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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • The antibiotic pipeline is running dangerously dry

    Why in the News?

    Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become a serious global public health threat as the development of new antibiotics has not kept pace with the rapid rise in drug resistance. Unlike earlier decades, when ineffective antibiotics were regularly replaced by new ones, no truly new antibiotic classes have emerged in recent years. India is among the worst affected, with very high antibiotic use and an estimated 2.74 lakh deaths linked to AMR in 2019.

    Why is antimicrobial resistance a growing public health crisis?

    1. Rising mortality burden: AMR-attributable deaths in India were estimated at 2.74 lakh in 2019, reflecting a large and growing health burden.
    2. Treatment failure: Common infections are increasingly difficult to treat, increasing complications, hospital stays, and mortality.
    3. Systemic impact: AMR undermines surgery, chemotherapy, organ transplants, and neonatal care by increasing infection risk.
    4. Global spread: Resistant pathogens spread rapidly through travel, trade, food chains, and the environment.

    Why is India disproportionately affected by AMR?

    1. High infectious disease load: India continues to face a high burden of communicable diseases requiring antibiotic use.
    2. Extensive antibiotic consumption: India is among the world’s largest consumers of antibiotics, both in human and animal health.
    3. Healthcare pressures: Overcrowded hospitals and limited diagnostic capacity encourage empirical and broad-spectrum antibiotic use.
    4. Survival advantage of pathogens: Drug-resistant bacteria survive treatment and transmit resistance genes to other bacteria.

    How does antibiotic misuse accelerate resistance?

    1. Inappropriate prescribing: Antibiotics are frequently used for viral infections such as colds, coughs, and diarrhoea.
    2. Empirical treatment: Lack of timely diagnostics leads to blind antibiotic use without pathogen identification.
    3. Prophylactic use: Antibiotics are prescribed preventively, even where clinical benefit is uncertain.
    4. Seasonal misuse: Antibiotics are used for seasonal viral illnesses due to patient demand and prescribing habits.

    What is happening to the global antibiotic pipeline?

    1. Limited innovation: Very few new antibiotic classes have been developed in the past three decades.
    2. R&D stagnation: Most recent approvals involve modifications of existing drugs rather than new mechanisms of action.
    3. Commercial disincentives: Antibiotics offer low returns compared to chronic disease drugs, discouraging private investment.
    4. Effectiveness erosion: Even newly introduced antibiotics lose effectiveness rapidly due to resistance.

    Why is antibiotic stewardship more effective than blanket bans?

    1. Behavioural regulation: Stewardship programs guide rational prescribing rather than eliminating access.
    2. Evidence from India: The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) launched a national antibiotic stewardship programme in 2015.
    3. Measured impact: Prescription awareness improved, but full behavioural internalisation remains limited.
    4. Sustainability challenge: Stewardship requires continuous monitoring, training, and institutional commitment.

    How do livestock and agriculture worsen the AMR problem?

    1. Non-therapeutic use: Antibiotics are used in animals for growth promotion and disease prevention.
    2. Shared drug classes: Many antibiotics critical for humans are also used in animals.
    3. Environmental spread: Antibiotic residues enter soil and water through animal waste and food chains.
    4. Resistance transfer: Resistance genes move between human, animal, and environmental bacteria.

    Why is data collection on AMR inadequate?

    1. Limited surveillance: ICMR’s AMR surveillance network covers only 25 tertiary hospitals.
    2. Urban bias: Most data originates from large hospitals, missing community-level resistance patterns.
    3. Underestimation risk: Resistance prevalence is likely higher than reported due to incomplete coverage.
    4. Policy constraint: Inadequate data limits targeted interventions and resource allocation.

    Why can’t new antibiotics alone solve AMR?

    1. Rapid resistance development: Resistance emerges even against newly introduced drugs.
    2. Finite effectiveness window: Antibiotics lose usefulness within a few years of widespread use.
    3. Overreliance risk: Dependence on drug discovery ignores behavioural and systemic drivers.
    4. Adjunct necessity: Stewardship, infection prevention, and diagnostics remain central.

