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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Explained: Why UN Human Rights Commission intends to intervene in a SC case against CAA?

    The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights “intends to file” an Intervention Application in the Supreme Court of India seeking to intervene in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1474 of 2019 and praying that it be allowed to make submissions.

    On what grounds is a UN body seeking to intervene in a case regarding a domestic Indian law?

    • The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN Human Rights) is the leading UN entity on human rights.
    • The UN General Assembly entrusted both the High Commissioner and her Office with a unique mandate to promote and protect all human rights for all people.
    • As the principal United Nations office mandated to promote and protect human rights for all, OHCHR leads global human rights efforts speaks out objectively in the face of human rights violations worldwide.
    • This resolution, adopted by the UNGA in 1994, created the post of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

    Its jurisdiction

    • The application says that successive High Commissioners have filed amicus curiae briefs on issues of particular public importance within proceedings before a diverse range of international and national jurisdictions.
    • It includes the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court, and at the national level, the United States Supreme Court and final appeal courts of States in Asia and Latin America.

    What exactly does the intervention application say?

    • The OHCHR has welcomed as “commendable” the CAA’s stated purpose, “namely the protection of some persons from persecution on religious grounds.
    • It also “acknowledges the history of openness and welcome that India has exhibited to persons seeking to find a safer, more dignified life within its borders”.
    • However the examination of the CAA raises important issues with respect to international human rights law and its application to migrants, including refugees, says the OHCHR.
    • The CAA, it says, raises “important human rights issues, including its compatibility in relation to the right to equality before the law and nondiscrimination on nationality grounds under India’s human rights obligations”.
    • The application acknowledges that “the issue of nondiscrimination on nationality grounds falls outside the scope of this intervention”, but insists that “this in no way implies that there are not human rights concerns in this respect”.

    Why intervene?

    • The application questions the reasonableness and objectivity of the criterion of extending the benefits of the CAA to Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan alone.
    • It points out that while the Indian government has suggested that persons of Muslim faith, regardless of denomination or ethnicity, are protected there.
    • However recent reports by UN human rights show that Ahmadi, Hazara and Shia Muslims in these countries warrant protection on the same basis as that provided in the preferential treatment proposed by the CAA.

    Is there a specific basis on which the OHCHR has faulted the CAA?

    The application flags some central principles of international human rights law:

    1. the impact of the CAA on some migrants
    2. the enjoyment of human rights by all migrants and the rights of all migrants (non-citizens) to equality before the law and
    3. the principle of non-refoulment, which prohibits the forcible return of refugees and asylum seekers to a country where they are likely to be persecuted
    • The application mentions that all migrants “regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, nationality and/or immigration status enjoy human rights and are entitled to protection”.
    • It cites international human rights instruments to urge the inclusion of non-discrimination, equality before the law, and equal protection before the law into the foundation of a rule of law.
    • International human rights law, the application says, does not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens or different groups of non-citizens for the purposes of providing them protection from discrimination, “including in respect of their migration status”.

    India’s stance

    • The Citizenship Amendment Act is an internal matter of India and concerns the sovereign right of the Indian Parliament to make laws.
    • MEA spokesperson insisted that no foreign party has any locus standi on issues pertaining to India’s sovereignty.
    • The CAA was “constitutionally valid and complies with all requirements of (India’s) constitutional values”, and “is reflective of our long-standing national commitment in respect of human rights issues arising from the tragedy of the Partition of India”.

  • [pib] Regulating Content of Trans-Fat in Oils and Fats

     

     

    The limit of trans-fats to be not more than 5% is prescribed under Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011 for vanaspati, bakery shortenings, bakery and industrial margarine and interesterified vegetable fats/oils.

    What are Trans Fats?

    • Artificial Trans fats are created in an industrial process that adds hydrogen to liquid vegetable oils to make them more solid.
    • Since they are easy to use, inexpensive to produce and last a long time, and give foods a desirable taste and texture, they are still widely used despite their harmful effects being well-known.

    Why this move?

