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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Indus Water Treaty turns 60

    September 19 this year marks the 60th anniversary of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) between India and Pakistan.

    Tap to read more about Indus River System:

    Drainage System | Part 3

    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.

    India plays resilient

    • That the treaty has remained “uninterrupted” is because India respects its signatory and values trans-boundary Rivers as an important connector in the region in terms of both diplomacy and economic prosperity.
    • There have been several instances of terror attacks which could have prompted India, within the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to withdraw from the IWT.
    • However, on each occasion, India chose not to do so.

    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.

  • Power, problems and potential of federalism

    The article analyses the issues of distribution of powers under the Constitution and the issues linked with it.

    Debate on the role of Centre and states

    • There is an argument for the need to re-examine the distribution of powers under the Seventh Schedule so as to rationalise the Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSSs).
    • Under the Centrally Sponsored SchemesCentre extends support in sectors pertaining to the State List.
    • Spending by the Centre on a state subject like health and need for states’ contribute to a Union subject like defence is considered.
    • However, the constitutional assignments between the Centre and subnational governments in federations, are done broadly on the basis of their respective comparative advantage.
    • That is why the provision of national public goods is in the federal domain and those with the state-level public service span are assigned to the states.

    3 settled issues in the debate

    • The debate seems to have settled on at least three counts.
    • One, the federal organisation of powers can be revisited and reframed.
    • Two, the CSSs must continue but they should be restructured.
    • Three, there is a need for an appropriate forum to discuss the complex and contentious issue of reviewing federal organisation of powers and restructuring of central transfers.

    Review of the subjects in lists

    • In spite of health being a state subject, the response to collective threats linked to the subject required some kind of organisation of federal responsibilities on a functional basis.
    • A typical response is to recommend shifting subjects to the Concurrent List to enable an active role for the Centre.
    • The High-Level Group, constituted by the 15th Finance Commission, recommended shifting health from the State to the Concurrent List.
    • A similar recommendation was made earlier by the Ashok Chawla Committee for water.

    Challenges

    • Shifting of subjects from the State to Concurrent List in times of acute sub-nationalism, deep territorialisation and competitive federalism is going to be challenging.

    Way forward

    • The most collective threats and the challenges of coping with emerging risks of sustainability are linked to either the State List subjects or require actions by states — water, agriculture, biodiversity, pollution, climate change.
    • This extended role of ensuring security against threats to sustainability of resources forms a new layer of considerations.
    • This should define the contours of a coordinated response between the Centre and States — as it happened during the pandemic.
    • In fact, such threats and challenges require the states to play a dominant role.
    • At the same time, the Centre must expand its role beyond the mitigation of inter-state externalities and address the challenges of security and sustainability.

    Consider the question “The federal organisation of powers under the Constitution’s Seventh Schedule needs review. In light of this, examine the problems faced by the distribution and suggest the challenge the review would face.”

    Conclusion

    The ongoing friction between the Centre and the states over GST reforms tells us that consensus-building is not a one-time exercise. It has to allow sustained dialogue and deliberation. Perhaps it is time to revisit the proposal for an elevated and empowered Inter-State Council.

  • What is Queen’s Counsel?

    India has suggested Pakistan appointing a Queen’s Counsel for the Kulbhushan Jadhav case to ensure a free and fair trial.

    Queen’s Counsel

    • In the UK and in some Commonwealth countries, a Queen’s Counsel during the reign of a queen is a lawyer who is appointed by the monarch of the country to be one of ’Her Majesty’s Counsel learned in the law’.
    • The position originated in England.
    • Some Commonwealth countries have either abolished the position, or re-named it so as to remove monarchical connotations, for example, ’Senior Counsel’ or ’Senior Advocate’.
    • Queen’s Counsel is an office, conferred by the Crown that is recognised by courts.
    • Senior Advocate Harish Salve earlier this year has been appointed as Queen’s Counsel (QC) for the courts of England and Wales.

