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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • De-criminalization of Politics

     

    The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a proposition made by the Election Commission (EC) to ask political parties to not give a ticket to those with criminal antecedents.

    Cleansing of Political Parties

    • The judgment had urged Parliament to bring a “strong law” to cleanse political parties of leaders facing trial for serious crimes.
    • The ruling concluded that rapid criminalisation of politics cannot be arrested by merely disqualifying tainted legislators but should begin by “cleansing” the political parties.
    • The court had suggested that Parliament frame a law that makes it obligatory for political parties to remove leaders charged with “heinous and grievous” crimes like rape, murder and kidnapping, only to a name a few, and refuse ticket to offenders in both parliamentary and Assembly polls.
    • It had also issued guidelines, including that both the candidate and the political party should declare the criminal antecedents of the former in widely-circulated newspapers.

    Why such move?

    • 46% of Members of Parliament have criminal records.
    • A move to steer politics away from the denizens of the criminal world would definitely serve national and public interest.
    • The EC had tried several measures to curb criminalisation of politics but failed.

  • [op-ed snap] As India prepares to honour Bolsonaro

    Context

    India has invited the Brazilian President to be a guest of honour for Republic Day 2020. It is also a good opportunity for focusing on intra-BRICS partnership and trade.

    Future of the BRICS

    • To move towards multi-polarity: This was set up as a move towards greater multi-polarity; hence the spread across three continents and both hemispheres.
      • Infirmities in the group: The BRICS combination accounts for about one-third of global output, but a glance at the GDP t and growth rates will show the infirmities of the group.
      • Differences in GDP: In terms of GDP, China occupies the second position; India the fifth; Brazil the ninth; Russia the 11th; and South Africa the 35th.
      • Differences in growth rate: In terms of growth rates, China grew at 6%; India at 4.5%, Russia 1.7%, Brazil 1.2% and South Africa 0.1%.
      • Both politically and economically, Brazil and South Africa have been the laggards in recent years. But there are certain similarities as well.
    • Similarities in the group: Each country has different economic and political leverage and its own burden of domestic and external issues.
      • Decision-making structure: They all share the benefits of autonomous decision making.
      • Non-affiliation: The members of the group have non-affiliation with any binding alliances.
      • Informal structure: The group’s informal structure is an advantage for coordination among the most influential non-Western countries.
    • Challenges to the survival of the group: The BRICS group can survive only if its members maximise their congruencies to the extent possible. Following are the challenges to the existence of the group-
      • The growing intensity of Sino-Russian ties.
      • The pro-American leanings in Brazil.
      • The socio-economic difficulties of South Africa after nine years under the controversial Jacob Zuma.
      • India’s many difficulties with China, including its abstention from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.

    Achievement of the grouping

    • New Development Bank: The main achievement of BRICS is the New Development Bank, with each country contributing equally to its equity.
      • The bank has so far financed over 40 projects at a cost of $12 billion.
      • The BRICS countries are also developing a joint payments mechanism to reduce foreign trade settlements in U.S. dollars.
    • BASICS: An offshoot of the group, dealing with climate change, is BASIC (BRICS without Russia).
      • BASICS met at the Spain conference last month and reiterated its support to the Paris Agreement.
    • India’s lead role: India is taking the lead role in-
      • Digital health, Digital forensics
      • Film technology.
      • Traditional medicine.
      • Sustainable water management,
      • Internships and fellowships.

    Brazil-India relation

    • Visa waiver for Indians: Brazil declared the decision to waive visa requirements for Indian citizens.
    • Potential for investments: There is potential for Brazilian investments in the sectors of space and defence, agricultural equipment, animal husbandry, post-harvest technologies, and bio-fuels.
    • Low two-way trade: The total two-way trade is at a paltry $8 billion, and the prospect of closer economic ties, however desirable, would require considerable optimism.

    Conclusion

    Both India and Brazil need to further deepen the ties and increase cooperation in various areas of cooperation. BRICS, despite the various challenges, need to focus on congruencies between them and work towards greater cooperation.

