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

Civilsdaily

Login

Archives: News

  • Science thrives on a global outlook, an inclusive culture. FCRA makes it difficult

    Why in the News:

    The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 1976, was designed to prevent foreign funds from covertly influencing India’s political and civil society space. Applied without distinction to research institutions registered as NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations), the Act now blocks the international collaboration Indian science needs to compete globally.

    Why was the FCRA created, and what has changed in its scope since?

    1. Origins in 1969: The government suspected foreign agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), of funding trade unions, student bodies, and political organisations to undermine India’s democracy, prompting the Home Minister to raise the issue in Parliament.
    2. Enactment in 1976: The FCRA came into force on 5 August 1976, aiming to ensure voluntary organisations functioned in a manner consistent with the values of a sovereign democratic republic.
    3. Progressive tightening: Successive amendments have expanded regulatory compliance requirements and the state’s power to terminate an organisation’s FCRA registration and seize its assets.

    How does FCRA treat scientific research institutions the same as advocacy NGOs?

    1. Research institutions classified as NGOs: Globally renowned institutions such as the Public Health Foundation of India, Christian Medical College (Vellore), St John’s Medical College, and Ashoka and KREA universities are legally categorised as NGOs and fall under FCRA.
    2. No distinction by activity type: FCRA rules do not distinguish a scientific research NGO from one engaged in political or rights-based advocacy, the category governments treat as most sensitive.
    3. Wide reach: The affected ecosystem spans mental health (Sangath, Schizophrenia Research Foundation), non-communicable disease (Centre for Chronic Disease Control, Dr Mohan’s Diabetes Centre), and biodiversity research (MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment).

    What specific FCRA provisions actively obstruct scientific collaboration?

    1. Repatriation bar: Foreign funds received by an Indian NGO can never be sent back out of the country, conflicting with international funders’ standard requirement that unspent project funds be returned on completion.
    2. Lead institution lockout: Because of the repatriation bar, no Indian NGO can act as the lead institution in an international collaboration, since a lead institution must be able to transfer funds to foreign partners.
    3. 2020 sub-granting ban: A 2020 amendment stopped FCRA-registered NGOs from sharing foreign donations with any other Indian NGO, even one also legally registered to receive foreign funds, shutting down domestic collaboration.
    4. Effect on grassroots and community research: The sub-granting ban has hurt smaller, grassroots NGOs that relied on larger NGOs re-granting foreign funds, and has hindered research that requires direct community engagement.

    What does this cost India’s scientific standing?

    1. Suspicion instead of prestige: Grants from bodies such as the Wellcome Trust and the National Institutes of Health are won through globally competitive, peer-reviewed processes and are prized internationally as marks of research quality. In India, the same grants are treated with regulatory suspicion.
    2. Global ranking gap: No Indian institution features in the top 100 of any global research ranking.
    3. Continued brain drain: Many of India’s most talented researchers continue to seek opportunities abroad, strengthening the rankings of their adopted institutions instead.

    What would a workable fix look like?

    1. Nuanced classification: FCRA rules should distinguish between categories of NGOs rather than treating all foreign contribution risk as uniform.
    2. Existing verification mechanism: A genuine scientific research NGO can already be identified through existing recognition procedures, such as registration with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR).
    3. Preserving the regulatory objective: Tailoring FCRA compliance for the research sector would preserve the government’s oversight of political and advocacy funding without collateral damage to scientific collaboration.

    Conclusion:

    FCRA’s core problem is not its security objective but its refusal to distinguish a scientific research NGO from a political advocacy one. A tailored classification for research institutions, verified through mechanisms like Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) recognition, would let India tighten oversight of foreign funds without continuing to cut off its own scientists from global collaboration.

  • It’s not just about a retest, it’s about the India story

    Why in the News:

    Protesters at Jantar Mantar are demanding Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation over the NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test) paper leak, and the government is countering with a promise of a clean retest. Both sides are treating a retest as the solution, when the actual failure is a shrinking Union education budget and unresolved Centre-state coordination since education moved to the Concurrent List in 1976.

    What does a retest actually fix, and what does it leave untouched?

    1. Narrow scope of a retest: A retest addresses the manipulation of a single examination cycle, nothing more.
    2. Small share of aspirants affected: Competitive examinations like NEET select only a small fraction of the hundreds of thousands who appear.
    3. The larger unaddressed problem: The majority of India’s youth remain ill-prepared and poorly equipped to participate in the country’s growth story, a gap no retest can close.

