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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Why trade with the US matters to India?

     

    Context

    • US President Trump arrives in India months after he went on stage with PM Modi at the ‘Howdy Modi’ event in Texas.
    • Both countries have repeatedly resolved to strengthen trade ties — however, attempts at working out a short-term agreement have fallen apart in the past, and tensions have risen over tariffs.
    • The US often accuses India of taking decisions over the previous few years that prevented “equitable and reasonable access” for Americans to its markets.
    • Let’s have a look at the current state of play:

    Why trade with the US matters to India?

    • India’s existing and stalled bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) started to receive attention from the government last year, even as the country worked to conclude the seven-year negotiations to join the RCEP, the world’s “largest” regional trade pact.
    • But by backing out of the RCEP in November, India shut the door on the large “integrated market” that the deal was offering.
    • Instead, it increased the pressure on itself to strengthen existing separate trade agreements with each member of the RCEP bloc.
    • Without these, it may not be able to tap a sizeable portion of the global market; also, it may not be able to easily access the products and services of these countries.

    Need for more bilateral activities

    • In the backdrop of the global economic slowdown, where India’s global exports have fallen consistently, it is important for the country to diversify and strengthen bilateral relations with other markets.
    • It has set its sights on “large developed markets”, improved access to which would help its industry and services sectors.
    • These include the US, which has, over the last two decades, become a crucial trading partner in terms of both goods and services.

    Trump’s advent

    • In March 2017, soon after taking office with election campaign focussing on “making America great again”, Trump ordered “first-ever comprehensive review” of trade deficits of the United States.
    • India was among the countries that exported more to the United States than it imported, and the latter was left with a trade deficit of over $21 billion in 2017-18.
    • While the US’s deficit with India is only a fraction of its deficit with China (over $340 billion in 2019), American officials have repeatedly targeted the “unfair” trade practices followed by India.
    • These include the tariffs that India imposes, which the Trump administration feels are too high — and over which the President has personally called New Delhi out on several occasions.

    Locating the main sticking points

    • Negotiations on an India-US trade deal have been ongoing since 2018, but have been slowed by “fundamental” disagreements over tariffs subsidies, intellectual property, data protection, and access for agricultural and dairy produce.
    • The office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) has underlined India’s measures to restrict companies from sending personal data of its citizens outside the country as a “key” barrier to digital trade.
    • The US wants India to strengthen patent regulations, and to ease the limitations American companies investing in India face.

    India’s tariffs

    • India is a “tariff king” that imposes “tremendously high” import duties, Trump has complained repeatedly.
    • The health cess on imported medical devices announced in the Budget for 2020-21 too, is seen as a negative for the American side, as the US is among the top three exporters of these categories of products to India.
    • However, India is working to finalise a proposal to move from caps on prices of medical devices to limiting the margins of those involved in the supply of the products.

    Agri sector

    • The US has long demanded greater access for American agriculture and dairy products.
    • For India, protecting its domestic agriculture and dairy interests was a major reason to walk out of the RCEP agreement.

    US retaliation

    1) Tariff on steel

    • In 2018, the US imposed additional tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum imports from various countries, including India.
    • While India’s government claims the impact is “limited”, they brought down the US share in India’s steel exports to 2.5% in 2018-19 from 3.3% in 2017-18.
    • In March 2018, India challenged the US decision at the World Trade Organization (WTO).
    • India held off on imposing retaliatory tariffs until the US struck again — by removing it from a scheme of preferential access to the American market.

    2) GSP axe and response 

    • In June 2019, the US decided to terminate India’s benefits under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) scheme, which provides preferential, duty-free access for over $6 billion worth of products exported from this country to the US.
    • The decision followed a warning earlier that year, after negotiations on a potential trade agreement had broken down.

    3) Labelling India as developed country

    • India was the largest beneficiary of the US GSP programme.
    • While duty-free benefits accrued to only around $200 million for the billions of dollars worth of exports, India is understood to have asked for restoration of these benefits in the ongoing trade negotiations.
    • Most recently, the USTR classified India as a “developed” country based on certain metrics. It is not clear whether the upgrade from “developing” will impact the restoration of benefits under the GSP scheme.

    The WTO tussle

    • India is one of the largest importers of almonds from the US, having imported fresh or dried shelled almonds worth $615.12 million in 2018-19.
    • Imports from the US of fresh apples stood at $145.20 million, of phosphoric acid at $155.48 million, and of diagnostic reagents at nearly $145 million that year.
    • Removal from the GSP list amidst rising trade tensions prompted India to finally impose retaliatory tariffs on several American imports, including almonds, fresh apples, and phosphoric acid.
    • This was a significant move — and the US approached the WTO against India.