    • Studies have recently shown that 60,000 deaths occur every year due to cardiovascular diseases, which in turn are caused due to high consumption of trans fats.
    • Since the impact of trans fats on human health is increasing exponentially, it is very important to create awareness about them.

    Standards for Trans-fats

    • A draft notification to limit trans-fat to be not more than 2% by weight of the total oils/fats present in the processed food products in which edible oils and fats are used as an ingredient on and from 1st January, 2022 was issued on 28.08.2019. 
    • Standards prescribed under various regulations of FSSAI are enforced to check that they comply with the standards laid down under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and the rules and regulations made thereunder.
    • In cases where the food samples are found to be non-conforming, recourse is taken to penal provisions under Chapter IX of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

  • Students Suicides in India

     

     

    Between 2016 and 2018, nearly 10,000 students committed suicide every year in India, data tabled by the Human Resource Development Ministry in Parliament show.

    About the Report

    • HRD Ministry sourced its data from ‘Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India’.
    • The report is based on data provided by the states and UTs.

    Highlights of the Report

    • Maharashtra accounted for 1 in every 7 student suicides in the country — 4,235 out of 29,542 in the three years combined, or about 1,400 a year.
    • Maharashtra had over 1,300 student suicides in each of the three years, while West Bengal was the only other state with over 1,000 in any single year — 1,147 in 2016.
    • In the overall three-year totals, Maharashtra was followed by Tamil Nadu (2,744), Madhya Pradesh (2,658) and West Bengal (2,535).
    • Eight more states totalled over 1,000 student suicides in the three years, with Karnataka the highest among these at almost 2,000.
    • Among the Union Territories, Delhi had 626 student suicides — 211, 212 and 203 in the three successive years.

  • Pieces of peace

    Context

    “Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan” between the US and Taliban signed on February 29 in Doha, is just another piece in the overall strategy of the US for Afghanistan.

    Pakistan’s support to the Taliban and unchanged Afghan policy of the US

    • Continuation of the same hard-nosed policy: While rolling out the Afghan policy in August 2017, it was emphasised by the current US dispensation that it was making amends to the Afghan strategy of the previous dispensation.
      • In reality, it has been a continuation of the same hard-nosed line.
    • How Pakistan supported the Taliban? The US and allies had got a rude shock when it dawned on them that between 2001 and 2008, the Taliban had used training and recuperation centres in Pakistan to regain domination over most parts of Afghanistan.
      • Benefiting from the Coalition Support Fund: Pakistan had actively aided the Taliban and al Qaeda (AQ), while continuing to benefit from handsome Coalition Support Funds and a seat at the “high table”.
      • Support of the Pakistan Army: All failures were blamed on inadequate numbers of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), which were ill-equipped to challenge the Taliban, backed by a professional Pakistan Army.
      • Misdiagnosed cause: The Obama administration diagnosed that lack of governance, corruption and fragmented polity were other key factors.

    What was the comprehensive Afghanistan Strategy?

    • COIN doctrine and “troop surge”: A comprehensive Afghanistan strategy review led to replicating its “troop surge” strategy, which was believed to have succeeded in Iraq, leading to total withdrawal of US troops (December 2011).
      • At the heart of the troop surge was the Counterinsurgency (COIN) doctrine of the US Field Manual.
    • COIN plus CT: The military strategy in Afghanistan was split into COIN plus CT (Counter Terrorism) objectives.
      • The Taliban movement was treated as an insurgency.
      • What was involved in COIN: The COIN efforts entailed protecting population centres and highways, building numbers and capability of the ANSF to take on insurgents, with emphasis on good governance and support for reconstruction.
      • It also included reconciliation and reintegration of lower to mid-level willing Taliban.
      • The UN designations of Taliban and AQ were separated to pave the way for “peace talks” with Taliban commanders who were tired of fighting.
    • What this strategy achieved? The US-led ISAF troop surge helped create time and space to build and strengthen the ANSF over three times and succeeded in pushing the Taliban back to outlying areas.
      • Even today these territorial gains have not been reversed, except in some areas.
      • As the ANSF gained strength and depth, the US led-ISAF mission became a NATO led-Resolute Support mission.
    • How changing geopolitical circumstances increased challenges? The CT effort yielded rich dividends for the US and allies, in the Af-Pak region and even beyond.
      • The rise of ISIS: From the build-up of ISIS in 2014 to the loss of its Caliphate in 2019 and recently to the killing of General Solemani, the CT challenges of the US and allies in the Af-Pak region and periphery have become graver than ever.
      • These elements had a bearing on the Afghan strategy rolled out in August 2017.
      • Good progress was made in building up the ANSF, with a strong focus on three key elements — Special Forces, Air Force, and Afghan Intelligence (NDS).