    Conclusion

    The antibiotic pipeline crisis reflects a structural mismatch between rising resistance and declining innovation. India’s experience demonstrates that stewardship, surveillance, and behavioural regulation are as critical as drug discovery. Without systemic correction, modern medicine risks returning to a pre-antibiotic era.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Can overuse and free availability of antibiotics without Doctor’s prescription, be contributors to the emergence of drug-resistant diseases in India? What are the available mechanisms for monitoring and control? Critically discuss the various issues involved.

    Linkage: This question directly maps to GS Paper III (Science & Technology-Public Health), aligning with UPSC’s repeated focus on antimicrobial resistance as a governance and regulatory challenge. It links with PYQs on antibiotic overuse, emerging health challenges, and technology-policy gaps, reflecting UPSC’s trend of testing systemic failures rather than medical details.

  • Delimitataion after 2027, redrawing power in India

    Why in the News?

    India is approaching its first inter-State Lok Sabha seat redistribution since 1976, following the end of the constitutional freeze after Census 2027. Representation is still based on the 1971 population despite India crossing 1.47 billion, creating a major imbalance. Uneven population growth could allow Uttar Pradesh and Bihar to hold over 25% of Lok Sabha seats, reshaping coalition politics and federal balance.

    What is Delimitation?

    1. It is a constitutional requirement following every Census to ensure equality of representation under Article 82. 
    2. However, India suspended inter-State redistribution of Lok Sabha seats for nearly half a century to avoid penalising States that implemented population control. 
    3. This freeze, reaffirmed by the 84th Constitutional Amendment (2001), effectively ends after Census 2027.
    4. The upcoming exercise will simultaneously reallocate seats, redraw all constituencies, and operationalise 33% women’s reservation, making it a structural reset of India’s representative system.

    Why is delimitation after 2027 fundamentally different from earlier exercises?

    1. Frozen Representation: Maintains 1971 population ratios despite a tripling of population, undermining equal suffrage.
    2. First Inter-State Redistribution Since 1976: Previous exercises only redrew internal boundaries without reallocating seats.
    3. Expanded Mandate: Includes full constituency redraw, inter-State seat reallocation, and women’s reservation implementation.
    4. Time Compression: Census data likely released in 2028; completion before 2031-32 is administratively improbable.

    How have demographic divergences created a representation paradox?

    1. Fertility Divergence: Southern and western States achieved below-replacement fertility through education and health investments.Governance Penalty: States that controlled population risk losing relative political influence.
    2. Population Arithmetic: If seats are allocated purely by population in an expanded House of ~888 members:
      1. Uttar Pradesh: 80 to 151 seats
      2. Bihar: 40 to 82 seats
      3. Combined Share: ~26% of Lok Sabha
      4. Tamil Nadu: 39 to 53 seats; share declines from 7.2% to ~6%
      5. Kerala: 20 to 23 seats; share declines from 3.7% to ~2.6%

    Why does expanding the Lok Sabha not resolve southern States’ concerns?

    1. Absolute vs Relative Power: Parliamentary influence depends on proportion, not absolute numbers.
    2. Coalition Arithmetic: Two States exceeding one-fourth of seats alters government formation dynamics.
    3. Diminished Bargaining Power: Smaller and demographically stable States lose leverage despite formal seat retention.
    4. Moral Paradox: Rewards demographic growth over governance outcomes.

    How to manage redistribution risks?

    1. Extended Freeze: Delays redistribution beyond 2026 to allow fertility convergence; risks Article 14 challenges due to unequal suffrage.
    2. House Expansion: Raises Lok Sabha size to 750-888 seats; mitigates seat loss but not proportional imbalance.
    3. Weighted Formula: Assigns 80% weight to population and 20% to governance indicators (literacy, health, fertility control), analogous to Finance Commission devolution.
    4. Rajya Sabha Rebalancing: Strengthens federal moderation through domicile restoration and restructured State tiers.
    5. State Reorganisation: Proposes dividing Uttar Pradesh into 3-4 States (~38 seats each) to neutralise excessive dominance.
    6. Phased Redistribution: Implements seat reallocation over two election cycles (2034 and 2039) to reduce political shock.