    Whats’ next?

    • US administration appeared to suggest that while no deal was imminent, work on a longer-term agreement was progressing well, and that his personal chemistry with Prime Minister Narendra Modi might help.
    • India and the US could begin with some “low-hanging fruit” to indicate their willingness for a deeper economic commitment.
    • This includes the US reinstating India’s benefits under the GSP programme, and India doing away with duties on motorcycles.

  • Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Bill, 2020

     

    The Union Cabinet has approved the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Bill, 2020 to monitor medical procedures used to assist people to achieve pregnancy.

    What is ART?

    • Assisted reproductive technology (ART) is used to treat infertility.
    • Assisted reproductive technology includes medical procedures used primarily to address infertility.
    • This subject involves procedures such as in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, cryopreservation of gametes or embryos, and/or the use of fertility medication.

    Highlights of the bill

    • National Board: The Bill provides for a national Board which will lay down a code of conduct to be observed by those operating clinics.
    • Standardization: It will also formulate minimum standards for laboratory and diagnostic equipment and practices to be followed by human resources employed by clinics and banks.
    • National registry: Under the proposed law, a national registry and registration authority will maintain a database to assist the national Board to perform its functions.
    • Confidentiality clause: The Bill will also ensure confidentiality of intending couples and protect the rights of the child.

    Strict punishment:

    • India has one of the highest growths in the number of ART centres and ART cycles performed every year.
    • India has become one of the major centres of this global fertility industry, with reproductive medical tourism becoming a significant activity.
    • This has also introduced a plethora of legal, ethical and social issues; yet, there is no standardisation of protocols and reporting is still very inadequate.
    • The Bill thus proposes stringent punishment for those who practise sex selection; indulge in sale of human embryos or gametes and those who operate rackets.

    Other such Bills

    Taken together, theses proposed legislations create an environment of safeguards for women’s reproductive rights, addressing changing social contexts and technological advances.

    Surrogacy Regulation Bill 2020

    • The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2020 proposes to regulate surrogacy in India by establishing National Board at the central level and State Boards and Appropriate Authorities in the States and Union Territories.
    • The major benefit of the Act would be that it will regulate the surrogacy services in the country.
    • While commercial surrogacy will be prohibited including sale and purchase of human embryos and gametes, ethical surrogacy to the Indian Married couple, Indian Origin Married Couple and Indian Single Woman (only widow or Divorcee) will be allowed on fulfillment of certain conditions.
    • As such, it will control the unethical practices in surrogacy, prevent commercialization of surrogacy and will prohibit potential exploitation of surrogate mothers and children born through surrogacy.

    Medical Termination Pregnancy Amendment Bill 2020

    • The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (34 of 1971) was enacted to provide for the termination of certain pregnancies by registered medical practitioners and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
    • The said Act recognised the importance of safe, affordable, accessible abortion services to women who need to terminate pregnancy under certain specified conditions.
    • Besides this, several Writ Petitions have been filed before the Supreme Court and various High Courts seeking permission for aborting pregnancies at gestational age beyond the present permissible limit on the grounds of foetal abnormalities or pregnancies due to sexual violence faced by women.

  • [pib] 22nd Law Commission of India

    The Union Cabinet has approved Twenty-second Law Commission of India for a period of three years from the date of publication of the Order of Constitution in the Official Gazette.

    Law Commission of India

    • It is an executive body established by an order of the Government of India. First law commission of independent India was established post the Independence in 1955
    • Tenure: 3 Years
    • Function: Advisory body to the Ministry of Law and Justice for “Legal Reforms in India”
    • Recommendations: NOT binding
    • First Law Commission was established during the British Raj in 1834 by the Charter Act of 1833
    • Chairman: Macaulay; It recommended for the Codifications of the IPC, CrPC etc.

    Composition

    The 22nd Law Commission will be constituted for a period of three years from the date of publication of its Order in the Official Gazette. It will consist of:

    1. a full-time Chairperson;
    2. four full-time Members (including Member-Secretary)
    3. Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs as ex-officio Member;
    4. Secretary, Legislative Department as ex officio Member; and
    5. not more than five part-time Members.

