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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Why the MTP Bill is not progressive enough

    The article highlights key changes the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Bill, 2021 seeks to make in the 1971 Act and also deals with the issues with some of these changes.

    Key changes

    • The 1971 Act had moral biases against sexual relationships outside marriage, adopts an ableist approach and carries a strong eugenic emphasis.
    • In addition to preventing danger to the life or risk to physical or mental health of the woman, “eugenic grounds” were recognised as a specific category for legally permissible abortions.
    • To deal with these issues the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was passed by the parliament.
    • The bill is being hailed for two reasons:
    • First, the bill replaces “any married woman or her husband” with “any woman or her partner” while contemplating termination of pregnancies resulting from contraception failures, thus ostensibly destigmatising pregnancies outside marriage.
    • Second, the time limit within which pregnancies are legally terminable is increased.

    Issues with the Bill

    1) Scope for executive overreach

    • The bill raises the upper gestational limits for the two categories of permissible abortions envisioned in Section 3(2) of the 1971 Act.
    • Limit for the first category in which pregnancies are terminable subject to the opinion of one medical practitioner is raised from 12 weeks to 20 weeks.
    • The limit for the second category in which pregnancies are terminable subject to the opinion of two medical practitioners is raised to include those exceeding 20 but not exceeding 24 weeks, instead of the present category of cases exceeding 12 but not exceeding 20 weeks.
    • However, the second category is left ambiguous and open to potential executive overreach insofar as it may be further narrowed down by rules made by the executive.

    2) Rejection of the bodily autonomy of women

    • Pregnancies are allowed to be terminated only where:
    • 1) Continuance of the pregnancy would “prejudice the life of the pregnant woman.
    • 2) Or cause grave injury to her mental or physical health”
    • 3) Or “if the child were born it would suffer from any serious physical or mental abnormality.”
    • As such, the bill seeks to cater to women “who need to terminate pregnancy” as against “women who want to terminate pregnancy.”
    •  By not accounting for the right to abortion at will the Bill effectively cripples women’s bodily autonomy.

    3) Ableist approach

    • A woman’s right to terminate the pregnancy of a child likely to suffer from physical or mental anomalies or one diagnosed with foetal abnormalities, on socio-economic grounds or otherwise, merits recognition.
    • However, in treating “physical or mental disability” or “foetal abnormalities” as separate categories amounting to heightened circumstances for termination of pregnancies, the bill reveals its ableist approach.
    • This evidences a presumption that certain people are by default societally unproductive, undesirable and somehow more justifiably eliminable than others.
    • This ableism becomes stark when the said 24-week limit, which is purportedly dictated by scientific and legislative wisdom, is completely lifted where the termination of a pregnancy involves “substantial foetal abnormalities”.

    4) Dichotomy in allowing termination beyond 24 weeks

    • When read together with Section 3(2B) of the bill, a strange dichotomy emerges:
    • 1) It is either the case that medical advancement is such that a safe abortion is possible at any point in the term of pregnancy, and hence, the bill allows it in case of “substantial foetal abnormalities” .
    • Or that, a 24-week ceiling is scientifically essential and abortions beyond the said limit would pose risks to the health of the pregnant woman or the foetus.
    • If it is the former, then allowing termination only in cases of “substantial foetal abnormalities” is a fictitious and moralistic classification.
    • If it is the latter, then the secondary status of women’s safety and the dominant eugenic tenor of the bill once again becomes evident.

    Need to sensitise healthcare provider

    • Access to abortion facilities is limited not just by legislative barriers but also the fear of judgment from medical practitioners.
    • It is imperative that healthcare providers be sensitised towards being scientific, objective and compassionate in their approach to abortions notwithstanding the woman’s marital status.

    Consider the question “What are the changes the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Bill, 2021 seeks to make in the 1971 Act. Discuss the issues with the changed provision in the Act.

    Conclusion

    In KS Puttaswamy v Union of India, the Supreme Court recognised women’s constitutional right to “abstain from procreating” was read into the right to privacy, dignity and bodily autonomy. The MTPA Bill falls short of meeting this constitutional standard and its own stated objectives.