    Why does procedure matter as much as formula in delimitation?

    1. Institutional Design: Requires experts in demography, constitutional law, and federal studies.
    2. State Participation: Meaningful State representation critical for legitimacy.
    3. Transparency: Public hearings and disclosure essential to prevent distrust.
    4. Reservation Sensitivity: SC/ST constituency placement involves Commission discretion and potential manipulation risks.

    How could delimitation reshape India’s federal and political landscape?

    1. Coalition Reconfiguration: Alters role of regional parties in government formation.
    2. Federal Trust Deficit: Perceived injustice risks deepening Centre-State tensions.
    3. Electoral Geography Reset: Administrative convenience, geography, and social composition gain renewed relevance.
    4. Democratic Renewal or Erosion: Outcomes depend on whether equity and transparency guide the process.

    Conclusion

    Delimitation after Census 2027 is not merely a technical exercise but a constitutional moment that will redefine representation, federal balance, and democratic fairness. Its legitimacy will depend on whether the process balances population equality with federal equity, ensuring that States are not politically disadvantaged for achieving governance and demographic stability.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] What changes has the Union Government recently introduced in the domain of Centre-State relations? Suggest measures to build trust between the Centre and the States and for strengthening federalism.

    Linkage: Post-2027 delimitation may alter Centre-State relations by shifting political power among States based on population growth. Trust can be strengthened through a transparent, phased process that protects federal balance and rewards responsible governance.

  • Pax Silica and Global Tech Supply Chains

    Why in the News?

    On 12 December 2025, the United States convened the inaugural Pax Silica Summit to secure Rare Earth Elements (REEs) and strengthen semiconductor and AI supply chains amid rising geopolitical competition.

    What is Pax Silica?

    • A strategic initiative to secure supply chains for semiconductors, AI, and critical minerals
    • Pax means peace and Silica refers to a key material in chip manufacturing
    • Aims to promote peace, prosperity, and trusted digital infrastructure

    Current Status of India

    • India not invited to inaugural summit
    • US Ambassador Sergio Gor announced India will be invited soon

    Why did the U.S. launch Pax Silica amid changing geopolitical realities?

    • Strategic Dependence: The U.S. sought to reduce over reliance on China for Rare Earth Elements and critical inputs essential for advanced technologies and defence. Eg China suspended REE exports to the U.S. during tariff escalations, revealing supply chain vulnerabilities.
    • Weaponisation of Trade: Critical minerals and technologies are increasingly used as tools of geopolitical coercion rather than neutral market goods. Eg China imposed strict licensing and end use restrictions on rare earth magnet exports to India, including bans on defence use.
    • Tech National Security: Semiconductors and AI are now core to economic strength, military capability, and strategic dominance. Eg Shortages of advanced chips during the COVID period disrupted U.S. defence production and AI driven industries.
    • Supply Chain Resilience: The U.S. aims to shift from cost efficiency driven globalisation to resilience driven and trusted supply chains. Eg Pax Silica links Australia’s lithium resources, Japan’s manufacturing strength, and the Netherlands’ lithography technology.

    What value can India add to Pax Silica despite ecosystem gaps?

    • Human Capital: India contributes a large, skilled workforce, strong STEM education base, and growing AI and semiconductor talent, which can support scaling of advanced technologies. Eg Return of U.S. trained Indian engineers due to visa constraints is strengthening India’s domestic AI and chip ecosystem.
    • Market Scale: India offers a fast growing digital economy, large consumer base, and rising AI adoption, making it a critical demand centre for next generation technologies.  
    • Trusted Partnerships: India has proven technology collaboration capacity, supply chain integration experience, and status as a strategic partner rather than a coercive actor. Eg Micron’s semiconductor investment in India and Tata Group’s entry into chip manufacturing demonstrate trusted industrial cooperation.

    How might Pax Silica affect India’s strategic autonomy and policy space?