    How has the Union government’s own education-spending record shaped this crisis?

    1. Declining budget share: Union government allocations for education have fallen sharply as a percentage of total government expenditure over the twelve years since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government took charge.
    2. Signal, not just shortfall: This downward trajectory reflects the government’s low prioritisation of education, not merely a resource constraint.
    3. Policy without investment: The government has refreshed the National Education Policy but has not matched it with investment in human resources as infrastructure for growth.

    Why does the 1976 shift of education to the Concurrent List complicate a fix?

    1. Constitutional history: Education was a State subject until 1976, when it was moved to the Concurrent List.
    2. Coordination requirement: Concurrent List placement means systemic reform requires substantial coordination between the Centre and State governments, not unilateral Union action.
    3. Limits of a Union-only response: A retest ordered by the Union government cannot substitute for the coordinated systemic reform the Concurrent List structure demands.

    What is the political stake if the underlying failure remains unaddressed?

    1. A generation coming of age: By the next general election in 2029, a generation of voters will have grown up entirely under NDA-led governments.
    2. Rising impatience: This cohort is likely to be far less tolerant of an unreformed education system and the toll it takes on growth.
    3. The real demand: The Jantar Mantar mobilisation is not asking the government to fix one exam; it is demanding that education be placed at the centre of governance and political discourse.

    Conclusion:

    The NEET leak is only the visible trigger; the substantive failure is chronic underinvestment in education and unresolved Centre-state coordination on a subject moved to the Concurrent List in 1976. Unless the Union treats education as core to growth policy rather than an electoral-cycle afterthought, retests will keep recurring without addressing employability. A durable Centre-state financing and coordination mechanism for education outcomes remains missing.

  • Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Mechanism for Biodiversity Conservation

    Why in News?

    The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) has released ₹6.67 crore under the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) mechanism to 11 cotton-growing States for biodiversity conservation and livelihood enhancement. The funds were realised from Bayer Science & Innovation Pvt. Ltd. for research involving 25,431 cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) varieties.

    What is Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS)?

    • Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) is a mechanism under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, ensuring that benefits arising from the commercial use of biological resources are shared fairly with biodiversity conservation efforts and local communities.
    • It implements the principle of fair and equitable sharing of benefits under the Nagoya Protocol.

    Why was the Amount Released?

    • ₹7.62 crore was realised from Bayer Science & Innovation Pvt. Ltd.
    • Since cotton germplasm was accessed through traders and intermediaries, individual benefit claimers could not be identified.
    • Hence, the funds were allocated to State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) based on the geographical distribution of cotton cultivation.

    Allocation Criteria

    • Based on data from the All India Coordinated Research Project on Cotton (AICRP) under the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR).
    • Distributed proportionately according to each State’s cotton cultivation area.
    • ₹6.67 crore released to 11 cotton-growing States, while ₹0.95 crore was retained by the NBA as per the Biological Diversity Rules.

    Utilisation of Funds

    The funds will support:

    • On-farm and ex-situ biodiversity conservation.
    • Preparation and updation of People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs).
    • Ecosystem restoration and Biodiversity Heritage Sites.
    • Documentation of traditional knowledge.
    • Biodiversity research and digital databases.
    • Capacity building of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs).
    • Livelihood enhancement and awareness programmes.

    Significance

    • Promotes conservation of India’s rich cotton genetic diversity.
    • Ensures benefits from commercial use of biological resources reach biodiversity-rich regions.
    • Supports implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, especially:
      • Target 13: Fair and equitable benefit sharing.
      • Target 4: Conservation of genetic diversity.

    About National Biodiversity Authority (NBA)

    • Established under: Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
    • Ministry: Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC).
    • Nature: Statutory body.
    • Functions: Regulates access to India’s biological resources. Advises on biodiversity conservation. Implements the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing.

    [2023] Consider the following statements:
    1. In Biodiversity the India, Management Committees are key to the realization of the objectives of the Nagoya Protocol.
    2. The Biodiversity Management Committees have important functions in determining access and benefit sharing, including the power to levy collection fees on the access of biological resources within its jurisdiction.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    [A] 1 only

    [B] 2 only

    [C] Both 1 and 2

    [D] Neither 1 nor 2

  • Commercialisation and Transfer of Government-Developed Technologies

    Why in News?

    The Government informed Parliament about the institutional framework, technology transfer mechanisms, and commercialization of technologies developed by public-funded research institutions such as the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Department of Science and Technology (DST), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), and National Research Development Corporation (NRDC).