  • Sanctions on China over Uighurs: Cause & Effect

    In a coordinated move, many countries imposed sanctions on Chinese officials for human rights abuses against Uighurs and other minorities in Xinjiang province.

    The Uighurs

    • Xinjiang has a large number of Uighurs, Muslims of Turkic descent.
    • Over the past few decades, more and more Han Chinese has settled in Xinjiang, which saw violent clashes between them and the Uighurs.

    The sanctions have come after a meeting between the US and Chinese officials in Alaska last week, in what Washington described as “tough and direct talks”.

    This was a “Tu-Tu, Mai-Mai” conservation if you had seen the news!

    Sanctions on China

    • The European Union, the US, Britain, and Canada imposed sanctions on Chinese Officials.
    • Australia and New Zealand issued a joint statement welcoming the Western action, adding they were concerned about reports of abuses from Xinjiang.
    • China on the other hand has consistently denied all reports of atrocities against Uighurs, maintaining it is only “deradicalising” elements of its population in the interests of security.

    Retaliation by China

    • Those sanctioned by China include five Members of the European Parliament and the Political and Security Committee, the EU’s main foreign policy decision-making body, among others.
    • China also summoned the EU ambassador and the UK ambassador to lodge “solemn protests”.

    Why these sanctions are crucial?

    • This is the first time the EU has imposed sanctions on China since an arms embargo after the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. That is still in place.
    • Although the EU sanctions are not very damaging, they show a hardening of stance against its largest trading partner.
    • Also significant is that the Western powers moved together, in what is being seen as a result of the US push to deal with China along with its allies.

    Nations that claim to be defenders of the faith or self-proclaimed Caliphates are silent on the persecution of Uighurs! They perceived the abrogation of Art. 370 as a doomsday event! This is height of hypocrisy!

    Reasons behind: Crackdown on Uighurs

    • China is accused of putting over a million people in internment camps to “de-Muslimise” them and make them integrate better in the Communist country.
    • Allegations are that these people have been forced to leave behind their occupations, properties and families, to stay at the camps.
    • Survivors, human rights organisations, and governments of other countries have alleged physical, psychological and sexual torture.
    • People can be sent to the camps for showing any signs of “extremism” — sporting beards, fasting during Ramzan, dressing differently from the majority, sending Eid greetings, praying “too often” etc.

    The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture because it seeks to turn other ideas – uncertainty, progress, change – into crimes.

  • Corrective voice from Supreme Court against stereotyping of women

    A judgment by the Supreme Court forbidding judges from making gender-stereotypical comments came as a corrective voice from within the highest judiciary.

    Q.Discuss the need for gender sensitization of the judicial institutions.

    What is the news?

    • The judgment came days after the CJI, during a virtual hearing reportedly asked an alleged rapist’s lawyer to enquire whether his client would marry the survivor.
    • His statement coincided with International Women’s Day.
    • Days later, a Bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and S. Ravindra Bhat urged courts to avoid using reasoning/language which diminished a sexual offence and tended to trivialize the survivor.

    What did the Court say?

    • The greatest extent of sensitivity is to be displayed in the judicial approach, language and reasoning adopted by the judge.
    • Even a solitary instance of such order or utterance in court, reflects adversely on the entire judicial system of the country, undermining the guarantee to fair justice to all, and especially to victims of sexual violence.
    • This judgment is one among a series of interventions with which the apex court has clamped down on abuse and sex stereotyping of women.

    No institution is mightier than the modesty of a woman.

    SC against stereotyping

    Some of the notable judgments which have lashed out at sex stereotyping include:

    1. The framing of the Vishaka Guidelines on sexual harassment of women in working places, and
    2. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s historic judgment giving women Armed Forces officers’ equal access to Permanent Commission while debunking the establishment’s claim that women were physiologically weaker than men
    3. In the Anuj Garg case, the Supreme Court had rebuked “the notion of romantic paternalism”, which, “in practical effect, put women, not on a pedestal, but in a cage”

    Avoid gender stereotypes such as:

    The courts should desist from expressing any stereotype opinion, in words spoken during proceedings, or in the course of a judicial order, to the effect that

    • women are physically weak and need protection;
    • men are the “head” of the household and should take all the decisions relating to family;
    • women should be submissive and obedient according to our culture;
    • “good” women are sexually chaste;
    • motherhood is the duty and role of every woman and assumptions to the effect that she wants to be a mother;
    • being alone at night or wearing certain clothes make women responsible for being attacked;
    • lack of evidence of physical harm in sexual offence case leads to an inference of consent by the woman.