    • Strategic Autonomy: Joining Pax Silica may increase pressure on India to align more closely with U.S. and its allies, even when India prefers to take independent positions. Eg India may choose not to fully support strict security or sanction policies that do not suit its national interests.
    • Policy Freedom: India will want to keep the freedom to support its own industries through subsidies and government support, which some Pax Silica countries may question. Eg India may continue giving financial support to local chip companies under the Semiconductor Mission, even if partners prefer open markets.
    • Regulatory Control: Common rules under Pax Silica could limit India’s flexibility to work with other countries outside the group.

    Way forward:

    • Calibrated Engagement: India should participate selectively and pragmatically, focusing on technology access and supply chain resilience while avoiding rigid security commitments.
    • Protect Policy Space: India must clearly defend its right to support domestic industries through subsidies, procurement, and phased localisation. Eg Continue incentives under the India Semiconductor Mission while aligning gradually with global standards.
    • Leverage Multi Alignment: India should use Pax Silica to diversify supply chains, not replace existing partnerships, maintaining strategic balance.
    [2012] Recently there has been a concern over the short supply of a group of elements called rare earth metals. Why? 

    1. China, which is the largest producer of these elements, has imposed some restrictions on their export. 

    2. Other than China, Australia, Canada, Chile, these elements are not found in any country. 

    3. Rare earth metals are essential for the manufacture of various kinds of electronic items and there is growing demand for these elements. 

    Select the correct answer using the code given below: (a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3

  • US Exit from World Health Organization

    Why in the News?

    On 23 January 2026, the United States formally withdrew from the World Health Organization after Donald Trump restarted the exit process at the beginning of his second term.

    Background

    • US announced withdrawal on Day 1 of Trump’s second term in 2025 through an executive order
    • Decision based on allegations that WHO failed in handling COVID 19
    • US confirmed it will not rejoin or participate even as an observer

    Financial Dimension

    • US was WHO’s largest single contributor
    • Outstanding unpaid dues around 260 million dollars
    • All US funding to WHO has been stopped
    • Under US law, one year notice is required, but payment obligation is legally disputed

    WHO’s Response

    • WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus urged the US to reconsider
    • Warned of global public health fallout
    • WHO may cut up to 25 percent of its workforce due to funding gap
    [2022] In the context of WHO Air Quality Guidelines, Consider the following statements: 

    1. The 24-hour mean of PM 2.5 should not exceed 15 μg/m³ and annual mean of PM 2.5 should not exceed 5 μg/m³

    2. In a year, the highest levels of ozone pollution occur during the periods of inclement weather

    3. PM 10 can penetrate the long barrier and enter the bloodstream

    4. Excessive ozone in the air can trigger asthma

    Which of the statements given above are correct? 

    (a) 1, 3 and 4 (b) 1 and 4 only (c) 2, 3 and 4 (d) 1 and 2 only

  • National Legislative Index (NLI)

    Why in the News?

    At the 86th All India Presiding Officers Conference, Om Birla, Speaker of Lok Sabha, announced the initiation of the National Legislative Index (NLI).

    What is National Legislative Index (NLI)?

    • Proposed performance evaluation framework
    • Objectively measures and compares the functioning of Parliament of India and State Legislatures
    • Uses predefined indicators and data driven metrics

    Examples of Predefined Indicators for NLI

    Legislative functioning: Number of sittings held, Duration of sittings, Percentage utilisation of House time and Adjournments and disruption.

    Aim

    • Healthy competition among legislatures
    • Improved efficiency and accountability
    • Better quality of legislative deliberation
    • People centric and outcome oriented law making

    Key Features

    • Objective performance metrics: Number of sittings, legislative output, committee work, utilisation of House time
    • Comparative and competitive framework: Cross comparison of Parliament and State Legislatures. Best practice sharing
    • Transparency and accountability focus: Public scrutiny, discipline, quality debate, citizen centric legislation

    Significance

    • Discourages disruptions and frequent adjournments
    • Improves deliberative quality of legislatures
    • Reinforces legislatures as core pillars of constitutional democracy
    • Aligns institutional performance with long term national development goals
    • Promotes efficient and outcome oriented governance
    [2017] The Parliament of India exercises control over the functions of the Council of Ministers through: 

    1. Adjournment motion 

    2. Question hour 

    3. Supplementary questions 

    Select the correct answer using the code given below: 

    (a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3

  • Ocean Governance – UNCLOS, ISA, High Seas Teaty, etc.