    Terms of reference

    • The Law Commission shall, on a reference made to it by the Central Government or suo-motu, undertake research in law and review of existing laws in India for making reforms therein and enacting new legislations.
    • It shall also undertake studies and research for bringing reforms in the justice delivery systems for elimination of delay in procedures, speedy disposal of cases, reduction in cost of litigation etc.

    The Law Commission of India shall, inter-alia: –

    • identify laws which are no longer needed or relevant and can be immediately repealed
    • examine the existing laws in the light of DPSP and Preamble
    • consider and convey to the Government its views on any subject relating to law and judicial administration that may be specifically referred to it by the Government through Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs);
    • Consider the requests for providing research to any foreign countries as may be referred to it by the Government through the Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs);
    • take all such measures as may be necessary to harness law and the legal process in the service of the poor;
    • revise the Central Acts of general importance so as to simplify them and remove anomalies, ambiguities and inequities;

  • A just verdict

    Context

    SC ruling in favour of women officers in the Army is pathbreaking, extends arc of equality.

    What is said in the significance of the judgement?

    • The judgement took many constitutional steps further
    • First, the judgement said “engagement of women officers in the Army” has been an “evolutionary process”.
      • It acknowledges that the “physiological features of a woman have no significance to her equal entitlements under the Constitution”.
    • Second, it indicates “a need for change in attitudes and mindsets to recognise the commitment to the values of the Constitution”.
      • The judgement said that reliance on the “inherent physiological differences between men and women” rests on a deeply entrenched stereotypical and constitutionally flawed notion.
      • The above-flawed notion fails to ignore “the solemn constitutional values which every institution in the nation is bound to uphold and facilitate”.
    • Third, this change has to be based on “the right of women officers to equality of opportunity”, which has two “facets”:
      • Non-discrimination on the grounds of sex and-
      • Equality of opportunity for all citizens in employment.
      • State and civil society have to firmly internalise these rights to achieve even the minima of gender justice.
      • Fundamental fallacy: Removal of the “fundamental fallacy” demands non-discrimination and affirmation of the equality of opportunity in public employment. To rule otherwise will constitute “a travesty of justice”.
      • What does this mean for women? This means women now have the same terms of employment as men.
      • No longer will women be forced to retire after 14 years in service, irrespective of their record.
      • They will also have a full pension and other financial benefits.
    • Fourth, Article 14 of the Constitution has been pressed into service as prescribing “a right to rationality” that forbids any “blanket” and “absolute”
      • The burden to justify differentiation on Army: The burden to justify the differentiation between women and men falls “squarely on the Army”, which has to “justify such differentiation with reason”

    Judicial consciousness of policy consciousness

    • Achilles’ heel of the judgement: In fact, the brief remark outlining the judicial consciousness of policy limitations may well prove to be the proverbial Achilles’ heel in future courts.
    • One hopes that the stoic and heroic endeavours of the petitioner army officers and their counsel, will not be visited with the constitutional fates in which the judgement is reversed.
      • And this path-breaking judgment will forever vindicate gender equality and justice.

    Conclusion

    Making gender justice less contingent on the executive’s mood swings is the primary task of the judiciary. Making it immune from judicial re-visitations remains the paramount constitutional duty of all citizens, but more particularly of feminist citizens’ crusade for judicial consistency as a badge for constitutional rights and justice.

  • Powering the health-care engine with innovation

    Context

    India needs to tap the potential of the health-care start-ups in India and make the necessary provision to deal with the problems in the adoption of innovations in health-care.

    Expanding the supply side

    • Need to increase the hospital empanelled: As the scale of this scheme grows, a key area of focus is-
      • To expand the secondary and tertiary hospitals empanelled under PM-JAY and
      • To ensure their quality and capacity while keeping the costs down.
    • The ratio of doctors and beds: At present, there is one government bed for every 1,844 patients and one doctor for every 11,082 patients.
    • 3% hospitalisation under the scheme: In the coming years, considering 3% hospitalisation of PM-JAY-covered beneficiaries, the scheme is likely to provide treatment to 1.5 crore patients annually.
      • This means physical and human infrastructure capacity would need to be augmented vastly.
    • Need for more beds: Conservative estimates suggest that we would need more than 150,000 additional beds, especially in Tier-2 and -3 cities.
    • Long-term strategy: While a comprehensive long-term strategy will focus on expanding hospital and human resources infrastructure, an effective near-term approach is needed to improve efficiencies and bridge gaps within the existing supply and likely demand.
    • Mainstreaming innovation: A strong, yet under-tapped lever for accelerating health system efficiency and bridging these gaps is mainstreaming innovation in the Indian health system.