    Conclusion

    • Stereotyping compromises the impartiality and integrity of the justice system, which can, in turn, lead to miscarriages of justice, including the re-victimization of complainants.
    • Often judges adopt rigid standards about what they consider to be appropriate behaviour for women and penalize those who do not conform to these stereotypes.

    There should be gender sensitization

    • The court-mandated that a module on gender sensitization is included, as part of the foundational training of every judge.
    • This module must aim at imparting techniques for judges to be more sensitive in hearing and deciding cases of sexual assault, and eliminating entrenched social bias, especially misogyny.

  • National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development Bill, 2021

    Finance Minister has introduced the National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development (NaBFID) Bill 2021 in the Lok Sabha to pave way for setting up a government-owned DFI to fund infra projects.

    NaBFID Bill

    • The NaBFID Bill, 2021 was introduced in Lok Sabha on March 22, 2021.
    • The Bill seeks to establish the National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development (NBFID) as the principal development financial institution (DFIs) for infrastructure financing.

    What are DFIs?

    • DFIs are set up for providing long-term finance for such segments of the economy where the risks involved are beyond the acceptable limits of commercial banks and other ordinary financial institutions.
    • Unlike banks, DFIs do not accept deposits from people.
    • They source funds from the market, government, as well as multi-lateral institutions, and are often supported through government guarantees.

    Note every statement about DFIs such as – Terms of finance, Sources of funds, Savings option etc. 

    Key provisions of the Bill

    NBFID:

    • NBFID will be set up as a corporate body with an authorised share capital of one lakh crore rupees.
    • Shares of NBFID may be held by (i) central government, (ii) multilateral institutions, (iii) sovereign wealth funds, (iv) pension funds, (v) insurers, (vi) financial institutions, (vii) banks, and (viii) any other institution prescribed by the central government.
    • Initially, the central government will own 100% shares of the institution which may subsequently be reduced up to 26%.

    Functions of NBFID:

    • NBFID will have both financial as well as developmental objectives.
    • Financial objectives will be to directly or indirectly lend, invest, or attract investments for infrastructure projects located entirely or partly in India.
    • The central government will prescribe the sectors to be covered under the infrastructure domain.
    • Developmental objectives include facilitating the development of the market for bonds, loans, and derivatives for infrastructure financing.

    Functions of NBFID include:

    • extending loans and advances for infrastructure projects,
    • taking over or refinancing such existing loans,
    • attracting investment from private sector investors and institutional investors for infrastructure projects,
    • organising and facilitating foreign participation in infrastructure projects,
    • facilitating negotiations with various government authorities for dispute resolution in the field of infrastructure financing, and
    • providing consultancy services in infrastructure financing

    Source of funds:

    • NBFID may raise money in the form of loans or otherwise both in Indian rupees and foreign currencies, or secure money by the issue and sale of various financial instruments including bonds and debentures.
    • NBFID may borrow money from: (i) central government, (ii) Reserve Bank of India (RBI), (iii) scheduled commercial banks, (iii) mutual funds, and (iv) multilateral institutions such as World Bank and Asian Development Bank.

    Management of NBFID:

    • NBFID will be governed by a Board of Directors.
    • The members of the Board include: (i) the Chairperson appointed by the central government in consultation with RBI, (ii) a Managing Director, (iii) up to three Deputy Managing Directors among others.
    • A body constituted by the central government will recommend candidates for the post of the Managing Director and Deputy Managing Directors.
    • The Board will appoint independent directors based on the recommendation of an internal committee.