  • Trump launches Board of Peace

    Why in the news?

    The United States has launched a new Board of Peace initiative at the World Economic Forum in Davos, projecting it as a global peace-making body that could rival or even replace the United Nations in the long term.The move is significant because many traditional U.S. allies declined participation, revealing skepticism about its mandate and legitimacy.

    What is the Board of Peace?

    Origin and Initial Mandate

    1. Conceptualisation: Conceived by Donald Trump as part of the second phase of a U.S.-brokered 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan announced in September.
    2. Original Scope: Oversight of demilitarisation, reconstruction, and governance of the Gaza Strip, following devastation caused by Israel’s two-year war.
    3. International Backing: Received formal legitimacy when the United Nations Security Council endorsed the ceasefire plan in November.

    Mandate Expansion and Charter Design

    1. Mandate Expansion: Expanded from a Gaza-specific reconstruction body to a global institution addressing conflicts worldwide.
    2. Charter Language: Defines the Board as an “international organization” promoting stability, peace, and governance in areas affected or threatened by conflict.
    3. Notable Omission: The draft charter circulated with invitations does not reference Gaza, despite Gaza being the original trigger.

    Leadership and Governance Structure

    1. Chairmanship: Trump designated as indefinite chairman, potentially extending beyond his second presidential term.
    2. Institutional Hierarchy: Board positioned above a Founding Executive Board.
    3. Executive Composition: Includes Jared Kushner, Marco Rubio, Steve Witkoff, andTony Blair, indicating executive-driven rather than multilateral governance.

    Membership Model and Access Rules

    1. Term Structure: Standard membership for three-year terms.
    2. Permanent Seats: Available upon payment of USD 1 billion to a peace-building fund.
    3. Governance Implication: Introduces a financial criterion for institutional permanence, distinct from norm-based multilateral systems.

    Why is participation in the Board of Peace contested?

    1. Limited Attendance: Heads of state or senior officials from only 19 countries, plus the U.S., were physically present.
    2. Ally Skepticism: Several close U.S. allies opted out due to uncertainty over mandate, authority, and overlap with existing institutions.
    3. Legislative Constraints: Some countries indicated interest but require parliamentary approval before formal participation.

    How does the Board of Peace relate to the United Nations?

    1. Institutional Overlap: The Board’s functions closely resemble UN peacekeeping and mediation roles.
    2. U.S. Positioning: The President indicated cooperation with the UN while simultaneously questioning its effectiveness.
    3. Long-term Implication: The Board was described as potentially making the UN obsolete, signaling a challenge to the post-1945 multilateral order.

    What role does the Gaza conflict play in this initiative?

    1. Ceasefire Focus: The Board was presented as a mechanism to manage and sustain ceasefires, with Gaza cited as a test case.
    2. Border Opening: Announcement that the Rafah crossing would reopen in both directions after Israeli approval.
    3. Governance Proposal: Oversight of Gaza by a Palestinian committee under U.S. supervision was mentioned as part of post-conflict planning.

    How have major global powers responded?

    1. Russia’s Position: Indicated ongoing consultations and refrained from immediate commitment.
    2. Engagement with Palestine: Russia hosted Palestinian leadership, highlighting parallel diplomatic tracks.
    3. Global Fragmentation: Divergent responses reflect declining consensus on U.S.-led peace initiatives.

    Conclusion

    The launch of the Board of Peace reflects dissatisfaction with existing global peace mechanisms and highlights the limits of unilateral institution-building. The gap between claimed support and actual participation raises questions about its legitimacy and effectiveness, even as ongoing conflicts like Gaza underline the urgency of peace efforts.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Terrorism has become a significant threat to global peace and security’. Evaluate the effectiveness of the United Nations Security Council’s Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) and its associated bodies in addressing and mitigating this threat at the international level.