    The US withdrawal

    • Objectives of the withdrawal: Emphasising that “consequences of a rapid exit were predictable and unacceptable”, it outlined two key objectives —
      • Preventing a resurgence of safe havens that threatened the security of Afghanistan and the US interests in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
      • Preventing terrorists from getting nukes or nuclear material which could be used against the US or elsewhere.
    • What is the recalibrated strategy: The “recalibrated” strategy envisaged following-
      • Time-bound but condition-based withdrawal.
      • Support for the Ghani government.
      • ANSF to take on the Taliban.
      • Talks with the Taliban and for Pakistan to demonstrate commitment on dismantling safe havens that threatened US objectives.
      • Overall, the strategy remained the same, except for the withdrawal of the US from a role in nation-building.
    • What are the results of the strategy? There has been a greater emphasis on the strengthening of ANSF.
      • The regular assessments by the US show an increasing role and success of the Afghan Special Forces.
      • The Air Force and the NDS in playing the lead in keeping the Taliban from running over capitals.
      • By and large, the ANSF have been successful in maintaining the balance and the Taliban-control has not slipped to 2009 levels.
      • In the meantime, US forces have dropped to 10 per cent of the peak (in 2011).
      • With the re-election of President Ghani, it is assured that the US line of thinking will prevail over the Afghan government.
      • Role of Pakistan in the process: On its part, Pakistan has demonstrated its intent by delivering top-rung Taliban, including Mullah Baradar in its custody since 2010, and Anas Haqqani released as part of the process, for the talks.
      • Even if there is no comprehensive ceasefire or full withdrawal ever, Pakistan is unlikely to be blamed.

    What Pakistan achieved from the peace process?

    • Return of Afghan refugee: Pakistan has been rewarded in more ways than one. It managed to return lakhs of Afghans.
    • Fencing on the eastern border of Afghanistan: It builds a fence along the eastern parts of Afghanistan to prevent cross-border attacks.
    • Targeting the key TTP leaders: Pakistan got the US and Afghan forces to target key TTP leaders, starting with TTP chief Mullah Fazlullah in June 2018.
      • Since January this year, three top TTP leaders have been killed in Kabul and Kunar.
      • This has also helped build the Pakistan narrative that Afghan soil is being used to target Pakistan.
    • Changing the international narrative in its favour: Even though it is facing “calibrated” heat on FATF sanctions, Pakistan has managed to change the international narrative in its favour.
      • The 24th report (July 2019) of the UNSC monitoring committee has stated, “Al Qaeda continues to cooperate closely with LeT and the Haqqani Network”, but there is no reference to LeT or Haqqani in the 25th report (January 2020).
      • This report has also asserted that ISIL-K has established informal contact with other terrorist groups, including Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, TTP and Lashkar e-Islam.
      • Meanwhile, these groups regularly attack Pakistani posts along the Afghan border.
      • All key anti-Pakistan groups are now being categorised as ISIL-K supporters, even though Pakistan has run the so-called Daesh networks in eastern Afghanistan for years.
      • The UNSC reports also highlight the positive role of Taliban in targeting ISIL-K.