    .

     

  • Corruption Perception Index 2019

    The Corruption Perception report for 2019 has been released. It has revealed that a majority of countries are showing little to no improvement in tackling corruption.

    About CPI

    • The CPI is annually released by Transparency International.
    • It draws on 13 surveys and expert assessments to measure public sector corruption in 180 countries and territories, giving each a score from zero (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean).

    India’s performance

    • India’s ranking in the CPI-2019 has slipped from 78 to 80 compared to the previous year.
    • Its score of 41 out of 100 remains the same.
    • CPI highlighted that unfair and opaque political financing, undue influence in decision-making and lobbying by powerful corporate interest groups, has resulted in stagnation or decline in the control of corruption.

    Global corruption

    • In the Asia Pacific region, the average score is 45, after many consecutive years of an average score of 44, which “illustrates general stagnation” across the region.
    • China has improved its position from 87 to 80 with a score of 41 out of 100, a two-point jump.
    • Despite the presence of high performers like New Zealand (87), Singapore (85), Australia (77), Hong Kong (76) and Japan (73), the Asia Pacific region hasn’t witnessed substantial progress in anti-corruption.
    • In addition, low performers like Afghanistan (16), North Korea (17) and Cambodia (20) continue to highlight serious challenges in the region.
    • The top ranked countries are New Zealand and Denmark, with scores of 87 each, followed by Finland (86), Singapore (85), Sweden (85) and Switzerland (85).

  • ICJ ruling on Rohingyas

     

    • The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Myanmar must take effective measures to protect its Rohingya Muslims, including protecting evidence relating to allegations of genocide.
    • It is important to note that these directions are “provisional measures” until the ICJ can finally decide if Myanmar has been committing genocide against the Rohingya. The final verdict could take years.

    What is the case against Myanmar?

    • Last year, the Republic of the Gambia moved the ICJ against Myanmar over alleged violations of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
    • The Gambia urged the ICJ to direct Myanmar to stop the genocide, ensure that persons committing genocide are punished, and allow the “safe and dignified return of forcibly displaced Rohingya”.
    • The Gambia and Myanmar are parties to the Genocide Convention that allows a party to move the ICJ for violations.
    • Disputes between the Contracting Parties are settled according to Article 9 of the Genocide Convention.

    How did Myanmar respond?

    • Myanmar asked the ICJ to remove the case from its list, citing lack of jurisdiction of the court.
    • Myanmar alleged that the proceedings before the court were instituted by the Gambia, not on its own behalf, but rather as a “proxy” and “on behalf of” the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
    • Gambia is a member of the OIC, which includes 53 Muslim-majority nations.
    • Myanmar cited the Gambia’s reliance on OIC documents to allege genocide and said the Gambia did not point to specific violations of the Genocide Convention.
    • The court refused to accept Myanmar’s argument and said the fact that the Gambia “may have sought and obtained the support of other States or international organizations in its endeavour” does not take away from its right to bring a case against Myanmar.

    Does the ICJ ruling indict Myanmar?

    • Although a ruling against Myanmar dents its image internationally, the order of provisional measures does not translate into a finding against Myanmar.
    • While granting provisional measures, the court is not required to ascertain whether Myanmar violated the Genocide Convention.
    • The court found that it is sufficient at this stage “to establish prima facie the existence of a dispute between the Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfillment of the Genocide Convention”.
    • Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s personal appearance before the ICJ to lead the defence of the military, however, shows the great stakes her country had in the case.

    Effects of non-compliance for Myanmar

    • For its part, Myanmar has denied that its military or paramilitary has participated in genocide of Rohingya and it is unlikely to alter its position.
    • Provisional measures are essentially a restraining order against a state when a case is pending and can be seen as, at most, a censure.
    • Provisional orders cannot be challenged and are binding upon the state.
    • However, limitations in enforcing decisions of the ICJ are widely acknowledged by law experts.