    Support from the central government:

    • The central government will provide grants worth Rs 5,000 crore to NBFID by the end of the first financial year.
    • The government will also provide a guarantee at a concessional rate of up to 0.1% for borrowing from multilateral institutions, sovereign wealth funds, and other foreign funds.
    • Costs towards insulation from fluctuations in foreign exchange (in connection with borrowing in foreign currency) may be reimbursed by the government in part or full.
    • Upon request by NBFID, the government may guarantee the bonds, debentures, and loans issued by NBFID.

    Prior sanction for investigation and prosecution:

    • No investigation can be initiated against employees of NBFID without the prior sanction of (i) the central government in case of the chairperson or other directors, and (ii) the managing director in case of other employees.
    • Courts will also require prior sanction for taking cognisance of offences in matters involving employees of NBFID.

    Other DFIs:

    • The Bill also provides for any person to set up a DFI by applying to RBI.
    • RBI may grant a licence for DFI in consultation with the central government.
    • RBI will also prescribe regulations for these DFIs.

    With inputs from:

    PRS India

  • Indus Water Panel holds meeting

    After a gap of more than two and a half years, the Indian and Pakistani delegations began the 116th Meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission.

    Indus Waters Treaty, 1960

    • The Indus Waters Treaty is a water-distribution treaty between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank signed in Karachi in 1960.
    • According to this agreement, control over the water flowing in three “eastern” rivers of India — the Beas, the Ravi and the Sutlej was given to India
    • The control over the water flowing in three “western” rivers of India — the Indus, the Chenab and the Jhelum was given to Pakistan
    • The treaty allowed India to use western rivers water for limited irrigation use and unrestricted use for power generation, domestic, industrial and non-consumptive uses such as navigation, floating of property, fish culture, etc. while laying down precise regulations for India to build projects
    • India has also been given the right to generate hydroelectricity through the run of the river (RoR) projects on the Western Rivers which, subject to specific criteria for design and operation is unrestricted.

    Based on equitable water-sharing

    • Back in time, partitioning the Indus rivers system was inevitable after the Partition of India in 1947.
    • The sharing formula devised after prolonged negotiations sliced the Indus system into two halves.
    • Equitable it may have seemed, but the fact remained that India conceded 80.52 per cent of the aggregate water flows in the Indus system to Pakistan.
    • It also gave Rs 83 crore in pounds sterling to Pakistan to help build replacement canals from the western rivers. Such generosity is unusual of an upper riparian.
    • India conceded its upper riparian position on the western rivers for the complete rights on the eastern rivers. Water was critical for India’s development plans.

    Significance of the treaty

    • It is a treaty that is often cited as an example of the possibilities of peaceful coexistence that exist despite the troubled relationship.
    • Well-wishers of the treaty often dub it “uninterrupted and uninterruptible”.
    • The World Bank, which, as the third party, played a pivotal role in crafting the IWT, continues to take particular pride that the treaty functions.

    Need for a rethink

    • The role of India, as a responsible upper riparian abiding by the provisions of the treaty, has been remarkable.
    • However, of late, India is under pressure to rethink the extent to which it can remain committed to the provisions, as its overall political relations with Pakistan becomes intractable.

  • How amendment bill will affect Delhi’s administration

    The article highlights the issues with the amendment bill introduced by the Centre to clarify the term ‘Government’.

    Why Delhi was made Union Territory: Historical background

    • When the Constitution came into force, there were four kinds of States, called Parts A,B, C and D States.
    • The last two were administered by centrally appointed Chief Commissioners and Lieutenant Governors, with no locally elected Assemblies to aid and advise them.
    • First, it was felt that if Delhi became a part of any constituent State of the Union, that State would sooner or later acquire a predominant position in relation to other States.
    • Second, the need for keeping the National Capital under the control of the Union Government was deemed to be vital in the national interest.
    • Third, it was felt that if Delhi became a full State, the administration of the National Capital would be divided into rigid compartments of the State field and Union field.
    • Conflicts would likely arise in vital matters, particularly if the two governments were run by different political parties.
    • Hence, Delhi was initially made a Part C State.
    • In 1951, a Legislative Assembly was created with an elected Chief Minister.
    • In 1956, when the Constitution of India was amended to implement the provisions of the States Reorganisation Act, only two categories, namely, States and Union Territories remained in the Indian Union.
    • Delhi then became a Union Territory to be administered by an Administrator appointed by the President.
    • Ten years later, the Delhi Administration Act, 1966 provided for a limited representative Government in Delhi through a Metropolitan Council comprising 56 elected Members and five nominated Members.