    Conclusion

    • The election in the US has bearing on the process: In an election year, the US needs to show that it is not fighting someone else’s battles and is making “sincere efforts” at peace-making.
      • The “Agreement” demonstrates sincerity.
      • At the same time, the US has to continue steering the Afghan strategy to keep terror networks in check.
      • The peace process has already created a comfort-loving, globe-trotting leadership in the top echelons of the Taliban, who would continue to talk, even if the current Agreement falters.
    • Pakistan is again sitting on the high table: As the LeT and Haqqani networks go missing from UN reports and JeM chief Masood Azhar and pro-Pak TTP leader Ehasanullah Ehsan go conveniently “missing” from Pakistan soil, the pressure on Pakistan has eased.
      • The new non-state entities backed by Pakistan, such as the AQIS and ISKP/IS-Kashmir/IS-Hind will become more visible.
      • The rank and file of LeT, JeM, HUJI etc can easily be transferred to these new entities, while many more can be recruited under new banners.
      • Online propaganda of these entities, including in Indian languages, is already visible and likely to escalate.

     

  • Department-related Standing Committees (DRSCs)

    Fewer sittings of Parliament are compensated by the working of department-related standing committees (DRSCs) praised Rajya Sabha Chairman.

    What are Standing Committees?

    • Standing Committee is a committee consisting of Members of Parliament.
    • It is a permanent and regular committee which is constituted from time to time according to the provisions of an Act of Parliament or Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business.
    • The work done by the Indian Parliament is not only voluminous but also of a complex nature, hence a good deal of its work is carried out in these Parliamentary Committees.
    • Standing Committees are of the following kinds :
    1. Financial Standing Committees (FSC)
    2. Department Related Standing Committees (DRSC)
    3. Others Standing Committees (OSC)

    About DRSCs

    • There are 24 Department-related Standing Committees (DRSCs). Each of these committees have 31 members – 21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha.
    • The 17 Departmentally Related Standing Committees were formally constituted with effect from April, 1993.
    • After experiencing the working of the DRSC system for over a decade, the system was restructured in July,2004 wherein the number of DRSCs was increased from 17 to 24.
    • These members are to be nominated by the Speaker of Lok Sabha or the Chairman of Rajya Sabha respectively. The term of office of these committees does not exceed one year.
    • These committees are serviced either by Lok Sabha secretariat or the Rajya Sabha secretariat depending on who has appointed the chairman of that committee.

    Equal to 10 House sittings

    • During a usual sitting of Parliament, the Houses are convened for six hours. Calculating it accordingly, the meeting of these committees amount to 10 sittings of Parliament.
    • Proportionately, the work done by the 16 Committees of Lok Sabha amounts to another 20 sittings of the Parliament.
    • In all, the work put in by the total 24 DRSCs in examining the Demands for Grants of all the ministries equals 30 days of functioning of the Parliament, which is quite significant.
    • If the working of the committees is taken into account for the entire year, it will amount to significantly higher number of days.

  • Whither tribunal independence?

    Context

    The reframed Tribunal rules are in contempt of several Constitution Bench decisions of the Supreme Court.

    What the SC said in Rojer Mathew case

    • Rules being unconstitutional: In November 2019, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in Rojer Mathew, declared the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualification, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2017 as unconstitutional.
      • Why it was declared unconstitutional? It was declared unconstitutional for being violative of principles of independence of the judiciary and contrary to earlier decisions of the Supreme Court in the Madras Bar Association 
    • Direction to the Central government: In Rojer Mathew, there was also a direction to the Central government to reformulate the rules strictly in accordance with principles delineated by the Court in its earlier decisions.
      • The reframed rules, notified by the Ministry of Finance, however, suffer from the same vices.