    What are these limitations?

    • As per Article 94 of the Charter of the United Nations, all member states are required to comply with decisions of the ICJ.
    • However, any action by a state can be secured only through consent of the state in international law.
    • When a state fails to comply, the Security Council has the power to impose sanctions against it and ensure compliance when international security and peace are at stake.
    • So far, the Security Council has never taken a coercive measure against any country to get an ICJ ruling implemented.
    • Even with the stepping in of the Security Council, there are several hurdles in enforcement of ICJ decisions.
    • Any one of the five permanent members of the Security Council with veto powers can block the enforcement of an ICJ decision against itself or its ally.

  • Enemy Property in India

    • A Group of Ministers (GoM) headed by Union Home Minister will monitor the disposal of over 9,400 enemy properties, which the government estimates is worth about Rs 1 lakh crore.
    • Two committees headed by senior officials will be set up for the disposal of immovable enemy properties vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India under The Enemy Property Act.

    What is “Enemy Property”?

    • In the wake of the India-Pakistan wars of 1965 and 1971, there was migration of people from India to Pakistan.
    • Under the Defence of India Rules framed under The Defence of India Act, 1962, the Government of India took over the properties and companies of those who took Pakistani nationality.
    • These “enemy properties” were vested by the central government in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India.
    • The same was done for property left behind by those who went to China after the 1962 Sino-Indian war.
    • The Tashkent Declaration of January 10, 1966 included a clause that said India and Pakistan would discuss the return of the property and assets taken over by either side in connection with the conflict.
    • However, the Government of Pakistan disposed of all such properties in their country in the year 1971 itself.

    How did India deal with enemy property?

    • The Enemy Property Act, enacted in 1968, provided for the continuous vesting of enemy property in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India.
    • The central government, through the Custodian, is in possession of enemy properties spread across many states in the country.
    • Some movable properties too, are categorised as enemy properties.
    • In 2017, Parliament passed The Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2016, which amended The Enemy Property Act, 1968, and The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

    Who is an Enemy?

    • The amended Act expanded the definition of the term “enemy subject”, and “enemy firm” to include the legal heir and successor of an enemy, whether a citizen of India or a citizen of a country which is not an enemy; and the succeeding firm of an enemy firm, irrespective of the nationality of its members or partners.
    • The amended law provided that enemy property shall continue to vest in the Custodian even if the enemy or enemy subject or enemy firm ceases to be an enemy due to death, extinction, winding up of business or change of nationality, or that the legal heir or successor is a citizen of India or a citizen of a country which is not an enemy.
    • The Custodian, with prior approval of the central government, may dispose of enemy properties vested in him in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and the government may issue directions to the Custodian for this purpose.

    Why were these amendments brought?

    • The thrust of the amendments was to guard against claims of succession or transfer of properties left by people who migrated to Pakistan and China after the wars.
    • The amendments denied legal heirs any right over enemy property. The main aim was to negate the effect of a court judgment in this regard.

    What did these court orders say?

    • One major judgment was passed in the case of the estate of the erstwhile Raja of Mahmudabad, who owned several large properties in Hazratganj, Sitapur and Nainital.
    • Following Partition, the Raja left for Iraq and stayed there for some years before settling in London.
    • After The Enemy Property Act was enacted in the year 1968, the Raja’s estate was declared enemy property. When the Raja died, his son who stayed in India staked claim to the properties.
    • After a legal battle that lasted over 30 years, an apex court Bench on October 21, 2005, ruled in favour of the son.
    • The verdict opened the floodgates for further pleas in courts across the country in which genuine or purported relatives of persons who had migrated to Pakistan produced deeds of gift claiming they were the rightful owners of enemy properties.
    • On July 2, 2010, the then UPA government promulgated an Ordinance that restrained courts from ordering the government to divest enemy properties from the Custodian.
    • The 2005 SC order was thus rendered ineffective, and the Custodian again took over the Raja’s properties.