    Balakrishnan Committee report

    • In 1989, the Balakrishnan Committee recommended that Delhi should continue to be a Union Territory but that there must be a Legislative Assembly and Council of Ministers responsible to the said Assembly with appropriate powers.
    • Based on this report, the Constitution (69th) Amendment Act and the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCT) Act, 1991 were passed.
    • They roughly restored the kind of governance system that was offered to Delhi in 1952: a Union Territory with a Legislative Assembly, a Council of Ministers and an elected Chief Minister.
    • This limited reincarnation has continued to hold the field to date, despite several efforts to progress to full or near-statehood.

    LG-Delhi Government conflict

    • A Bench in 2018 ruled over the conflict and said that Parliament envisaged a representative form of Government for the NCT of Delhi.
    • The Bench also said that the Constitution has mandated a federal balance wherein independence of a certain required degree is assured to the State Governments.
    • The remaining issues of governance, especially in the matter of control over Delhi government servants, was remitted to two judges of the Court for further adjudication.
    • In 2019, there was a difference of opinion recorded in separate judgments by the two judges and the matter awaits hearing before a larger Bench. 

    Issues with the Amendment Bill

    • The central government recently introduced a Bill, namely, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Bill, 2021 seeks, inter alia, to clarify the expression ‘Government’ in 2018 Supreme Court judgement.
    • The Bill effectively reduces the elected government to a mere vestigial organ and elevates the centrally appointed LG, to the position of a Viceroy with plenipotentiary powers.
    • It further provides that before taking any executive action to exercise powers of Government, the opinion of Lieutenant Governor shall be obtained on all such matters as may be specified by Lieutenant Governor.
    • The population of Delhi which counts among the highest in the world, will have an unrepresentative administration.
    • It is quite likely that the amendment act will end up being challenged in the constitutional courts.
    • The Supreme Court has already cautioned — “Interpretation cannot ignore the conscience of the Constitution.“

    Consider the question “Examine the issues with Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Bill, 2021. Do you think that the Bill will avoid the conflict between the LG and the Delhi government?” 

    Conclusion

    The Amendment Bill should be reconsidered given its impact on the administration of the Delhi government.

  • Applying lessons from India-Bangladesh ties to relations with Pakistan

    There is a sharp contrast between India’s relations with its neighbours two neighbours: Pakistan and Bangladesh. The article suggest drawing on the lessons from Indo-Bangladesh relations to mend Indo-Pak relations.

    Indo-Bangladesh relations

    • Prime Minister of India will travel to Dhaka this week to commemorate Bangladesh’s Declaration of Independence from Pakistan 50 years ago.
    • From being one of the world’s poorest countries in 1972, Bangladesh is now racing to be in the world’s top 25 economies by the end of this decade.
    • It is also a time for deeper reflection — on the inability of the region to come to a closure on the two Partitions of the subcontinent, the first in 1947 and the second in 1971.
    • Delhi and Dhaka have started finding ways to overcome the tragedy of the Partition to chart a new course of bilateral and regional cooperation.
    • Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has provided strong leadership in advancing ties with India over the last decade and more.
    • Recently the Indian government mobilised enough political support to get a boundary settlement agreement with Bangladesh approved by the Parliament.
    • India also backed an international tribunal’s award resolving the maritime territorial dispute with Bangladesh.
    • The steady improvement in bilateral relations over the last decade has reflected in growing trade volumes, expanding trans-border connectivity, mutual cooperation on terrorism, and widening regional cooperation.

    Applying lessons from Indo-Bangladesh relations to Indo-Pak relations

    • Positive changes in India’s relations with Pakistan have been elusive.
    • Hopes have been rekindled by the agreement late last month between the two military establishments to a ceasefire on the border and to address each other’s concerns.
    • Following are the lessons we can learn and apply productively to Indo-Pak relations

    1) Importance of political stability

    • First lesson is the importance of political stability and policy continuity that have helped Delhi and Dhaka deepen bilateral ties over the last decade.
    • In contrast, the political cycles in Delhi and Islamabad have rarely been in sync.
    • Pakistan’s mainstream civilian leaders have all supported engagement with India.
    • In fact, it is the military that is yet to make up its collective mind.