    What were the issues in the Finance Act, 2017

    • What was prescribed in the Finance Act, 2017: The Finance Act, 2017, around 26 Central statutes were amended.
      • Excessive rule-making powers to the Centre government: The power to prescribe eligibility criteria, selection process, removal, salaries, tenure and other service conditions pertaining to various members of 19 tribunals were sub-delegated to the rule-making powers of the Central government.
    • Attempt to keep the judiciary away: Describing the search-cum-selection-committee as an attempt to keep the judiciary away from the process of selection and appointment of members, vice-chairman and chairman of tribunals.
      • Executive litigant in most cases: The Court held that the executive is a litigating party in most of the litigation and hence cannot be allowed to be a dominant participant in tribunal appointments.
      • Selection committee issue: Barring the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), the selection committee for all other tribunals was made up either entirely from personnel within or nominated by the Central government or comprised a majority of personnel from the Central government.
      • While the selection committee for NCLAT consisted of two judges and two secretaries to the Government of India, all other committees comprised only one judge and three secretaries to the Government of India. Now, in the 2020 rules, by default, all committees consist of a judge, the president/chairman/chairperson of the tribunal concerned and two secretaries to the Government of India
    • 3 years tenure injurious to the efficiency: Reiterating its previous decision in Madras Bar Association (2010), the Court held that the tenure of three years for members will “preclude cultivation of adjudicatory experience and is thus injurious to the efficiency of the Tribunals”.

     An equal say for the judiciary

    • 2 Judges in 4 member committee: The common thread in the Madras Bar Association series and Rojer Mathew decisions is that judiciary must have an equal say in the appointment of members of the tribunals.
      • To deny the executive an upper hand in appointing members to tribunals, the court ordered to have two judges of the Supreme Court to be a part of the four-member selection committee.
      • In Madras Bar Association(2010), held that the selection committee should comprise the Chief Justice of India or his nominee (chairperson, with a casting vote), a senior judge of the Supreme Court or Chief Justice of the High Court, and secretaries in the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Law and Justice respectively.
    • Decision applicable to all tribunals: Subsequent Constitution Bench decisions in Madras Bar Association (2014), Rojer Mathew and the decision of the Madras High Court in Shamnad Basheer have repeatedly held that the principles of the Madras Bar Association (2010) are applicable to the selection process and constitution of all tribunals in India.
    • What are the provisions dealing with appointment in 2020 rules? Under the 2020 rules, the inclusion of the president/ chairman/chairperson of the tribunal as a member in the selection committee is in the teeth of previous decisions of the Supreme Court.
      • Non-judicial member can become a chairman: For instance, now, in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), etc. a non-judicial member can become the president/chairman/chairperson, as the case may be.
      • Therefore, when a non-judicial member becomes a member in the selection committee, the Supreme Court judge will be in minority, giving primacy to the executive, which is impermissible.
    • Only judges and advocates can be judicial members: In Madras Bar Association (2010), the Court explicitly held that only judges and advocates can be considered for appointment as a judicial member of the tribunal and that persons from the Indian Legal Service cannot be considered for appointment as judicial member.
      • Recently, in Revenue Bar Association (2019), the Madras High Court declared Section 110(1)(b)(iii) of the CGST Act, 2017 as unconstitutional for allowing members of Indian Legal Service to be judicial members in GSTAT.

    Violation of the SC directives

    • What the SC said on tenure: Based on Madras Bar Association (2010), in Rojer Mathew, the Court held that the term of three years is too short, and by the time members achieve a refined knowledge, expertise and efficiency, one term will be over.
      • What are the provisions in 2020 rules? In the 2020 rules, the tenure of members has been increased from three years to four years, thereby blatantly violating the directions of the Supreme Court.
    • Since the Madras Bar Association (2010), the government has repeatedly violated the directions of the Supreme Court.
      • One by one, the traditional courts, including the High Courts, have been divested of their jurisdictions and several tribunals have been set up.

    Conclusion

    The 2020 rules are, thus, in contempt of several Constitution Bench decisions of the Supreme Court. Unless the Court comes down heavily on the Central government, we will see these encroachments over and over again.

     

  • Tracking the big three

    Context

    The article focuses on the top three Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations, namely poverty elimination, zero hunger, and good health and well-being by 2030.