    Enactment of the Amended Law

    • A Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha on July 22, 2010, and subsequently, a revised Bill was tabled on November 15, 2010. This Bill was thereafter referred to the Standing Committee.
    • However, the said Bill could not be passed during the term of the 15th Lok Sabha, and it lapsed.
    • On January 7, 2016, the President of India promulgated The Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2016, which was replaced by the Bill that became law in 2017.

  • [pib] National Data and Analytics Platform (NDAP)

     

    NITI Aayog has released its vision for the National Data and Analytics Platform (NDAP).

    National Data and Analytics Platform

    • The platform aims to democratize access to publicly available government data.
    • NDAP will host the latest datasets from various government websites, present them coherently, and provide tools for analytics and visualization.
    • It will spearhead the standardization of formats in which data is presented across sectors and will cater to a wide audience of policymakers, researchers, innovators, data scientists, journalists and citizens.
    • It will follow a user-centric approach and will enable data access in a simple and intuitive portal tailored to the needs of a variety of stakeholders.
    • The development of NDAP will take place over a period of one year. The first version of the platform is expected to be launched in 2021.

  • Democracy Index 2019

     

    The latest edition of the Democracy Index spells gloom for India. The world’s biggest democracy slipped 10 places in the 2019 global ranking to 51st place.

    Democracy Index

    • The report is published by The Economist Intelligence Unit — the research and analysis division of The Economist Group, which is the sister company to The Economist newspaper.
    • It records how global democracy fared, analysing 165 independent states and two territories.
    • The 2019 survey attributes the primary cause of “the democratic regression” to “an erosion of civil liberties in the country”.

    India’s performance

    • India’s overall score fell from 7.23 to 6.9, on a scale of 0-10, within a year (2018-2019) — the country’s lowest since 2006.
    • India was graded in electoral process and pluralism (8.67), government functioning (6.79), political participation (6.67), political culture (5.63) and civil liberties (6.76).
    • In the Asia and Australasia region, India ranks eighth, behind Taiwan and Timor-Leste.
    • The report talks about the repeal of both Article 370 and Article 35A and various restrictions such as house arrests, internet shutdowns and excessive use of forces.

    India: A flawed democracy?

    The Index also categorizes India under “flawed democracies”, i.e. countries that hold free and fair elections and where basic civil liberties are respected, but have significant weaknesses in aspects of democracy, such as problems in governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation.

  • Blue Corner Notice

    Interpol has issued a Blue Corner notice to help locate an infamous fugitive self-styled godman weeks after the Gujarat Police sought the agency’s intervention for this.

     ‘Blue Corner’ notice

    • According to the Interpol website, “Notices are international requests for cooperation or alerts allowing police in member countries to share critical crime-related information.”
    • There are seven types of notices — Red Notice, Yellow Notice, Blue Notice, Black Notice, Green Notice, Orange Notice, and Purple Notice.
    • The Blue Notice is issued to “collect additional information about a person’s identity, location or activities in relation to a crime.”

    Blue notices a/c to CBI

    • The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) website refers to Blue Notices as ‘B Series (Blue) Notices’.
    • It says, “The ‘B’ series notices are also called ‘enquiry notices’ and may be issued in order to have someone’s identity verified; to obtain particulars of a person’s criminal record; to locate someone who is missing or is an identified or unidentified international criminal or is wanted for a violation of ordinary criminal law and whose extradition may be requested.”

  • [pib] SERVICE Initiative

    The Steel Authority of India Ltd has launched an initiative called SERVICE to promote Voluntary Philanthropist Activities (VPA) by its employees.

    About SERVICE

    • SERVICE stands for “SAIL Employee Rendering Voluntarism and Initiatives for Community Engagement (SERVICE)”.
    • It aims to promote and facilitate philanthropist activities by the employees in a structured manner.
    • The Minister also launched a portal for the employees to register for the scheme.
    • This dedicated portal will act as a platform for enabling faster interaction and communication amongst the various stakeholders.

