Afghanistan is not an isolated incident: The Afghan withdrawal was not an isolated incident.
    • In Iraq and Libya, it failed to establish political stability and order after invasions.
    • It could not stop Russia taking Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. In Syria, it was outmanoeuvred by Vladimir Putin.
    • Finally, the way American troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan and the return of the Taliban to power strengthened this perception of great power fatigue and emboldened America’s rivals to openly challenge the U.S.-centric “rules-based order.”

    Three geopolitical challenges facing the US

    • [1]Aggressive Russia: Russia has amassed about 175,000 troops on its border with Ukraine.
    • Western intelligence agencies claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin could order an invasion of Ukraine.
    • Russian sphere of influence: From the migrant crisis in Belarus to the troop mobilisation in Ukraine, Russia is unmistakably sending a message to the West that the region stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, the eastern flank of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is a Russian sphere of influence.
    • [2] Iran issue:  Iran, which has stepped up its nuclear programme after the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the 2015 nuclear deal, has refused to hold direct talks with the U.S. 
    • Iran insists that the U.S. should first remove the sanctions and give assurance that a future President would not violate the terms of the agreement.
    • [3] Assertive China: China is sending dozens of fighter jets into the so-called Taiwan Air Defence Identification Zone almost on a weekly basis, triggering speculation on whether Beijing was considering taking the self-ruled island by force.
    • As the U.S. is trying to shift its focus to the Indo-Pacific region to tackle China’s rise, China is becoming more and more assertive in its periphery, seeking strategic depth.

    Implications

    • Limited choice: The pivot to Asia has limited America’s options elsewhere. For example, what could the U.S. do to deter Mr. Putin from making the next military move in Europe.
    • With regard to Iran, if the U.S. blinks first and lifts the sanctions, it could be read as another sign of weakness.
    • If it does not and if the Vienna talks collapse, Iran could continue to enrich uranium to a higher purity, attaining a de facto nuclear power status without a bomb (like Japan), which would be against America’s declared goals in West Asia.
    • The Afghan withdrawal and the downsizing in West Asia suggest that America’s strategic focus has shifted towards China.

    Conclusion

    This transition, from American unipolarity into something that is still unknown, has put America in a strategic dilemma: Should it stay focused on China, preparing itself for the next bipolar contest; or continue to act as a global policeman of the liberal order that is under attack from multiple fronts?

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

  • Amendment to the NDPS Act

    The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was passed by Lok Sabha.

    Must read:

    [Burning Issue] Substance Abuse in India

    About NDPS Act

    • The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, commonly referred to as the NDPS Act was promulgated in 1985.
    • It prohibits a person from the production/manufacturing/cultivation, possession, sale, purchasing, transport, storage, and/or consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance

    What is the 2021 amendment?

    • The 2021 Bill amends the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and seeks to rectify a drafting “anomaly” created by a 2014 amendment to the parent legislation.
    • It contains a legislative declaration about what one section refers to.
    • It says Section 2 clause viii(a) corresponds to clause viii(b) in Section 27, since 2014 when the provision was first brought in.
    • Section 27A of the NDPS Act, 1985, prescribes the punishment for financing illicit traffic and harbouring offenders.

    Earlier amendment in 2014

    • In 2014, a substantial amendment was made to the NDPS Act to allow for better medical access to narcotic drugs.
    • It defined “essential drugs”; under Section 9 and allowed the manufacture, possession, transport, import inter-State, export inter-State, sale, purchase, consumption and use of essential narcotic drugs.
    • But before the 2014 amendment, a Section 2(viii)a already existed and contained a catalogue of offences for which the punishment is prescribed in Section 27A.

    What is Section 21A?

    • Section 27A reads: Whoever indulges in financing, directly or indirectly or harbours any person engaged in any of the aforementioned activities, shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment.
    • The term shall not be less than ten years and may extend to twenty years.
    • The accused shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees.

    What was the drafting “anomaly”?

    • While defining “essential drugs” in 2014, the legislation re-numbered Section 2.
    • The catalogue of offences, originally listed under Section 2(viii)a, was now under Section 2(viii)b.
    • In the amendment, Section 2(viii)a defined essential narcotic drugs.
    • However, the drafters missed amending the enabling provision in Section 27A to change Section 2(viii)a to Section 2(viii)b.

    What was the result of the drafting error?

    • Section 27A punished offences mentioned under Section 2(viiia) sub-clauses i-v.
    • However, Section 2 (viiia) sub-clauses i-v, which were supposed to be the catalogue of offences, does not exist after the 2014 amendment. It is now Section 2(viiib).
    • This error in the text meant since 2014, Section 27A was inoperable.

    When was the error noticed?