    India’s record on extreme poverty, hunger and health

    • Decline in extreme poverty: The World Bank’s estimates of extreme poverty- measured as $1.9/per capita/per day at purchasing power parity of 2011- show a secular decline in India from 45.9 per cent to 13.4 per cent between 1993 and 2015.
    • Elimination of extreme poverty 2030: If the overall growth process continues as has been the case since, say, 2000 onwards, India may succeed in eliminating extreme poverty by 2030, if not earlier.
    • Zero hunger by 2030: Given the overflowing stock of food grains with the government, and a National Food Security Act (NFSA) that subsidises grains to the tune of more than 90 per cent of its cost to 67 per cent of the population, there is no reason to believe that India can also not attain the goal of zero hunger before 2030.
    • Health- a real challenge: The real challenge for India, is to achieve the third goal of good health and well-being by 2030. India’s performance in this regard, so far, has not been satisfactory. as per the National Family Health Survey (NFHS 2015-16)-
      • In 2015-16, almost 38.4 per cent of India’s children under the age of five years were stunted.
      • 8 per cent were underweight.
      • 21 per cent suffered from wasting (low weight for height).
      • The situation in some states like Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh is even worse.
    • Global Hunger Index ranking of India: No wonder, the Global Hunger Index (GHI) ranks India at 102 out of 117 countries in terms of the severity of hunger in 2019.

    What are the various targets set on the nutrition problem?

    • Target on reducing the problems of underweight children: The National Nutrition Strategy, 2017, aims to reduce the prevalence of underweight children (0-3 years) by three percentage points every year by 2022 from NFHS 2015-16 estimates.
      • Why this is an ambitious target? This is an ambitious target given the decadal decline in underweight children from 42.5 per cent in 2005-06 to 35.8 per cent in 2015-16 amounts to less than 1 per cent decline per year.
    • Targets set in National Nutrition Mission: Similar targets have been set by the National Nutrition Mission (renamed as POSHAN Abhiyaan), 2017.
      • To reduce stunting by 2 per cent.
      • Under-nutrition by 2 per cent.
      • Anaemia (among young children, women and adolescent girls) by 3 per cent.
      • Low birth weight by 2 per cent.

    Four areas India needs to focus to achieve the set targets

    • India has to focus on four key areas:  If India has to make a significant dent on malnutrition by 2030.
    • First- Mother’s education.
      • Multiplier effect: It is one of the most important factors that have a positive multiplier effect on child care and access to healthcare facilities.
      • Increases awareness: It also increases awareness about the nutrient-rich diet, personal hygiene, etc. This can also help contain the family size in poor, malnourished families.
      • Thus, a high priority to female literacy, in a mission mode through liberal scholarships for the girl child, would go a long way towards tackling this problem.
    • Second- Access to improved sanitation and safe drinking water.
      • The Swachh Bharat Abhiyan and Jal Jeevan Mission would have positive outcomes in the coming years.
    • Third-shift in dietary pattern
      • Shift from cereals to more nutritious food: There is a need to shift dietary patterns from cereal dominance to the consumption of nutritious foods such as livestock products, fruits and vegetables, pulses, etc.
      • But they are generally costly and their consumption increases only by higher incomes and better education.
      • Diverting the food subsidy to nutritious foods: Diverting a part of the food subsidy on wheat and rice to more nutritious foods can help.
    • Fourth- Adoption of new agricultural technology
      • Adopt bio-fortifying cereals: India must adopt new agricultural technologies of bio-fortifying cereals, such as zinc-rich rice, wheat, iron-rich pearl millet, and so on.
      • The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) has to work closely with the Harvest Plus programme of the Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) to make it a win-win situation for curtailing malnutrition in Indian children at a much faster pace — and, at a much lower cost than would be achieved under a business as usual scenario.

    Examples from the world

    • Right public policies make the difference: Global experience shows that with the right public policies focusing on agriculture, improved sanitation, and women’s education, one can have much better health and well-being for its citizens, especially children.
    • China’s example: In China, it was agriculture and economic growth that significantly reduced the rates of stunting and wasting among the population and lifted millions of people out of hunger, poverty and malnutrition.
    • Brazil and Ethiopia example: According to FAO, Brazil and Ethiopia have transformed their food systems: They have targeted their investments in agricultural R&D and social protection programmes to reduce hunger in the country.