    2) Concerns for mutual security

    • Cooperation in countering terrorism built deep mutual trust between Dhaka and Delhi.
    • That trust helped deal with many complex issues facing the relationship.
    • In the case of Pakistan, its army has sought to use cross-border terrorism as a political lever to compel India to negotiate on Kashmir.
    • If sponsoring terror seemed a smart strategy in the past, it has now become the source of international political and economic pressure on Pakistan.

    3) Depoliticise national economic interests

    • Delhi and Dhaka have steadily moved forward on issues relating to trade, transit and connectivity by dealing with them on their own specific merits.
    • Pakistan, on the other hand, has made sensible bilateral commercial cooperation and regional economic integration hostages to the Kashmir question.
    • It is not clear if Pakistan is ready to separate the two and expand trade ties while talking to India on Kashmir.

    Consider the question “The steady improvement in bilateral relations with Bangladesh over the last decade can offer valuable lessons to be applied to India-Pakistan relations. In light of this, examine the factors that India and Pakistan need to focus on to achieve improvement in bilateral relations.”

    Conclusion

    Both India and Pakistan need to recognise the importance of pursuing the national well being through regional cooperation. That is exactly what Bangladesh has done in the last decade.

  • Mizoram’s bond with people fleeing Myanmar

    Mizoram CM has expressed his sympathies for the people fleeing areas bordering Mizoram. These areas are inhabited by Chin communities who are ethnically Mizo.

    Map reading: Note all NE states bordering Myanmar.

    Who are the Chin communities?

    • The Chin Hills, or the Indo-Chin hill ranges as they are often called, are a mountainous region in north-western Myanmar.
    • At an elevation of 2100-3000 metres, this heavily- forested mountain region was the home of numerous tribes that fall under the Zo umbrella.
    • The Zo people include all the tribes that come under the Chin-Kuki-Mizo ethnic group spread across Myanmar, India and Bangladesh.
    • They include a host of tribes, sub-tribes and clans such as Chin, Kuki, Mizo, Zomi, Paitei, Hmar, Lushei, Ralte, Pawi, Lai, Mara, Gangte, Thadou etc.

    Their ethnic origin

    • Believed to have originated in China, the tribes migrated through Tibet to settle in Myanmar, and speak a group of the Tibeto-Burman languages.
    • But constant feuds among clans of different tribes and their kings (chieftains), drove many of the clans westwards, towards Mizoram and some parts of Manipur, in the 17th century.
    • Here the tribes set up new villages and colonies, but even with their new identities, they remain socially and emotionally tied with the Chin tribes of Myanmar.
    • When British rule extended towards the Northeast, Mizoram was denoted an “excluded area” and remained outside the administration of the British, governed only by the Scheduled District Act.

    Nature of the bond with Mizos

    • While they are separated by a 510-km India-Myanmar border, they consider themselves “one people’’ despite past conflicts: the Indo-Chin people.
    • Besides the shared ethnicity, what binds these two peoples together is a shared religion.
    • Mizoram is predominantly Christian, as are the Chin people of Buddhist-majority Myanmar.
    • Mizoram officials refer to the refugees’ status as a Christian minority people in seeking asylum for them, and also the fear of persecution by the junta.
    • Rih Dil in Chin state, Myanmar, is a cultural and spiritual lake for the Mizos, deeply revered in folklore, shaping pre-Christian belief of traditional Mizo views of life after death.

    How well are the two sides connected?

    India’s Look East, Act East policy and greater interactions on the border have strengthened an already strong connection between the people on either side of the border.

    • The Mizoram-Myanmar border is porous, with very little fencing, if any.
    • While the latest influx has been driven by the coup, Myanmar residents have been crossing this open border for decades.
    • It is understood that the actual number of refugees is much higher, with more arriving every day.
    • In the early 20th century, Mizos from Champhai district and elsewhere migrated to Myanmar, setting up villages in the Kalay-Kabaw valley.
    • Many are believed to have joined the Myanmar army for lucrative employment.
    • Many Mizo families also migrated to Myanmar in 1966 and 1986, when the Mizo National Front sought secession from India, to escape counter-insurgency operations from the Indian government.