    • In June this year, the Tripura High Court, while hearing a reference made by the district court, flagged the drafting error, urging the Centre to bring in an amendment and rectify it.
    • In 2016, an accused had sought bail before a special judge in West Tripura in Agartala, citing this omission in drafting.

    Why can’t it be applied retrospectively?

    • Article 20(1) of the Constitution says that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of the law in force at the time of the commission.
    • The person shall not be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
    • This protection means that a person cannot be prosecuted for an offence that was not a “crime” under the law when it was committed.

    Does the latest amendment make it retrospective?

    • In September, the government brought in an ordinance to rectify the drafting error, which Lok Sabha. “It shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of May 2014,” the Bill reads.
    • Retrospective application is permitted in clarificatory amendments.
    • This 2021 amendment is not a substantive one, that is why the retrospective is allowed.

     

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

  • Inter-State Boundary Disputes in India

    The Union Home Ministry (MHA) has informed that 11 States and one Union Territory have boundary disputes between them.

    Why in news?

    • There are disputes arising out of the demarcation of boundaries and claims and counterclaims over territories.
    • Occasional protests and incidents of violence are reported from some of the disputed border areas.

    Major boundary disputes include:

    [1] Karnataka-Maharashtra

    • The Belgaum district is arguably part of one of the biggest inter-state border disputes in India.
    • The district has a large Marathi and Kannada-speaking populations and has been at the centre of a dispute for a long time.
    • The area came under Karnataka in 1956 when states were reorganized and till then it was under the Bombay presidency.

    [2] Assam-Mizoram

    • The border dispute between Assam and Mizoram is a legacy of two British-era notifications of 1875 and 1933, when Mizoram was called Lushai Hills, a district in Assam.
    • The 1875 notification differentiated Lushai Hills from the plains of Cachar and the other demarcated boundary between Lushai Hills and Manipur.
    • While Mizoram became a state only in 1987 following years of insurgency, it still insists on the boundary decided in 1875.
    • Assam, on the other hand, wants the boundary demarcated in 1986 (based on the 1933 notification).
    • In that case, entire Mizoram was part of Assam before the Independence,” Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on July 27.
    • Mizoram says the 1986 agreement is not acceptable as the Mizo civil society was not consulted at that time.

    [3] Haryana-Himachal Pradesh

    • The Parwanoo region has had the spotlight over the border dispute between the two states.
    • It is next to the Panchkula district of Haryana and the state has claimed parts of the land in Himachal Pradesh as its own.

    [4] Himachal Pradesh-Ladakh

    • Himachal and Ladakh lay claim to Sarchu, an area on the route between Leh and Manali.
    • It is considered a major point where travellers stop when travelling between the two cities.
    • Sarchu is in between Himachal’s Lahul and Spiti district and Leh district in Ladakh.

    [5] Arunachal Pradesh-Assam

    • Arunachal’s grievance is that the re-organisation of North Eastern states unilaterally transferred several forested tracts in the plains that had traditionally belonged to hill tribal chiefs and communities to Assam.
    • After Arunachal Pradesh achieved statehood in 1987, a tripartite committee was appointed which recommended that certain territories be transferred from Assam to Arunachal.
    • Assam contested this and the matter is before the Supreme Court.

    [6] Meghalaya-Assam

    • The problem between Assam and Meghalaya started when the latter challenged the Assam Reorganisation Act of 1971, which gave Blocks I and II of the Mikir Hills or present-day Karbi Anglong district to Assam.
    • Meghalaya contends that both these blocks formed part of the erstwhile United Khasi and Jaintia Hills district when it was notified in 1835.
    • Meghalaya bases its case on survey maps of 1872 and 1929 and certain notifications of 1878 and 1951, while Assam wants to go by the rejected recommendations of the Churachand Committee.

    [7] Assam-Nagaland

    • The longest-running border dispute in the North East is between Assam and Nagaland, which began soon after Nagaland became a state in 1963.
    • The Nagaland State Act of 1962 had defined the state’s borders according to a 1925 notification when Naga Hills and Tuensang Area (NHTA) were integrated into a new administrative unit.
    • Nagaland, however, does not accept the boundary delineation and has demanded that the new state should also have all Naga-dominated areas in North Cachar and Nagaon districts.
    • Since Nagaland did not accept its notified borders, tensions between Assam and Nagaland flared up soon after the latter was formed, resulting in the first border clashes in 1965.
    • This was followed by major clashes between the two states along the border in 1968, 1979, 1985, 2007, 2014 and 2021.

     

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

  • India-UK ties

    Context

    When Delhi thinks of technological cooperation with major powers, the US, Europe and Japan come to mind. The missing link in India’s technological mind space, however, is the United Kingdom.

    How India can benefit from technology partnership with Britain

    • Britain was the first nation to industrialise and has a long tradition of scientific research and technological development.
    • With top-ranking universities and the golden triangle of science and innovation — London, Oxford and Cambridge — Britain is one of the world’s top technology powers.
    • WIPO ranking: This year, the World Intellectual Property Organisation ranked Britain fourth in the global innovation index.
    • India is far behind at the 46th position.
    • India, then, could gain in a technology partnership with Britain.