    Linkage: The question tests how far UN bodies like the Security Council and its counter-terrorism mechanisms have been effective in maintaining global peace and security. The Board of Peace has been launched because existing UN mechanisms are seen as slow and ineffective.

  • Prior Sanction for Corruption Investigations | Section 17A of PCA, 1988

    Why in the News?

    A two judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India has delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which mandates prior government approval before investigation against public servants for decisions taken in official capacity.

    What is the Current Split Verdict?

    • Justice K V Viswanathan
        • Upheld Section 17A conditionally
        • Held prior approval is needed to protect honest officers
        • Said approval must come from an independent authority
        • Linked Section 17A with Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
        • Approval to be based on binding opinion of Lokpal for Centre and Lokayukta for States.
    • Justice B V Nagarathna
      • Held Section 17A unconstitutional
      • Called it “old wine in new bottle”
      • Violates Article 14
      • No rational nexus or intelligible differentia
      • Protection already exists under Section 19 which requires sanction before prosecution

    What is the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988?

    • Enacted to consolidate laws on corruption among public servants
    • Originated from recommendations of the Santhanam Committee (1962)
    • Covers offences such as
      • Bribery
      • Criminal misconduct
      • Undue advantage
    • Applies to public servants, including government officials, judges, and local authority employees

    What is Section 17A of PCA?

    • Inserted through 2018 amendment
    • Requires prior approval of the appropriate government before
      • Inquiry or
      • Investigation
    • Applicable when alleged offence relates to
      • A recommendation made or
      • A decision taken by a public servant while discharging official duties

    Rationale Behind Section 17A

    • To protect honest officers from
      • Frivolous
      • Vexatious complaints
    • Intended to prevent decision making paralysis or “play it safe” behaviour in bureaucracy
    • Distinguishes between
      • Good faith administrative decisions
      • Intentional corruption

    Earlier Supreme Court Rulings

    • Vineet Narain vs Union of India (1998)
        • Struck down the CBI’s Single Directive
        • Held that prior sanction for investigation violates rule of law
    • Dr Subramaniam Swamy vs Director, CBI (2014)
      • Struck down Section 6A of DSPE Act
      • Required prior approval for probing senior officers
      • Declared violative of Article 14 (equality before law)
    [2025] Consider the following statements about Lokpal: 

    I. The power of Lokpal applies to public servants of India, but not to the Indian public servants posted outside India. 

    II. The Chairperson or a Member shall not be a Member of the Parliament or a Member of the Legislature of any State or Union Territory, and only the Chief Justice of India, whether incumbent or retired, has to be its Chairperson. 

    III. The Chairperson or a Member shall not be a person of less than forty-five years of age on the date of assuming office. 

    IV. Lokpal cannot inquire into the allegations of corruption against a sitting Prime Minister of India. 

    Which of the statements given above is/ are correct? 

    (a) III only (b) II and III (c) I and IV (d) None of the above statements is correct

  • Spain joins Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI)

    Why in the News?

    Spain has formally joined the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative, with Spain’s Foreign Minister handing over the Declaration of Accession to S. Jaishankar.

    What is the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI)?

    • A non-treaty, voluntary, cooperative framework for maritime cooperation
    • Focused on practical collaboration, not military alliances
    • Applicable to like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific region

    Aim of IPOI

    • Promote a free, open, inclusive, and rules-based Indo-Pacific
    • Address maritime challenges through cooperation and capacity building
    • Balance security, development, and sustainability in maritime domains

    Significance of Spain’s Accession

    • Enhances global and European legitimacy of IPOI
    • Reflects growing Europe Indo-Pacific engagement
    • Strengthens India’s role as a net security provider and agenda-setter
    • Promotes inclusive multilateralism amid rising great power rivalry

    Prelims Pointers

    • IPOI is not a treaty or alliance
    • It is India-led, unlike QUAD which is minilateral
    • Focuses on oceans governance, not territorial disputes
    • Countries participate based on voluntary pillar leadership
    [2017] Consider the following in respect of Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS): 

    1. Inaugural IONS was held in India in 2015 under the chairmanship of the Indian Navy

    2. IONS is a voluntary initiative that seeks to increase maritime co-operation among navies of the littoral states of the Indian Ocean Region

    Which of the above statements is/are correct? 