    Conclusion

    Despite India’s improvement in child nutrition rates since 2005-06, it is way behind the progress experienced by China and many other countries. According to the Global Nutrition Report, 2016, at the present rates of decline, India will achieve the current stunting rates of China by 2055. India can certainly do better, but only if it focuses on this issue.

  • Explained: US-Taliban Pact

     

     

    • The US and Taliban signed an agreement for “Bringing Peace to Afghanistan”, which will enable the US and NATO to withdraw troops in the next 14 months.
    • The pact is between the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban” and the US.
    • The four-page pact was signed between Zalmay Khalilzad, US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation, and Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, political head of the Taliban.

    Key elements of the deal

    Troops Withdrawal

    • The US will draw down to 8,600 troops in 135 days and the NATO or coalition troop numbers will also be brought down, proportionately and simultaneously.
    • And all troops will be out within 14 months — “all” would include “non-diplomatic civilian personnel” (could be interpreted to mean “intelligence” personnel).

    Taliban Commitment

    • The main counter-terrorism commitment by the Taliban is that “It will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including al-Qaeda, to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the US and its allies”.
    • While Miller said the reference to al-Qaeda is important, the pact is silent on other terrorist groups — such as anti-India groups Lashkar-e-Toiba or Jaish-e-Mohammed.
    • Again, India, not being an US ally, is not covered under this pact.

    Sanctions Removal

    • UN sanctions on Taliban leaders to be removed by three months (by May 29) and US sanctions by August 27.
    • The sanctions will be out before much progress is expected in the intra-Afghan dialogue.

    Prisoner’s release

    • This is a possible trouble spot because the US-Taliban agreement and the joint declaration differ, and it is not clear whether the Ashraf Ghani-led government is on board with this big up-front concession to Taliban.
    • The joint declaration says the US will facilitate discussion with Taliban representatives on confidence building measures, to include determining the feasibility of releasing significant numbers of prisoners on both sides.
    • While there are no numbers or deadlines in the joint declaration, the US-Taliban pact says up to 5,000 imprisoned Taliban and up to 1,000 prisoners from “the other side” held by Taliban “will be released” by March.
    • The intra-Afghan negotiations are supposed to start in Oslo.

    Ceasefire

    • This is identified as another potential “trouble spot”.
    • The agreement states ceasefire will be simply “an item on the agenda” when intra-Afghan talks start, and indicate actual ceasefire will come with the “completion” of an Afghan political agreement.

    Implications of the Deal

    An adieu to democracy in Afghanistan

    • The Taliban have got what they wanted: troops withdrawal, removal of sanctions, release of prisoners.
    • This has also strengthened Pakistan, Taliban’s benefactor, and the Pakistan Army and the ISI’s influence appears to be on the rise.
    • It has made it unambiguous that it wants an Islamic regime.
    • The Afghan government has been completely sidelined during the talks between the US and Taliban.
    • The future for the people of Afghanistan is uncertain and will depend on how Taliban honours its commitments and whether it goes back to the mediaeval practices of its 1996-2001 regimes.

    Implications for India

    • India has been backing the Ghani-led government and was among very few countries to congratulate Ghani on his victory.
    • India’s proximity to Ghani also drew from their shared view of cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan.
    • There has not been formal contact with top Taliban leaders, the Indian mission has a fair amount of access to the Pashtun community throughout Afghanistan through community development projects of about $3 billion.
    • Due to So, although Pakistan military and its ally Taliban have become dominant players in Kabul’s power circles, South Block insiders insist that it is not all that grim for New Delhi.
    • these high-impact projects, diplomats feel India has gained goodwill among ordinary Afghans, the majority of whom are Pashtuns and some may be aligned with the Taliban as well.

    Way Forward

    • The joint declaration is a symbolic commitment to the Afghanistan government that the US is not abandoning it.
    • Much will depend on whether the US and the Taliban are able to keep their ends of the bargain, and every step forward will be negotiated, and how the Afghan government and the political spectrum are involved.
    • Like in 1989, 1992, 1996, and in 2001, Pakistan has the opportunity to play a constructive role. It frittered away the opportunities in the past.