    The Free Movement Regime

    • The Mizo social fabric spans across the border, which now separates families.
    • The two countries have an arrangement called the Free Movement Regime (FMR) that allows locals on either side to go up to 16 km on the other side and stay up to 14 days.
    • Thousands regularly cross over on either side for work and to meet relatives, often unofficially and for extended periods.
    • Marriages are often arranged across the border.

    Trade dependency on Myanmar

    • In border trade, Mizoram depends to a large extent on Myanmar for many essential commodities including beef, pork, good quality rice, fruits, and household utensils.
    • Mizoram sends across items scarce in Myanmar such as medicines or fertilisers.

    What is India’s policy on asylum seekers?

    • India is not a signatory to the 1951 United Nations Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, and it does not currently have a national law on refugees.
    • In 2011, the Centre circulated to all states and UTs a Standard Operating Procedure to deal with foreign nationals who claimed to be refugees.
    • An illegal immigrant can be a foreign national who enters India on valid travel documents and stays beyond their validity or a foreign national who enters without valid travel documents.
    • Cases can be justified on grounds of well-founded fears of persecution on account of race, religion, sex, nationality, ethnic identity, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
    • They can be recommended by states or UTs to the Home Ministry for a long-term visa (LTV) after due security verification.

    Note: LTV-holders are allowed to take up private-sector employment and enrol in any academic institution.

    What is happening in Mizoram right now?

    • The Mizo Zirlai Pawl, the apex Mizo students body, on February 3 held a sit-in demonstration in Aizawl in solidarity with the people of Myanmar.
    • Several Mizo village council authorities have issued letters and statements affirming their willingness to accommodate Chin refugees.
    • The CM gave an assurance in the Assembly that the state government would be ready to provide assistance to civilians fleeing the Myanmar regime.

    Way ahead

    • With the swell of sympathy among Mizos for the fleeing Chin people and increasing pressure on the state government, it is unlikely that Mizoram will back down any time soon — unless the Centre devises a way out.

  • Gandhi Peace Prize

    The Culture Ministry has announced that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the late Sultan of Oman, Qaboos bin Said Al Said, would be awarded the Gandhi Peace Prize for 2020 and 2019 respectively.

    Note the features of the award such as prize, the composition of jury etc.

    Gandhi Peace Prize

    • The International Gandhi Peace Prize, named after Mahatma Gandhi, is awarded annually by the Government of India.
    • As a tribute to the ideals espoused by Gandhi, the GoI launched the International Gandhi Peace Prize in 1995 on the occasion of the 125th birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi.
    • This is an annual award given to individuals and institutions for their contributions towards social, economic and political transformation through non-violence and other Gandhian methods.

    Its features

    • The award carries â‚č1 crore (US$140,000) in cash, convertible in any currency in the world, a plaque and a citation.
    • It is open to all persons regardless of nationality, race, creed or gender.
    • A jury consisting of the PM of India, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India, Speaker of the Lok Sabha and one other eminent person decides the awardees each year.
    • Ordinarily, only proposals coming from competent persons invited to nominate are considered.
    • However, a proposal is not taken as invalid for consideration by the jury merely on the ground of not having emanated from competent persons.

    Information about the awardees

    (1) Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (1920-1975)

    • The Prize recognizes the immense and unparalleled contribution of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in inspiring the liberation of Bangladesh.
    • It acknowledges the contribution in bringing stability to a nation born out of strife, laying the foundation for the close and fraternal relations between India and Bangladesh and promoting peace and non-violence in the Indian subcontinent.

    (2)Sultan Qaboos Bin Said (1940-2020)

    • Sultan Qaboos was a visionary leader whose twin policy of moderation and mediation in addressing international issues won him praise and respect across the globe.
    • He played an important role in supporting peace efforts in various regional disputes and conflicts. H.M. Sultan Qaboos was the architect of the special ties between India and Oman.
    • He had studied in India and always maintained a special relationship with India.
    • Under his leadership, India and Oman became strategic partners and our mutually beneficial, comprehensive partnership strengthened and scaled newer heights.