    Transformative solutions

    • India’s burgeoning entrepreneurial spirit combined with a systematic push for the development of a start-up ecosystem has led to a plethora of innovations in health care.
    • It is estimated that there are more than 4,000 health-care technology start-ups in India.
    • How do start-ups help? Today, start-ups are working to bring-
      • Innovative technologies and business models that leapfrog infrastructure.
      • Human resources.
      • Cost-effectiveness and efficiency challenges in Tier-2 and -3 cities.
    • How other innovations could help?
      • Artificial Intelligence platforms that aid in rapid radiology diagnoses in low resource settings.
      • Tele-ICU platforms to bridge the gap in high-skilled critical care personnel.
      • Centralised drone delivery of blood, medicines and vaccines to reach remote locations cost-effectively and reliably are all no longer just theoretical ideas.
    • Time to implement transformative solutions: It is high time for transformative solutions to make their way into our hospitals, especially in Tier-2 and -3 cities, to turbocharge the way health care is delivered at scale.

    Challenges in mainstreaming healthcare innovations

    • Lack of uniform regulatory standards: One challenge is non-uniform regulatory and validation standards.
      • Regulations evolving in India: Regulatory requirements, specifically for biomedical start-ups, are still evolving in India.
      • As a result, hospitals often rely on foreign regulatory certifications such as FDA and CE, especially for riskier devices and instruments.
      • Government to overhaul standards: The government is now pushing ahead to overhaul Indian med-tech regulatory standards and product standards which will help bridge this trust-deficit.
    • Difficulty in the promotion of start-ups: Another problem in promoting start-ups is the operational liquidity crunch due to a long gestation period.
      • Health-care start-ups spend long periods of time in the early development of their product, especially where potential clinical risks are concerned.
      • Long gestation period: The process of testing the idea and working prototype, receiving certifications, performing clinical and commercial validations, and raising funds, in a low-trust and unstructured environment makes the gestational period unusually long thereby limiting the operational liquidity of the start-up.
    • Lack of framework to adopt innovation: Another hurdle is the lack of incentives and adequate frameworks to grade and adopt innovations.
      • Health-care providers and clinicians, given limited bandwidth, often lack the incentives, operational capacity, and frameworks necessary to consider and adopt innovations.
      • This leads to limited traction for start-ups promoting innovative solutions.
    • Procurement challenges: Start-ups also face procurement challenges in both public and private procurement.
      • They lack the financial capacity to deal with lengthy tenders and the roundabout process of price discovery.
      • Private procurement is complicated by the presence of a fragmented customer base and limited systematic channels for distribution.

    Way forward

    • Identify promising market-ready products: To accelerate the process of mainstreaming innovations within the hospital system in India-
      • We need to focus on identifying promising market-ready health-care innovations that are ready to be tested and deployed at scale.
    • Facilitate standard operational validation studies: There is a need to-
      • Facilitate standardised operational validation studies that are required for market adoption.
      • To help ease out the start-up procurement process such that these solutions can be adopted with confidence.
      • This, in effect, will serve the entire ecosystem of health-care innovators by opening up health-care markets for all.
    • Need to develop an interface between hospital and start-ups: A strong theme in mature health-care systems in other parts of the world is a vibrant and seamless interface between hospitals and health-care start-ups.
      • Through Ayushman Bharat, India has the unique opportunity to develop a robust ecosystem where-
      • Hospitals actively engage with health-care start-ups by providing access to testbeds, communicating their needs effectively and adopting promising innovations.
      • Start-ups as collaborators: Start-ups can be effective collaborators for the most pressing health-care delivery challenges faced by hospitals.

    Conclusion

    The dream of an accessible, affordable and high-quality health-care system for all, will be achieved when we work in alignment to complement each other and jointly undertake the mission of creating an Ayushman Bharat.

  • When Yankee goes home

    Context

    Delhi needs to unlearn some of the assumptions about US policy as it prepares to host Trump next week. While the diaspora is important and could be of some value in dealing with Trump, it can’t override the deeper forces animating American politics.