    National Research Development Corporation (NRDC)

    • NRDC is an autonomous organization under the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR).
    • It is the nodal agency for technology transfer, licensing, commercialization, and Intellectual Property (IP) management.
    • Has licensed technologies to 5,100+ entrepreneurs and facilitated filing of 2,100+ Intellectual Properties (IPs).
    • Supports patenting, prototyping, pilot plants, feasibility studies, and export of indigenous technologies.

    Institutional Framework

    • Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR): Technology Transfer and Utilisation of Knowledgebase Guidelines.
    • Department of Biotechnology (DBT): Intellectual Property (IP) Guidelines, 2023, enabling institutions to own and license IP through exclusive or non-exclusive agreements.
    • Technology Development Board (TDB) under the Department of Science and Technology (DST): Provides financial assistance for commercialization of indigenous technologies.

    Startup & Industry Support

    • Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council (BIRAC) has established:
      • 7 Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) under the National Biopharma Mission (NBM).
      • 94 biotechnology incubation/pre-incubation centres across 25 States and Union Territories (UTs).
    • Department of Science and Technology (DST) has established 22 Technology Enabling Centres (TECs) to connect researchers with industry.
    • Incubation centres at IITs and NRDC provide mentorship, testing facilities, funding support, and Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessment.

    Commercialisation Performance (2023–2025)

    • CSIR: 707 technologies licensed/developed and 452 technologies commercialized/transferred.
    • DBT: 120 technologies licensed/developed and 18 technologies commercialized/transferred.
    • DST: 185 technologies licensed/developed and 36 technologies commercialized/transferred.

    Startup Creation

    • CSIR: Supported 148 startups, generating royalty income and employment for about 7,200 people.
    • DBT: Facilitated 34 startups in healthcare, agritech, diagnostics, and biomanufacturing.
    • NRDC: Supported 13 startups under the Technology Development, Validation and Commercialisation (TDVC) programme.

    [2017] With reference to the “National Intellectual Property Rights Policy” consider the following statements:

    1. It reiterates India’s commitment to Doha Development Agenda and the TRIPS agreement.
    2. Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion is the nodal agency for regulating Intellectual Property Rights in India.

    Which of the above statements is/are correct?
    a) Only 2
    b) Neither 1 nor 2
    c) Only 1
    d) Both 1 and 2

  • Borophene-Based Green Lubricant Can Help Save Energy

    Why in News?

    Scientists at the Institute of Advanced Study in Science and Technology (IASST), Guwahati, under the Department of Science and Technology (DST), have developed a borophene-enhanced castor oil lubricant that reduces friction and wear, improving energy efficiency. The research was published in ACS Applied Engineering Materials.

    What is Borophene?

    • A single-atom-thick (2D) allotrope of boron.
    • Possesses high strength, excellent electrical conductivity, and thermal stability.
    • Has applications in batteries, supercapacitors, sensors, fuel cells, and advanced lubricants.

    Key Findings

    • Adding 0.1 wt.% borophene to castor oil reduced friction by about 42%.
    • Improves load-bearing capacity and wear resistance.
    • Disperses uniformly in castor oil without chemical modification.

    How Does It Work?

    Borophene forms a tribofilm (a thin protective layer) on metal surfaces, reducing direct metal-to-metal contact, friction, and wear.

    Why is Castor Oil Used?

    • Renewable, biodegradable, and non-toxic.
    • Borophene enhances its performance, making it suitable as a sustainable alternative to petroleum-based lubricants.

    Significance

    • Reduces energy losses due to friction.
    • Increases machinery lifespan and efficiency.
    • Promotes eco-friendly lubricants for sustainable manufacturing.

    Prelims Facts

    • Borophene: Two-dimensional allotrope of boron.
    • Lubricant Base: Castor oil.
    • Friction Reduction: About 42%.
    • Protective Layer: Tribofilm.
    • Research Institute: IASST, Guwahati.
    • Ministry: Department of Science and Technology (DST).

  • [22nd July 2026] The Hindu OpED: Building an Atmanirbhar philanthropy ecosystem

    PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2015] Examine critically the recent changes in the rules governing foreign funding of NGOs under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 1976.
    Linkage: The PYQ asks the same theme of FCRA under different context. The present debate is about India’s necessary shift from foreign funding dependency toward a self-reliant domestic philanthropy ecosystem.