    Overview of the India-UK bilateral ties

    • Pakistan angle: India’s foreign policy community can’t shake off the Pakistan prism in viewing London.
    • To be sure, London’s advocacy of Pakistan has always irritated Delhi.
    • Instead of complaining about London’s South Asian policy, Delhi now simply ignores London’s claims for a special role in India’s political disputes with Pakistan.
    • By focusing on the positive, Delhi is betting it can reduce the traditional negative elements in the engagement with the UK.
    • At the same time, Delhi recognises the enormous strategic possibilities with Britain and is willing to invest political capital to build on those synergies.
    • Meanwhile, the steady relative decline of Pakistan — its economy is now about a tenth of India’s — and Delhi’s deepening strategic partnership with Washington are also encouraging London to rethink its past approach to the Subcontinent.
    • India is fully conscious of UK’s enduring global salience.
    • External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar has often highlighted Britain’s continuing weight in the world as the fifth-largest economy, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a major financial centre, and a leading hub of higher education and technology.
    • Britain also enjoys a global maritime reach and a measure of political influence across the world.

    Possibilities for partnership in the technological domain

    • While a trade agreement between Delhi and London is said to be imminent, it is in the technological domain that the prospects are immense but under-explored.
    • There is insufficient awareness in India’s strategic community of the British moves to put science and technology at the very heart of its political, economic, security and foreign policies.
    •  London announced a raft of measures this year starting with a major report on “Global Britain in a Competitive Age: An Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development, and Foreign Policy”.
    • One of the broad themes stand out from these initiatives, which is forming a coalition of like-minded countries.
    • London wants to build a coalition of like-minded countries to reshape the global governance of technology.
    • This includes strengthening technological ties with the traditionally close partners in the Anglosphere — US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand — as well as other partners like Japan and India.
    • All these elements of British policy mesh with India’s own economic, political, and security interests.
    • The British technology initiatives are also aligned with the technological agenda of the Quad — or the Quadrilateral forum that brings together Australia, India, Japan, and the US.

    Consider the question “In India’s partnership with the UK, it is the technological domain where prospects are immense but underexplored. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    For Delhi, the essence of the new alliance with Britain is fourfold — generate domestic prosperity, enhance national security, climb up the global technology hierarchy, and contribute to the construction of a free, open, and democratic global technological order.

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

    Back2Basics: Major themes of the policy report on “Global Britain in a Competitive Age”

    • [1] Leverage technology to “level up” the regional and social inequalities in Britain.
    • [2] Ensure Britain’s privileged position as a leading science power.
    • [3] Focus on technological innovation to drive Britain’s future economic growth.
    • [4] Build internal security resilience against new technological threats.
    • [5] Modernise the intelligence apparatus with the help of new technologies.
    • [6] Integrate technology into the national defence strategy as new capabilities like AI become as consequential as battle-tanks, ships and fighter jets.
    • [7] Project technological power to counter malevolent actors in the international system.
    • [8]A coalition of like-minded countries.

  • India stands committed to UNCLOS

    India remains committed to promoting a free, open and rules-based order rooted in international law and undaunted by coercion, the Centre informed Parliament while reiterating support for the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

    Background of UNCLOS

    • UNCLOS replaces the older ‘freedom of the seas’ concept, dating from the 17th century.
    • According to this concept, national rights were limited to a specified belt of water extending from a nation’s coastlines, usually 3 nautical miles (5.6 km; 3.5 mi).
    • This was considered according to the ‘cannon shot’ rule developed by the Dutch rulers.

    About UNCLOS

    • UNCLOS is sometimes referred to as the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty.
    • It came into operation and became effective from 16th November 1982.
    • It defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world’s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources.
    • It has created three new institutions on the international scene :
    1. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea,
    2. International Seabed Authority
    3. Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf

    Note: UNCLOS does not deal with matters of territorial disputes or to resolve issues of sovereignty, as that field is governed by rules of customary international law on the acquisition and loss of territory.

    Major conventions:

    There had been three major conferences of UNCLOS:

    1. UNCLOS I: It resulted in the successful implementation of various conventions regarding Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zones, Continental Shelf, High Seas, Fishing Rights.
    2. UNCLOS II: No agreement was reached over breadth of territorial waters.
    3. UNCLOS III: It introduced a number of provisions. The most significant issues covered were setting limits, navigation, archipelagic status and transit regimes, exclusive economic zones (EEZs), continental shelf jurisdiction, deep seabed mining, the exploitation regime, protection of the marine environment, scientific research, and settlement of disputes.

    The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully defined baseline.