    Changing America under Trump

    • Restriction on immigration: Trump’s America wants the Americans to come home but is shutting the door on unrestricted immigration from the rest of the world.
      • Domestic critics say America has been a nation of immigrants and Trump is wrong to keep them out.
      • Why the restriction on immigrants? But Trump has much support among the working people who know-
      • Immigration keeps wages low.
      • Helps the capitalist class and-
      • Disrupts the familiar cultural and social landscape.
    • Some want America out
      • Some chancelleries in the world demand that America must go home.
      • The president of the Philippines wants to end Manila’s century-old relationship with the US military.
      • Iran wants America out of the Gulf.
      • Russia and China would like to see the US forces out of Europe and Asia respectively.
      • The world is paying serious attention to the possibility of Yankee going home.

    Downsizing of the US role and how the world is responding?

    • Downsizing
      • In the Gulf, Trump wants the Asian powers to police the vital sea lines of communication.
    • In Europe and Asia, he wants the allies to do more for their own security.
    • How the world is responding?
      • Europe’s response In Europe, France and Germany are now talking about creating new defence capabilities for the European Union amidst the prospect for American security retrenchment.
      • How the Asian countries are responding? In Asia, Japan is debating a larger security role.
      • In the Gulf, America’s Arab allies are scrambling to diversify their security dependence.

    America First policy

    • What is America First policy? The idea of downsizing America’s role, along with the rejection of free trade and open borders, is at the very heart of Trump’s America First policy.
    • Resistance to the policy: To be sure there is deep resistance in the US to these ideas that run counter to America’s post-war internationalism.
      • Wall Street on the East Coast and Silicon Valley on the West Coast along with the old foreign and security policy establishment in Washington all oppose Trump’s America First focus.
    • Widespread support to the policy: Trump’s message, however, resonates across the political divide in the US.
      • Many candidates for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party agree with Trump’s goal of ending America’s “endless wars” in the Middle East.
      • Many in the working classes, who traditionally supported the Democrats, believe Trump is right in arguing that free trade has hollowed out American industry and eliminated manufacturing jobs.

    How the changes matter for India?

    • Prepare for the changes: America is at an inflection point; India needs to come to terms with the profound changes unfolding in the US.
    • No intervention policy: The Indian political classes castigated the US for excessive interventions in the affairs of other nations.
      • Trump now says such interventions are counterproductive and all nations must strengthen their sovereignty.
    • Critical of globalisation: Indians criticised the US for imposing globalisation on others; the US President is now one of the biggest critics of globalisation.
      • Trump’s America is not the one we have known.
    • India’s sensitivity to the US domestic politics: As India broadened its engagement with America in the last two decades, Delhi has become more sensitive to the US domestic political dynamics.
      • In getting the US to ease off on Kashmir and nuclear issues, Delhi had to look beyond the foreign policy establishment to generate better US appreciation of India’s concerns and interests.
    • Indian diaspora: One of the instruments that came in handy was the mobilisation of the Indian diaspora, it emerged as a key factor in elevating the bilateral relationship in the 21st century.
      • While the diaspora is important and could be of some value in dealing with Trump, it can’t override the deeper forces animating American politics.

    Conclusion

    Delhi’s success with the US will depend on the kind of strategic imagination it can display on trade cooperation, securing Afghanistan after America’s withdrawal, stabilising the Gulf and developing a new global compact on migration that is sensitive to domestic political considerations and yet contributes to the collective economic development.

     

     

     

     

  • Hype Trumps Hope

    Context

    US president’s visit comes when a mutually beneficial framework of bilateral relationship stands disrupted.

    Significance previous U.S. President’s visits

    • The Clinton visit:  The Clinton visit occurred against the backdrop of a new assessment within the American strategic community of India’s potential role in the post-Cold War era and against the backdrop of the rise of China.
      • Recognition of India’s nuclear power: He implicitly recognising India’s nuclear power status.
      • Kashmir issue: He suggested that the line of control (LoC) between India and Pakistan should be viewed as the international border so as to bury the “Kashmir issue” forever and-
      • Visas for Indians: increasing entry visas for Indians that has since contributed to the emergence of a sizeable community of Indian Americans.
      • As a counter to China: It was suggested that the rise of democratic India would be in the interests of the US and so the latter ought to be supportive of the former.
    • The Bush visit:
      • Political context: The rise of China and of radical Islam and jihadi terrorism provided the geopolitical context.
      • Economic context: The growth of an increasingly open Indian economy provided the economic context.
      • Cooperation in civil nuclear energy: Influenced by this new thinking, President George Bush took the next steps in strategic partnership and led the initiative to promote cooperation in the field of civil nuclear energy that also explicitly recognised India as a nuclear weapons power.
      • As heads of state, Clinton and Bush altered US-India bilateral relations in a fundamental way.
    • The Obama visit:
      • P2P relation: His second visit was more a recognition of the growing importance of people-to-people (P2P) relations and
      • Defence sales to India: The visit also aimed at promoting defence sales to India.
      • During the nuclear deal negotiations, US Congresspersons would often suggest that it was a “123 for 126” deal — that is, they would vote in favour of the 123 agreement in Congress in the hope that India would buy 126 fighter jets from the US.
      • That hope remains as yet unfulfilled, with the French getting the Rafale deal and no decision taken on the purchase of US fighter jets.