    Mentor’s Comment 

    Domestic private philanthropy in India, at over Rs 1.18 lakh crore a year, now exceeds foreign philanthropic inflows more than fivefold, even as FCRA compliance tightening disrupted a subset of NGOs. This reframes the FCRA debate from a dispute over foreign funding into a question of how to build a self reliant domestic philanthropy ecosystem.

    What is Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010?

    1. It regulates the acceptance and utilization of foreign funds by individuals, associations, and NGOs. 
    2. Enforced by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, it ensures foreign donations do not adversely impact national security, internal politics, or public interest.
    3. The primary goal of FCRA is to maintain transparency and accountability for any money flowing into India from outside sources. It requires that foreign contributions be used strictly for their intended purposes (e.g., social, religious, educational, or cultural) and prevents foreign entities from influencing India’s internal socio-political landscape. 

    Has tighter FCRA regulation actually starved Indian civil society of foreign funds?

    1. Sovereign right: Every nation has the right and responsibility to regulate foreign capital flowing into organisations shaping public life; this is not unique to India nor illiberal.
    2. Reframed question: The real debate is not whether foreign funding should be regulated but whether regulation is proportionate, predictable and efficiently administered.
    3. Scale check: NITI Aayog’s NGO Darpan portal lists roughly six lakh voluntary organisations, of which only about 14,500 hold active FCRA registration.
    4. Inflows unshrunk: Foreign contributions have doubled over the decade, from about Rs 10,000 crore to around Rs 22,000 crore, showing the sector has not been starved of foreign money.

    Is FCRA’s problem the law itself or how it is administered?

    1. Real but narrow hardship: A small number of organisations faced delayed renewals, long processing times, or cancelled registrations, disrupting education, health, livelihood and rural development work, not true of the sector as a whole but real for those affected.
    2. Uneven governance exposed: Many NGOs operate with exemplary governance while others have gone dormant or lacked documentation matching rising compliance expectations.
    3. The SBI Account Bottleneck: Under the 2020 amendments, every NGO in India must open their FCRA account at this single specific branch. This created massive logistical bottlenecks, delayed approvals, and administrative chokepoints for small, rural NGOs located thousands of kilometers away from the capital.
    4. Corporate parallel: Indian companies underwent a similar governance reckoning over three decades, where stronger governance initially felt like a burden before it became what won investor confidence.
    5. Proposed reform: A structured compliance path, deficiency notices, defined correction windows, clarification opportunities, and an independent appellate body, would protect legal integrity while sparing genuine organisations avoidable disruption.
    6. FCRA 2.0: The newly launched FCRA 2.0 platform is framed as an opportunity to simplify compliance and move toward risk based supervision.

    What do international comparators show about regulating foreign funds and incentivising domestic giving?

    1. Regulatory comparators (limited detail): The US requires disclosure under its Foreign Agents Registration Act, and Australia and several European democracies run comparable disclosure regimes, though specific design features are not detailed.
    2. Singapore: Offers a 250% tax deduction for qualifying donations, a far larger incentive multiple than India’s.
    3. United Kingdom: Uses a Gift Aid top up mechanism, where the tax authority adds an amount to the donation based on the donor’s tax paid.
    4. United States: Allows carry forward provisions, letting donors carry unused deduction limits into future tax years.
    5. India’s proposed calibration: Raising the 80G deduction from 50% to 100% and lifting the income ceiling from 10% to 25% would signal similar intent without wholesale copying these regimes.

    Why has domestic giving overtaken foreign inflows as the sector’s main resource?

    1. Scale: Domestic private philanthropy now exceeds Rs 1.18 lakh crore a year, more than five times foreign inflows, per the Bain Dasra India Philanthropy Report 2026.
    2. Family philanthropy: Growing at double digit rates as a new generation of wealth creators treats giving as part of wealth stewardship.
    3. CSR channel: Corporate Social Responsibility now channels over Rs 40,000 crore a year into development, the second of three phases in India’s philanthropic evolution, after foreign reliance and before individual and family giving.
    4. Retail infrastructure: India’s over 220 million demat accounts, widespread SIP investing, and UPI penetration provide ready made rails for mass small ticket giving.

    What specific mechanisms could unlock India’s untapped domestic giving?