  • Our larger China picture

    Context

    • After the skirmish at the border, Beijing started to concentrate troops, armoured vehicles and munitions opposite our posts in Aksai China at Galwan.

    2 interpretations of China’s move

    • First believes that the Chinese exercise was a territorial snatch in Aksai Chin, which they believe is entirely theirs.
    • The move was accompanied by a “lesson” to the Indians on aggressive Indian behaviour in not conceding Aksai Chin.
    • The second school of thought in India believes that territory has nothing to do with it.
    • They believe that, due to growing economic power, Beijing will lay down the rules of world governance.

    How it matters for India

    • India contest China’s entire southern border, refuse to join the Belt and Road initiative, create an anti-China maritime coalition, compete with them for influence in South East Asia and Africa.
    • India is also unsupportive of their crackdown on Taiwan, Hong Kong and Xinjiang and move ever closer to the United States.
    • When China assumes hegemonic power after 2030, India is going to get a nasty surprise.
    • Secularism, democracy and the rights of man will play no part in Chinese foreign policy.
    • China will overturn every international, financial, trade, diplomatic, arms control and nuclear agreement that the world has put together in seven decades.

    Way forward

    • We in India need to conduct a large and vociferous debate on Chinese intentions.
    • If the Chinese intention is to “teach us a lesson” we need a new national strategy, combining diplomatic and military means.
    •  If our national goal is to concentrate on the creation of wealth and growing GDP, let us proclaim it, tighten our belt, look down and avoid conflict.

    Conclusion

    What China wants is Indian acceptance of Beijing’s benign superiority, and that is a purely Chinese trait, not to be confused with the known rules of international diplomacy. Talking from a position of inferiority will not lead to an equitable solution. But first, a national debate.

  • Nationalism and the crisis of federalism

    The article analyses the challenges federalism in India faces and the important role played by the division of states based on the languages.

    Three conceptions of nationalism in India

    • Following three conceptions of nationalism were prevalent in India before independence.
    • The first, the idea that a community with a strongly unified culture must have a single state of its own.
    • The second saw the nation as defined by a common culture whose adherents must have a state of their own.
    • But this common culture was not ethno-religious.
    •  It conceives common culture in terms of a strong idea of unity that marginalises or excludes other particular identities.
    • A third nationalism accepts that communities nourished by distinct, territorially concentrated regional cultures have the capacity to design states of their own as also educational, legal, economic, and other institutions.
    • This may be called a coalescent nationalism consistent with a fairly strong linguistic federalism.
    • The central state associated with it is not multi-national.
    • At best, it is a multi-national state without labels, one that does not call itself so; a self-effacing multi-national state.

    Suspicion of linguistic identities

    • After Partition, the Indian ruling class began to view with suspicion the political expression of even linguistic identities.
    •  It was feared that federation structured along ethno-linguistic lines might tempt politicians to mobilise permanently on the basis of language.
    • The second fear was about an increase in the likelihood of inter-ethnic violence, encourage separatism and eventually lead to India’s break up.
    • Thus, when the Constitution came into force in 1950, India adopted unitary, civic nationalism as its official ideology.

    Formation of states on linguistic basis and its implications

    • A unitary mindset shaped by the experience of a centralised colonial state was resurrected.
    • The second tier of government was justified in functional terms, not on ethical grounds of the recognition of group cultures.
    • Following the Committee’s recommendations, States were reorganised in 1956.
    • India slowly became a coalescent nation-state, moving from the ‘holding together’ variety to what is called the ‘coming together’ form of (linguistic) federalism.
    • This meant that regional parties were stronger than earlier in their own regions and at the centre.
    • This let to more durable centre because it was grounded more on the consent and participation of regional groups that, at another level, were also self-governing.
    • Indian federalism also attempted to remove its rigidities by incorporating asymmetries in the relation between the Centre and different States.
    • Treating all States as equals required the acknowledgement of their specific needs and according them differential treatment.