    America First policy of Trump

    • The credit for laying the foundation for a new and supportive post-Cold War relationship between the US and India goes singularly to President Bush.
    • Disruption with the arrival of Trump: The mutually beneficial framework that Bush helped create to promote the bilateral relationship has been rudely disrupted by the arrival of Donald Trump in Washington DC.
      • End of GSP: Trump’s “America First” policy offers no space for offering India “special and differential” treatment on any front, least of all trade.
      • Status of the Indian economy from the US perspective: With per capita annual national income of US $60,000, Trump’s America has no qualms declaring India, with a per capita annual average national income of US $2,000 a “developed economy” not deserving of any leniency in trade policy.
      • Clubbing together with China: To club China, a $15-trillion economy, with a $3-trillion India on the trade front is not just stupid but an affront to Indian sensibilities.

    What are the hopes and what could be the outcomes of the visit?

    • No bi-partisan support to India’s rise: It has to be recognised that neither Democratic liberals nor Republican conservatives are any longer willing to be supportive of the Bush-Rice paradigm that views India’s rise in benign and mutually beneficial terms.
      • Inward-orientation in both the countries: Today the relationship seems caught in the pincers between the inward-orientation of rightwing nationalists in both nations.
      • No hope of change: There is no reason as yet to believe that this unfortunate state of affairs will be altered by the Trump visit next week.
    • Stand on Pakistan or Kashmir: Trump has also moved away from the Clinton-Bush framework on India-Pakistan relations and moved closer to approach of wanting to insert the US into the equation on Kashmir.
      • Appeasement of Pakistan: Trump’s motives are no different from those that initially drove Obama-namely, to appease Pakistan in the hope of securing a peaceful exit from Afghanistan.
      • Expect differences to persist: At best, India can hope to limit the damage Trump may do to strategic stability in the region.
    • Visa and investment: There will be much talk about US investments in India and increased visas for Indians going to the US.
      • Corporate interests: Both are driven largely by US corporate interests.
      • Given the direction of the Modi government’s trade policy, one cannot expect any dramatic concessions being made.
      • Defence purchases: The best India can do for the US is to buy more defence equipment and ease up on some trade restrictions.
      • Defence sales to India are an essentially commercial activity and much of it can go on even in the absence of strategic convergence and shared geopolitical perspectives.
    • Brain-drain and need to focus on education: Much is made of Indian Americans heading US multinationals and the Great Indian Diaspora in the US.
      • Outmigration of talent: The continued neglect of education in India is increasing the outmigration of talent, offering the US a reservoir of talent.
      • Drain on national resources: While the Indian elite celebrates this out-migration, the fact is that it is a drain on national resources.

    Conclusion

    In sum,  with the supportive Bush-Rice doctrine defining the post-Cold War US-India partnership virtually abandoned, and the new Trump doctrine treating India as a “developed” economy, demanding parity on trade, bilateral relations have become uncertain and testy. To hide the lack of substance in the relationship the Trump visit will focus on the hype and Prime Minister Modi has perfected the art of diplomacy as mass entertainment.

     

     

  • Explained: Recusals by Judges

    Recently a Supreme Court judge recused himself from hearing a petition filed against the government’s move to charge Omar Abdullah under the Public Safety Act.  The case was finally heard by another bench.

    Rules on Recusals

    • There are no written rules on the recusal of judges from hearing cases listed before them in constitutional courts. It is left to the discretion of a judge.
    • The reasons for recusal are not disclosed in an order of the court. Some judges orally convey to the lawyers involved in the case their reasons for recusal, many do not. Some explain the reasons in their order.
    • The decision rests on the conscience of the judge. At times, parties involved raise apprehensions about a possible conflict of interest.

    Why Judges need recusal?