  • [op-ed snap] Same country, different script

    Context

    Pakistan is changing significantly, which is good for itself and its neighbour as well.

    Changing Pakistan

    • Major stakeholders in favour of peace: The civil society, the political parties, and even the military establishment of Pakistan have come to favour peaceful and cooperative relations with India.
    • Both the power-centre on the same page: Both Islamabad and Rawalpindi, Pakistan’s two centres of power, are now on the same page in seeking “honourable peace” with New Delhi on the basis of “sovereign equality”.
      • Heavy price paid by Pakistan: There is a broad consensus in Pakistani society and polity that their country has paid a very heavy price by supporting the forces of Islamist extremism and terrorism.
      • The futility of using terrorism as foreign policy: There is also consensus that using terrorism for achieving mistaken foreign policy ends in Afghanistan and India.

    Conducive conditions for dialogues

    • Four factors have influenced the welcome winds of change in Pakistan.
    • First-Realisation that Pakistan has suffered a lot:
      • Harm at home and to the global image: There is the across-the-board realisation that Pakistan has suffered a lot, both domestically and in terms of damage to its global image, by supporting religious extremism and terrorism.
      • A large number of casualties: Terrorists have killed a shockingly large number of civilians -certainly far many more than in India. Several thousand soldiers have lost their lives in the army’s “war on terror”-more than the number of casualties in all the wars with India.
      • The threat of FATF blacklisting: Furthermore, Islamabad is under relentless pressure from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to act decisively and irreversibly against terrorist organisations.
    • Second-Decrease in religious radicalisation in Pakistan
      • The decrease in the financial support to radicalism: What has contributed to the diminished importance of religious radicalism is also the shrinking inflow of petrodollars from Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries that promoted this agenda.
      • The ideological influence of religious radicalisation on Pakistan’s civil society is clearly declining.
      • Change in Saudi Government Policy: Export of Wahhabism is no longer a foreign policy priority of the Saudi Arabian government.
      • Changing policies in UAE: The United Arab Emirates has gone a step further, under the leadership of Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, it is pursuing inter-religious tolerance with a zeal that has surprised Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
    • Third-Interest of China
      • Rise of China as an economic and security partner: The third factor is China, which has emerged as Pakistan’s most important economic and security partner.
      • The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and BRI: The flagship projects under Beijing’s BRI has begun to modernise Pakistan’s infrastructure spectacularly, but its security is which could be threatened by terrorism is also the concern for China.
      • Connection with China’s Xinjiang Province: China has urged Pakistan’s ruling establishment to take firm steps to curb the activities of Islamist groups because they can easily foment trouble in China’s Muslim-majority Xinjiang province.
      • India-China relation factor: Beijing is also engaged in a steady effort to improve relations with New Delhi, in recognition of India’s rising economic and geopolitical stature in Asia and globally.
      • Possibility of India-China-Pakistan cooperation: China’s President Xi Jinping even mooted cooperation among China, India and Pakistan at Mamallapuram summit.
    • Fourth-Military establishment in favour of peace.
      • The military establishment seems to be fully convinced of the need for normalisation of India-Pakistan
      • Opening of Kartarpur Sahib Corridor: The opening of the Kartarpur Sahib Corridor, perhaps the greatest confidence-building measure between the two countries since 1947, is almost entirely due to Gen. Bajwa’s personal commitment to the project.
      • The economic crisis in Pakistan: Bajwa’s is also said to be convinced of the need to open the doors for economic and trade cooperation between the two countries given a serious economic crisis Pakistan is going through.
      • Discussion on the Kashmir issue: The Pakistan Army may also be ready to discuss a solution to the Kashmir issue on the basis of a formula Gen. Pervez Musharraf had discussed with PMs Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Dr Manmohan Singh.

    Conclusion

    India needs to seize the opportunity to resume the talks with Pakistan on all the contentious issues and try to resolve the disputes so that the improved relations could help both the countries and the neighbouring countries.