    Conclusion

    Coalescent nationalism has served India well, benefiting several groups in India. True, it has not worked as well in India’s border areas such as the North-east and Kashmir. But their problems can only be resolved by deepening not abandoning coalescent nationalism.

  • India joins Djibouti Code of Conduct

    India has joined the Djibouti Code of Conduct/ Jeddah Amendment (DCOC/JA) as Observer, following the high-level virtual meeting.

    Try this MCQ:

    Q.The Djibouti Code of Conduct is related to:

    (a) International trade in precious stones (b) Maritime Security (c) Data sharing on Terrorism related activities (d) Data Localization

    Djibouti Code of Conduct

    • DCOC/JA is a grouping on maritime matters comprising 18 member states adjoining the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden, the East coast of Africa and Island countries in the IOR.
    • The DCOC, established in January 2009, is aimed at the repression of piracy and armed robbery against ships in the Western Indian Ocean Region, the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea.

    Provisions of the code

    • The Code provides a framework for capacity building in the Gulf of Aden and Western Indian Ocean to combat the threat of piracy.
    • It is a partnership of the willing and continues to both deliver against its aims as well as attract increasing membership.
    • The Code was signed on January 29 by the representatives of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Maldives, Seychelles, Somalia, the United Republic of Tanzania and Yemen.
    • Since the meeting, further countries have signed bringing the total to 18 countries from the 21 eligible.

    Significance for India

    • India joins Japan, Norway, the UK and the US as Observers to the DCOC/JA.
    • As an Observer at the DCOC/JA, India looks forward to working together with DCOC/JA member states towards coordinating and contributing to enhanced maritime security in the Indian Ocean Region.
    • Delhi has been steadily increasing its strategic footprints in Western and Eastern Indian Ocean besides Eastern African coastal states.

  • What are Supplementary Grants?

    Finance Minister has tabled the first batch of Supplementary Demands for Grants for this financial year in the Lok Sabha.

    Supplementary Demand for Grants

    • Article 115 of the constitution provides for Supplementary, additional or excess grants. (Note: Article 116 provides for Votes on account, votes of credit and exceptional grants.)
    • They are additional grants which are required to meet the expenditure of the government
    • Their demand is presented when the authorized amounts are insufficient and need for additional expenditure has arisen.

    Why need supplementary grants?

    • When actual expenditure incurred exceeds the approved grants of the Parliament, the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Railways presents a Demand for Excess Grant.
    • It is needed for government expenditure over and above the amount for which Parliamentary approval was already obtained during the Budget session.
    • When grants, authorised by the Parliament, fall short of the required expenditure, an estimate is presented before the Parliament for Supplementary or Additional grants.
    • These grants are presented and passed by the Parliament before the end of the financial year.

    Who notices such grants?

    • The Comptroller and Auditor General of India bring such excesses to the notice of the Parliament.
    • The Public Accounts Committee examines these excesses and gives recommendations to the Parliament.

    What are other grants?

    • Excess Grant: It is the grant in excess of the approved grants for meeting the requisite expenses of the government.
    • Additional Grant: It is granted when a need has arisen during the current financial year for supplementary or additional expenditure upon some new service not contemplated in the Budget for that year.
    • Token Grant: When funds to meet proposed expenditure on a new service can be made available by re-appropriation, demand for the grant of a token sum may be submitted to the vote of the House and, if the House assents to the demand, funds may be so made available.

  • [pib] Swamih Investment Fund

    In order to give relief to homebuyers of stalled projects, a Special Window for Completion of Affordable and Mid-Income Housing (SWAMIH investment fund) has been created for funding stalled projects.

    Try this MCQ:

    Q.The SWAMIH Fund recently seen in news is related to:

    (a) Higher Education (b) MSMEs (c) Housing (d) Highways

    SWAMIH Investment Fund

    • SWAMIH investment fund is an alternative investment fund which aims to provide last-mile funding to the stressed affordable and middle-income housing projects in the country.
    • It is expected to fund the projects which are net-worth positive, including those projects that have been declared as NPAs or are pending proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal under the IBC.