    • Recusal usually takes place when a judge has a conflict of interest or has a prior association with the parties in the case.
    • For example, if the case pertains to a company in which the judge holds stakes, the apprehension would seem reasonable.
    • Similarly, if the judge has, in the past, appeared for one of the parties involved in a case, the call for recusal may seem right.
    • A recusal inevitably leads to delay. The case goes back to the Chief Justice, who has to constitute a fresh Bench.

    Should the reasons be put on record?

    • In his separate opinion in the NJAC judgment in 2015, Justice (now retired) Kurian Joseph, who was a member of the Constitution Bench, highlighted the need for judges to give reasons for recusal as a measure to build transparency.
    • It is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one’s oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case, Justice Kurian wrote.
    • One of his companion judges on the Constitution Bench, Justice (retired) Madan B. Lokur, agreed that specific rules require to be framed on recusal.
    • The two judges were referring to senior advocate Fali Nariman’s plea to Justice J.S. Khehar, who was then in line to be the next Chief Justice, to recuse himself.
    • But Justice Khehar refused to recuse himself though he admitted that Mr. Nariman’s plea left him in an “awkward predicament”.
    • Justice Khehar reasoned that he did not recuse himself for fear of leaving an impression that he was “scared”.

    What happened in the Judge Loya and Assam detention centres cases?

    • In 2018, petitioners in the Judge Loya case sought the recusal of Supreme Court judges, Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud, from the Bench as they both hailed from the Bombay High Court.
    • The case banked on the written statements of two judges from that High Court, both saying that Judge Loya’s death was from natural causes. The court refused the request and called it a “wanton attack”.
    • Recusal, the court observed, would mean abdication of duty. Maintaining institutional civilities are distinct from the “fiercely independent role of the judge as adjudicator”, the court explained.
    • In May 2019, in the middle of a hearing of a PIL filed by activist Harsh Mander about the plight of inmates in Assam’s detention centres, the then-Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi was asked to recuse himself.
    • In a lengthy order, Justice Gogoi said a litigant cannot seek recusal of the judge. “Judicial functions, sometimes, involve performance of unpleasant and difficult tasks, which require asking questions and soliciting answers to arrive at a just and fair decision.
    • If the assertions of bias as stated are to be accepted, it would become impossible for a judge to seek clarifications and answers,” the court observed.

  • Battling the bug

    Context

    With multiple cities in China under a public health lockdown, global supply chains of various essential products and consumer goods are likely to be affected. This should be particularly worrisome for India, which has a roughly $93 billion total trade and about $57 billion trade imbalance with China.

    Cause of worry turned into a reality

    • Public health experts have worried most about an animal virus-
      • That gets into humans.
      • Causes human-to-human transmission.
      • Has high infectivity and a range of clinical severity.
      • With no human immunity, no diagnostic tests, drugs or vaccines.
    • An emerging virus, called the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), appears to be just that.
    • With the World Health Organisation declaring it a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), this outbreak is now a pandemic.

    What is coronavirus

    • Group of animal virus: Coronaviruses are a group of animal viruses identified by their crown-like (corona) appearance under a microscope.
    • SAARS connection: The 2019-nCoV belongs to this group of viruses, six of which, including the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and the 2012 Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) viruses, were earlier known to cause disease in humans.
      • Genetic similarity with other viruses: Genetic sequencing of the virus from five patients showed it to be 5 per cent identical to the SARS virus.
    • Bats as hosts: Since the SARS outbreak in 2003, scientists have discovered a large number of SARS-related coronaviruses from their natural hosts-bats.
      • Previous studies have shown some of these bat coronaviruses to have the potential to infect humans.
      • Genetic sequencing showed it to human coronavirus to be over 96 per cent identical to a bat coronavirus.
      • Thus, 2019-nCoV clearly originated from bats, jumped into humans either directly or through an intermediate host, and adapted itself to human-to-human transmission.
      • Bats are a particularly rich reservoir for viruses with the potential to infect humans.
      • Examples of these include viruses such as Hanta, Rabies, Nipah, Ebola and Marburg viruses, and others that have caused high levels of mortality and morbidity in humans.
      • India has 117 species and 100 sub-species of bats, but we know little about the viruses they harbour and their disease potential.