    These terminologies are as follows:

    (1) Baseline

    • The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully defined baseline.
    • Normally, a sea baseline follows the low-water line, but when the coastline is deeply indented, has fringing islands or is highly unstable, straight baselines may be used.

    (2) Internal waters

    • It covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline.
    • The coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within internal waters.
    • A vessel in the high seas assumes jurisdiction under the internal laws of its flag State.

    (3) Territorial waters

    • Out to 12 nautical miles (22 km, 14 miles) from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource.
    • Vessels were given the Right of Innocent Passage through any territorial waters.
    • “Innocent passage” is defined by the convention as passing through waters in an expeditious and continuous manner, which is not “prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security” of the coastal state.
    • Fishing, polluting, weapons practice, and spying are not “innocent”, and submarines and other underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to show their flag.
    • Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of their security.

    (4) Archipelagic waters

    • The convention set the definition of “Archipelagic States”, which also defines how the state can draw its territorial borders.
    • All waters inside this baseline are designated “Archipelagic Waters”.
    • The state has sovereignty over these waters mostly to the extent it has over internal waters, but subject to existing rights including traditional fishing rights of immediately adjacent states.
    • Foreign vessels have right of innocent passage through archipelagic waters, but archipelagic states may limit innocent passage to designated sea lanes.

    (5) Contiguous zone

    • Beyond the 12-nautical-mile (22 km) limit, there is a further 12 nautical miles (22 km) from the territorial sea baseline limit, the contiguous zone.
    • Here a state can continue to enforce laws in four specific areas (customs, taxation, immigration, and pollution) if the infringement started or is about to occur within the state’s territory or territorial waters.
    • This makes the contiguous zone a hot pursuit area.

    (6) Exclusive economic zones (EEZs)

    • These extend 200 nm from the baseline.
    • Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources.
    • In casual use, the term may include the territorial sea and even the continental shelf.

    (7) Continental shelf

    • The continental shelf is defined as the natural prolongation of the land territory to the continental margin’s outer edge, or 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the coastal state’s baseline, whichever is greater.

    India and UNCLOS

    • As a State party to the UNCLOS, India promoted utmost respect for the UNCLOS, which established the international legal order of the seas and oceans.
    • India also supported freedom of navigation and overflight, and unimpeded commerce based on the principles of international law, reflected notably in the UNCLOS 1982.
    • India is committed to safeguarding maritime interests and strengthening security in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) to ensure a favorable and positive maritime environment.

     

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

  • [pib] Lokpal-Online: Platform for management of complaints

    The (first) Chairperson, Lokpal of India, Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose has inaugurated’ a digital Platform for Management of Complaints called ‘Lokpal-Online’.

    Lokpal-Online

    • Lokpal-Online is an end-to-end digital solution for the management of complaints against public servants filed under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.
    • It is a web-based facility, which will quicken the disposal of complaints in an accountable, transparent and efficient manner with benefits to all stakeholders.
    • It facilitates handling of complaints during the complete lifecycle of the Complaint, right from its filing to the final disposal.
    • It aims to bring more transparency and efficiency to the complaint handling mechanism.

    Notable features of Online-Lokpal

    • Convenience to complainants for filing complaints online from anywhere anytime
    • Information to the complainant about action on the complaint at every stage through e-mails and SMS
    • Facility to the complainant to ascertain the status of complaint at anytime
    • Identity of the complaint is kept confidential
    • The CVC, CBI and other inquiry agencies can upload their reports directly on the ‘Lokpal-Online’ platform.
    • Reminders to inquiry agencies through e-mails and SMS
    • Generation of analytical reports as per requirement

    Back2Basics: Lokpal

    • The Lokpal, the apex body to inquire and investigate graft complaints against public functionaries, came into being with the appointment of its chairperson and members in March 2019.
    • In March 2019, former SC judge Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose was selected as the first head of the Lokpal.

    Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013

    • The Lokpal Act 2013 is anti-corruption legislation that seeks to provide for the establishment of the institution of Lokpal.
    • It seeks to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain important public functionaries including the PM, cabinet ministers, MPs, Group A officials of the Central Government, etc.
    • The Bill was introduced in the parliament following massive public protests led by anti-corruption crusader Anna Hazare and his associates.
    • The Bill is one of the most widely discussed and debated Bills in India in recent times.

    Its history

    • The term Lokpal was coined in 1963 by Laxmi Mall Singhvi, a member of parliament during a parliamentary debate about grievance mechanisms.
    • The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) headed by Morarji Desai submitted an interim report on “Problems of Redressal of Citizen’s Grievances” in 1966.
    • In this report, ARC recommended the creation of two special authorities designated as ‘Lokpal’ and ‘Lokayukta’ for a redress of citizens’ grievances.
    • Maharashtra was the first state to introduce Lokayukta through The Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act in 1971.

     

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