    (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

  • [22nd January 2026] The Hindu OpED: Judicial removal, tough law with a loophole

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2023]  “Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy.” Comment.

    Linkage: This issue lies at the core of GS Paper II (Separation of Powers and Judiciary), examining how constitutional safeguards protect judicial independence while ensuring accountability. The article on judicial removal highlights that procedural loopholes in impeachment weaken accountability.

    Mentor’s Comment

    Judicial independence and accountability are equally important under the Constitution. The impeachment process was meant to protect judges from political pressure while allowing removal in cases of proven misconduct. Recent events, however, show a clear gap between law and practice. Discretion given to the Speaker or Chairman has created a loophole that can block the removal of even an erring judge.

    Why in the News?

    In December 2025, Lok Sabha MPs submitted a notice to remove a High Court judge for misconduct. Although the required number of signatures was met, the process stalled because the Speaker can admit or reject the motion. This reflects a long-standing institutional failure: no judge has ever been removed through impeachment despite repeated allegations. The episode shows how a constitutionally strict removal process can be blocked at the initial procedural stage itself.

    What is the constitutional framework for removal of judges?

    1. Constitutional Basis: Articles 124(4) and 217 mandate removal only through a special majority of Parliament on grounds of proven misbehaviour or incapacity.
    2. Procedural Authority: Article 124(5) empowers Parliament to legislate procedures for investigation and presentation of an address to the President.
    3. Statutory Instrument: The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 operationalises this power by prescribing inquiry procedures and thresholds.
    4. High Threshold: Removal requires a majority of total membership and two-thirds of members present and voting in each House.

    How does the Judges (Inquiry) Act structure the removal process?

    1. Notice Requirement: Admission of a motion requires signatures of 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs.
    2. Speaker/Chairman’s Role: The Presiding Officer may either admit or refuse to admit the motion.
    3. Inquiry Committee: Upon admission, a three-member committee (Supreme Court judge, Chief Justice of a High Court, and a distinguished jurist) investigates charges.
    4. Final Stage: Only after a finding of guilt does Parliament vote on the motion for removal.

    Where does the procedural loophole arise?

    1. Statutory Discretion: The Act empowers the Speaker/Chairman to reject a motion without prescribing objective criteria.
    2. Absence of Reasons: No mandatory requirement exists to record or disclose reasons for refusal.
    3. Non-Justiciability: The admission stage is treated as part of parliamentary procedure, limiting judicial review.
    4. Gatekeeping Power: Rejection at this stage prevents inquiry, evidence collection, and parliamentary debate.

    Why is this discretion constitutionally problematic?

    1. Erosion of Accountability: Proven misconduct cannot be examined if inquiry is blocked at inception.
    2. Separation of Powers Concern: A political office-holder effectively determines whether judicial misconduct is investigated.
    3. Arbitrariness Risk: Absence of standards allows inconsistent or selective application.
    4. Institutional Contradiction: Parliament’s power to regulate procedure undermines its own constitutional duty to act on misbehaviour.

    Has impeachment ever succeeded in India?

    1. Historical Record: No judge has been removed through impeachment since independence.
    2. Failed Attempts: Multiple motions have lapsed or been withdrawn due to resignation or procedural deadlock.
    3. Pattern: Political reluctance combined with procedural discretion has ensured institutional inertia.
    4. Outcome: The removal mechanism exists in form but not in effect.

    Conclusion

    Judicial independence is vital for democracy, but it cannot exist without credible accountability. The current removal framework, though constitutionally stringent, is weakened by discretionary gatekeeping at the admission stage. This procedural gap allows serious allegations to go unexamined, undermining public trust in constitutional institutions. Strengthening objectivity and transparency in the removal process is therefore essential to preserve both judicial integrity and democratic balance.