    1. HNI gap: High net worth individuals’ giving has lagged well behind their wealth growth, marking them as the largest pool of new domestic capital obtainable through policy.
    2. Tax deduction reform: Raising the 80G deduction to 100% and the ceiling to 25% of adjusted gross total income would cost the exchequer little while improving long term social capital flows.
    3. Equity donation route: A framework for donating appreciated listed shares to eligible charities, with a one to three year disposal window, could unlock wealth held in equity rather than cash.
    4. Mass small ticket giving: If even a fraction of households gave Rs 100 to Rs 1,000 a month through trusted digital platforms, millions of citizens could become active philanthropic partners.
    5. Social Stock Exchange: It is a trusted national platform linking credible organisations to ordinary citizens through disclosure and measurable impact. Social Stock Exchange (SSE) is already live under SEBI on the National Stock Exchange (NSE) and the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). SGBS Unnati Foundation, which became the first entity to list on the NSE Social Stock Exchange, raising funds transparently through Zero Courier Zero Principal (ZCZP) instruments.

    Conclusion: 

    Domestic philanthropy, not foreign funding, is now the dominant resource for India’s social sector, making the FCRA debate less about restricting inflows and more about building an accountable domestic ecosystem. What remains unresolved is calibrating regulation so genuine organisations are not treated like fraud cases, and converting proposed tax and market incentives, the 80G reform, the equity donation route, and the Social Stock Exchange, into actual growth in domestic giving. Foreign philanthropy is expected to keep mattering for research and innovation, but the goal is for it to complement rather than shape India’s social development.

  • AAROH: Annual Report on Mine Closure

    Why in News?

    The Ministry of Coal will release AAROH (Annual Report on Mine Closure) on 22 July 2026, highlighting India’s progress in scientific mine closure. The event will also witness the signing of the India-Germany Implementation Agreement on mine closure, inauguration of Coal NEER Plants, and MoUs under the Revised Jharia Master Plan.

    Key Highlights

    • AAROH is the first comprehensive annual report documenting India’s scientific mine closure efforts.
    • For the first time since Independence, 42 coal mines have been scientifically closed according to approved mine closure plans.
    • The report showcases:
      • Scientific land reclamation.
      • Ecological restoration.
      • Sustainable post-mining land use.
      • Community-centric rehabilitation and livelihood generation.

    Frameworks for Scientific Mine Closure

    The Ministry of Coal has developed dedicated frameworks and digital tools to ensure scientific and sustainable mine closure:

    • RECLAIM (Resourceful Engagement and Community-Led Action in Integrated Mine Closure) Framework promotes community participation and stakeholder engagement during mine closure.
    • L.I.V.E.S. (Livelihood, Inclusion, Value, Environment and Sustainability) Framework provides guidelines for sustainable mine closure and productive post-mining land use.
    • SUVIKALP (Sustainable Utilisation of Vast Land Resources through Intelligent Planning) is an interactive decision-support tool for identifying suitable post-mining land-use options.

    International Cooperation

    • The Ministry of Coal will sign an Implementation Agreement with Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Germany.
    • The partnership aims to:
      • Build institutional capacity.
      • Facilitate knowledge sharing.
      • Adopt international best practices in scientific mine closure and post-mining development.

    Community Development Initiatives

    • Coal NEER Plants will be inaugurated to provide safe and sustainable drinking water in coal-bearing regions.
    • Tripartite MoUs will be signed among BCCL, JRDA, and private industries for establishing vocational training centres under the Revised Jharia Master Plan.

    Significance

    • Promotes environmentally responsible mining practices.
    • Restores degraded mining landscapes and biodiversity.
    • Converts abandoned mines into productive assets for agriculture, tourism, forestry, renewable energy, or industrial use.
    • Enhances livelihood opportunities through skill development and community participation.

    [2022] In India, what is the role of the Coal Controller’s Organization (CCO)?
    1.CCO is the major source of coal Statistics in Government of India.
    2.It monitors progress of development of Captive Coal/ Lignite blocks.
    3.It hears any objection to the Government’s notification relating to acquisition of coal-bearing areas.
    4.It ensures that coal mining companies deliver the coal to end users in the prescribed time.
    Select the correct answer using the code given below:

    [A] 1, 2 and 3

    [B] 3 and 4 only

    [C] 1 and 2 only

    [D] 1, 2 and 4

  • India’s Renewable Energy Installed Capacity Nearly Quadruples Since 2014

    Why in News?

    The Union Government informed the Rajya Sabha that India’s installed renewable energy (RE) capacity has increased from 76.38 GW in 2014 to 288.58 GW (as of 30 June 2026), marking nearly a fourfold increase.

    Key Highlights

    • India’s total renewable energy installed capacity reached 288.58 GW by 30 June 2026.
    • Solar power contributes the largest share with 162.15 GW.
    • Wind power accounts for 57.44 GW.
    • Hydro power contributes 57.24 GW.
    • Bio power contributes 11.75 GW.