  • Iran deal could be rescued by the IAEA

    The article explains how IAEA could play an important role in finding a solution to the stalemate between the U.S. and Iran on JCPOA.

    Issue of Iran’s return to JCPOA

    • There is uncertainty between the U.S. and Iran on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) as to whether Iranian compliance comes first or the lifting of sanctions by the U.S.
    • In this context, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is back on the stage to rescue the JCPOA.
    • The U.S. tried to pressurise Iran by proposing a resolution in the IAEA Board of Governors meeting criticising Iranian non-compliance with the JCPOA and its alleged IAEA safeguards violations.
    • This comes amidst rumours that Iran might withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

    Iran may follow Indian model on creating a deterrent

    • Foreign Policy recently noted that Iranian society increasingly see the weapon not just as an ultimate deterrent but as a panacea for Iran’s chronic security problems and challenges to its sovereignty by foreign powers.
    • If the stalemate continues on JCPOA, because of the U.S. pressure, public opinion may shift towards the Indian model of creating a deterrent and then seeking a special dispensation to avoid severe sanctions.
    • But the risks involved in such a policy will be grave, including the possibility of military action by Israel.

    Relation between IAEA and NPT

    • The IAEA is neither the Secretariat of the NPT nor is it empowered to request States to adhere to it.
    • . It does, however, have formal responsibility in the context of implementing Article III of the Treaty.
    • At the broadest level, the IAEA provides two service functions under the NPT.
    • 1) It facilitates and provides a channel for endeavours aimed at further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
    • 2) It administer international nuclear safeguards, in accordance with Article III of the Treaty, to verify fulfilment of the non-proliferation commitment assumed by non-nuclear-weapon States party to the Treaty.
    • The NPT assigns to the IAEA the responsibility for verifying, at the global level, through its safeguards system, that non-nuclear weapon States fulfil their obligations not to use their peaceful nuclear activities to develop any nuclear explosive devices of any kind.

    How IAEA could play role in JCPOA

    • Accordingly, the Iranian file could go back to the IAEA to start fresh negotiations to restrain Iran to remain within the permissible level of enrichment of uranium.
    • This may mean going back to the pre-six nation initiative, when the IAEA could not certify that Iran was not engaged in weapon activities.
    • With the experience of the JCPOA, any new arrangement has to ensure the following:
    • 1) Iran must have sanctions relief.
    • 2) The stockpile of enriched uranium should not exceed the limits established.
    • 3) There should be guarantees that Iran will not violate the safeguards agreement.
    • The test is whether these can be accomplished within the framework of the IAEA.

    Way forward

    • Since the IAEA is a technical body, its deliberations may be kept at the technical level.
    • At the same time, since it is open for the IAEA to report to the Security Council for necessary action, the IAEA will have the necessary clout to insist on the implementation of the NPT and its additional protocol.
    • A new avenue may open for Iran to continue its peaceful nuclear activities as permitted in the NPT.

    Consider the question “Examine the role played by IAEA under NPT. How this role can help IAEA in breaking the ice between Iran and the U.S. on JCPOA?” 

    Conclusion

    Thus, IAEA can play an important role in ending the statement JCPOA finds itself in and ensure compliance from Iran on JCPOA and lifting sanctions by the U.S.

    Back2Basics: Article III of NPT

    • This article provides for the application of safeguards to ensure that nuclear material in non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS) isn’t diverted to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.
    •  NNWS must place all nuclear materials in all peaceful nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards.
    • Each nuclear weapon state (NWS) will not provide nuclear materials or equipment to a NNWS without an IAEA safeguards agreement.
    • The safeguards should comply with Article IV of the NPT, and should not hamper peaceful uses of nuclear technology or economic/technical development in general.
    • Safeguards agreements can be concluded on an individual or group basis.
    • After the entry into force of the NPT, state parties had 180 days to commence negotiation of a safeguards agreement. Currently, state parties must begin negotiations by the date they deposit their instruments of ratification or accession.