    Why need such funds?

    • Several real estate projects have suffered due to a combined effect of two changes in the real estate sector.
    • On one hand, incremental launches and slow sales have increased unsold inventory in each project.
    • While the effect has then got compounded by the fact that consumer preference is now towards completed projects rather than under-construction projects.
    • This preference has developed as consumers are largely avoiding taking project completion risk and instead are more inclined to completed projects.

  • Departmental Standing committees

    The article analyses the issue of tenure of the members of the Department related committees and suggest the changes to the rules about the tenure.

    Context

    • There was speculation in the media that the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, M. Venkaiah Naidu, is keen on amending the rules to give them a fixed tenure of two years.

    Why 2-year tenure?

    • According to the Rajya Sabha Rules, the term of office of the “members” of the committees shall not exceed one year.
    • Thus, it is the term of office of the members and not that of the committees per se that is one year.
    • The tenurial issue has to be looked at against the backdrop of the fact that the Rajya Sabha itself undergoes partial biennial renewal.
    • While Lok Sabha has a fixed tenure of five years, unless sooner dissolved.
    • Given these facts,2-year tenure suggestion is in consonance with the biennial partial reconstitution of the Rajya Sabha.

    Need to rethink the tenurial prescription

    • In case of Lok Sabha, the major reconstitution takes place when a new Lok Sabha is elected, that is normally after five years.
    • Since Rajya Sabha elects new member every two years and the Lok Sabha after every five years, it is only once in 10 years that the requirement of major reshuffle of the Standing Committees in both the Houses is expected to coincide.
    • Given the different election schedules of the two Houses, there is perhaps no need to mandate the same term for the members of both the Houses.

    Way forward

    • There are 24 Department-related Standing Committees, each with a membership of 31 (10 of the Rajya Sabha and 21 of the Lok Sabha).
    • They can accommodate 240 members of the Rajya Sabha and 504 members of the Lok Sabha.
    • Therefore, once a member is nominated to a committee, he should be allowed to continue till he retires or otherwise discontinues the membership in order that the committee is able to benefit from his experience and expertise.
    • The Standing Committees are permanent. Hence, there should be no difficulty if the terms of the members of the two Houses on these committees are different, in consonance with the tenure of the Houses themselves.
    • Given these facts, it would stand to reason if the tenure of Department-related Standing Committees is prescribed differently for the two Houses.
    • The Rules could also provide that casual vacancies may be filled in by the Presiding Officers.

    Conclusion

    While making changes to the rules the Chairman and the Speaker should consider the different tenure for the members of the two Houses on the Department-related committees.

  • Understanding the significance of Kesavananda Bharati case

    The article revisits the impact and significance of the case for the democracy in India.

    Understanding the Basic Structure doctrine

    • Basic Structure and essential features doctrine was expounded in the Kesavananda Bharati case.
    • In the case, the validity of the 29th amendment which immunised, in the Ninth Schedule Kerala’s takeover of the religious mutt’s property was challenged.
    • Basic structure is the power of judicial review and essential features are what the Court identifies as such in the exercise of that power.
    • Justice Bhagwati remarkably enunciated as an essential feature the “harmony” between fundamental rights and directive principles.
    • The crucial message though is that the apex court has, in the rarest of rare cases, the constituent power to pronounce a constitutional amendment invalid.

    Limits on the powers of Supreme Court

    • The Court is bound by the “golden triangle” of rights created by Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
    • Court must derive the “spirit” of the Constitution by reference to the provisions of the Constitution.
    • Since 1973, the evidence shows the Apex Court has shown utmost democratic responsibility and rectitude in interpreting the doctrine of BSEF.

    Consider the question asked by the UPSC in 2019 “Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power”. In light of this statement explain whether parliament under article 368 of the constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power? “

    Conclusion

    The ultimate message of BSEF doctrine is not merely to set limits to the power of the managers of people, but to make little by little the tasks of emancipation less onerous.