    Back2Basics

    India and the Taliban

    • India and the Taliban have had a bitter past.
    • New Delhi nurses bitter memories from the IC-814 hijack in 1999, when it had to release terrorists — including Masood Azhar who founded Jaish-e-Mohammed that went on to carry out terror attacks as such on Parliament, Pathankot and in Pulwama.
    • Quite predictably, Mullah Baradar did not name India among the countries that supported the peace process, but specially thanked Pakistan for the “support, work and assistance” provided.
    • The Taliban perceived India as a hostile country, as India had supported the anti-Taliban force Northern Alliance in the 1990s.
    • India never gave diplomatic and official recognition to the Taliban when it was in power during 1996-2001.
    • But its foreign policy establishment has shied away from engaging with the Taliban directly.

  • Delimitation in the UT of Jammu and Kashmir

    The newly created UT of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) will be the only one in the country to undergo a delimitation exercise based on the population figures recorded in the 2011 census.

    Delimitation in J&K

    • The latest readjustment of boundaries of constituencies in other States and UTs has been done on the basis of 2001 census and in future it will be carried out according to the 2031 census.
    • As per 2011 Census, the population in Kashmir region is 68,88,475, Jammu has a population of 53,78,538 and Ladakh has 2,74,289.
    • Delimitation was last done in J&K in the year 1995.

    The legal basis for delimitation

    • Section 63 was introduced in the J&K Reorganisation Act so that delimitation exercise can be conducted smoothly without overlapping with other provisions of Delimitation Commission Act, 2002.
    • It is a saving clause and since J&K is a UT, it now has constitutional safeguards.
    • The provision did not require any separate legislation as it was incorporated in the primary Act.
    • It says that “until the relevant figures for the first census taken after the year 2026 have been published,” it shall not be necessary to readjust the constituencies.
    • And any reference to the “latest census figures” in shall be construed as a reference to the 2011 census figures.
    • The delimitation will be done for 90 seats as 24 seats fall in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK).

    Back2Basics

    https://www.civilsdaily.com/news/explained-delimitation-of-constituencies/

  • Defining Anti-national Activities

    Ever since the anti-CAA protests erupted across the country, the MHA has been quite active in filtering out foreigners among the protesters and serving them with ‘Leave India’ notices’.

    What contributes to ‘Anti-government’ activities?

    • According to visa guidelines laid out by the MHA, Foreign nationals shall be required to strictly adhere to the purpose of visit declared while submitting the visa application.
    • However, a foreign national (other than a Pakistani national) coming to India on any type of visa will be allowed to avail activities permitted under tourist visa.
    • However, there are no provisions specified under “anti-government” activities subhead.
    • The absence of any such provision in visa laws or Foreigner’s Act makes it necessary for the government to define “anti-government” activities under a statute.
    • Visa laws are not in any derogation with any other law, so inferences can be drawn — which means a court can rule that whatever are defined as “anti-government” activities for Indian national is “anti-government” for foreign national too.”

    What do ‘anti-government’ activities mean for an Indian national?

    • According to the lawyers, anti-government activities are those which are listed as punishable under Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code.
    • Section 124A IPC deals with attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India.
    • Such offences shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which a fine may be added; or, with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which a fine may be added; or, with fine.

    Does a foreigner on Indian visa have a right to protest?

    • Right to protest peacefully is enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of Indian Constitution which guarantees the freedom of speech and expression.
    • Article (19)(b) guarantees the citizens of the country the right to assemble peacefully and without arms.
    • Since Article 14 of the Constitution ensures equality to any person before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India, foreigners also have the right to protest peacefully, argue proponents.
    • However, the act done by the foreigner must not be anything in contravention to the existing laws of India.
    • Being a part of a peaceful protest isn’t illegal and thus, being a part of it isn’t anything wrong even if that is against the Indian government, critic says.