    India’s response

    • India’s response includes-
      • Surveillance of arriving passengers at airports.
      • Awareness drives in the border states.
      • Designation of hospitals with isolation wards and the availability of protective gear (e.g. masks) to health workers.
      • SOP: There are clear operating procedures for sample collection and its transport to the National Institute of Virology, Pune, which is the nodal testing centre.
      • A self-declaration mechanism is in place and a 24×7 telephone helpline has been set up.
    • Two areas of concern
      • 1. Promotion of untested medicines: There is mixed messaging promoting AYUSH products that are untested and of questionable efficacy.
      • 2. India- a hot zone of zoonotic pathogens: India has been a “hot zone” for the emergence of new zoonotic (animal-derived) pathogens for over a decade.
      • But we continue to lack the capacity to quickly identify, isolate and characterise a novel pathogen.
      • Example of China: China is a good example of how investments in research and public health will allow it to take a lead on developing diagnostic tests, vaccines and drugs for this new virus. We must do the same and prepare for the future.
    • Disruption in global supply chains and concerns for India
      • With multiple cities in China under a public health lockdown, global supply chains of various essential products and consumer goods are likely to be affected.
      • This should be particularly worrisome for India, which has a roughly $93 billion total trade and about $57 billion trade imbalance with China.
      • Disruption in medicine supply: The Indian pharmaceuticals industry imports about 85 per cent of its active pharmaceutical ingredients from China.
      • Any disruption in this supply chain would adversely affect the availability of medicines in India, which would be required in an outbreak situation.
      • Need to support local pharma. industry: India must, therefore, take steps to correct this imbalance and support the local pharmaceuticals industry in reducing its dependence on China

    Possible scenarios

    • Public health experts estimate that the epidemic will peak in three months.
    • From here on, there are a few possible scenarios, but which of these would play out is hard to guess.
    • 1st possibility: There could be very large numbers of cases and global spread of the virus with a low CFR of 0.1-0.5 per cent, like the bad flu. Or the same with increased CFR, which would lead to significant mortality.
    • 2nd possibility: It is also possible that the outbreak spiralled in China due to a combination of factors not present elsewhere, such as population density, food habits and the Chinese New Year, which sees large population movements.
      • It is also possible that the pandemic may not sustain outside China and die out like the 2003 SARS outbreak.
    • Whatever be the case, surveillance and sensible public health measures will be needed over the next few months.

    Conclusion

    India escaped the 2003 SARS and 2012 MERS outbreaks largely unscathed. This may still be the case with 2019-nCoV, but the laws of probability are likely to catch up soon. It would help to invest, build capacity and be ready.

     

     

     

     

  • System Risk Indicator (SyRI)

    • In a first anywhere in the world, a court in the Netherlands recently stopped a digital identification scheme for reasons of exclusion.
    • This has a context for similar artificial intelligence (AI) systems worldwide, especially at a time when identity, citizenship and privacy are pertinent questions in India.

    SyRI

    • Last week, a Dutch district court ruled against an identification mechanism called SyRI (System Risk Indicator), because of data privacy and human rights concerns.
    • It held SyRI was too invasive and violative of the privacy guarantees given by European Human Rights Law as well as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation.
    • The Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs developed SyRI in 2014 to weed out those who are most likely to commit fraud and receive government benefits.
    • Legislation passed by Dutch Parliament allowed government agencies to share 17 categories of data about welfare recipients such as taxes, land registries, employment records, and vehicle registrations with a private company.
    • The company used an algorithm to analyse data for four cities and calculate risk scores.

    What were the arguments in court?

    • After taking into account community concerns, civil society groups and NGOs launched a legal attack on this case of algorithmic governance.
    • Legal criticism mounted, alleging that the algorithm would begin associating poverty and immigrant statuses with fraud risk.
    • The Dutch government defended the programme in court, saying it prevented abuse and acted as only a starting point for further investigation instead of a final determination.
    • The government also refused to disclose all information about how the system makes its decisions, stating that it would allow gaming of the system.
    • The court found that opaque algorithmic decision-making puts citizens at a disadvantage to challenge the resulting risk scores.
    • The Netherlands continuously ranks high on democracy indices.

    How relevant is this for India?

    • Similar to the Supreme Court’s Aadhaar judgment setting limits on the ID’s usage, the Hague Court attempted to balance social interest with personal privacy.
    • However, the Aadhaar judgment was not regarding algorithmic decision-making; it was about data collection.
    • The ruling is also an example of how a data protection regulation can be used against government surveillance.
    • India’s pending data protection regulation, being analysed by a Joint Select Committee in Parliament, would give broad exemptions to government data processing in its current form.
    • India’s proposed regulation is similar to the US in the loopholes that could be potentially exploited.