    Non-Fossil Fuel Electricity Capacity

    • Total installed non-fossil fuel electricity capacity stands at 297.36 GW.
    • It comprises: 288.58 GW from renewable energy. 8.78 GW from nuclear power.

    Investment in Renewable Energy (FY 2014 to FY 2026)

    • The renewable energy sector attracted USD 45.72 billion in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI).
    • Domestic financial institutions deployed ₹12.32 lakh crore towards the sector.
    • Major financing institutions include IREDA, PFC, REC, IIFCL, NaBFID, SIDBI, along with 12 Public Sector Banks.

    Significance

    • Solar energy has become India’s largest renewable energy source.
    • Strengthens India’s progress towards its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Net Zero by 2070 target.
    • Improves energy security by reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels.
    • Encourages green jobs, private investment, and domestic manufacturing.
    • Supports the growth of emerging sectors such as Green Hydrogen and battery storage.

    Challenges

    • Integrating intermittent renewable energy into the power grid.
    • Scaling up energy storage infrastructure.
    • Land acquisition and transmission bottlenecks.
    • Financial stress of power distribution companies (DISCOMs).

    [2022] Consider the following statements:
    1. Gujarat has the largest solar park in India.
    2. Kerala has a fully solar powered International Airport.
    3. Goa has the largest floating solar photovoltaic project in India.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    [A] 1 and 2

    [B] 2 only

    [C] 1 and 3

    [D] 3 only

  • A Checklist for a New-Age Courtroom

    Why in the News:

    The Supreme Court released Draft Regulations on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Judiciary in June 2026 for public consultation. While the draft establishes several AI governance committees, it leaves key questions regarding institutional design, accountability, and AI standards unresolved before AI systems are deployed in courts.

    Why do successive waves of court technology each create new oversight committees, and why is that a concern?

    1. Committee proliferation: Every phase of judicial technology reform has created new committees. AI governance now proposes an Apex AI Body, five Standing Committees, High Court AI Committees, District AI Secretariats, and a Centre of Research and Excellence on AI (CoRE-AI).
    2. Fragmented accountability: AI applications such as case scheduling simultaneously involve case management, digital infrastructure, court administration, and AI governance. Multiple committees dilute ownership, coordination, and decision making.

    What institutional design would address this challenge, and what are the Indian precedents?

    1. Need for a permanent institution: Instead of creating separate committees for every technological innovation, the judiciary requires one permanent technology institution that integrates the functions of the existing e-Committee, AI governance, and future digital initiatives.
    2. Precedent – Tamil Nadu Medical Services Corporation (TNMSC): TNMSC institutionalised professional procurement of medicines, becoming a model adopted by several states.
    3. Precedent – Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI): UIDAI serves as a permanent institution responsible for developing and maintaining the Aadhaar ecosystem.
    4. Importance of permanence: Long term technology governance requires institutional continuity, technical expertise, and clear accountability, which rotating committees cannot consistently provide.

    Why should AI standard setting be separated from procurement?

    1. UPI model: The National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) developed the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) standards, while private companies such as PhonePe and Google Pay built competing applications based on those standards.
    2. Role of CoRE-AI: The proposed Centre of Research and Excellence on AI (CoRE-AI) should function as a neutral standard setting body, without financial or commercial interests in selecting AI vendors.
    3. Separation of functions: A sound governance framework requires:
      • A permanent technical institution to develop AI standards.
      • A separate procurement authority to acquire AI systems.
      • A judicial oversight committee to approve AI applications for court use.

    What happens if AI standards remain undefined?

    1. Key unanswered questions: The draft regulations do not specify:
      • Explainability requirements for AI decisions.
      • Acceptable error rates for different judicial functions such as bail decisions versus case scheduling.
      • Standards governing training data, transparency, and validation.
    2. Risk of inconsistent implementation: Without common national standards, each of India’s 25 High Courts may independently determine what constitutes an acceptable AI system, resulting in uneven adoption and inconsistent judicial practices.
    3. Regulatory comparison: Just as pharmaceutical products must comply with uniform quality standards before approval, judicial AI requires national technical standards to ensure reliability, fairness, and public trust.

    Conclusion:

    The Supreme Court’s Draft AI Regulations represent an important step towards integrating Artificial Intelligence into India’s judicial system. However, effective implementation requires a permanent institutional framework, a clear separation between standard setting and procurement, and uniform national AI standards. Without these safeguards, differences in technical capacity across High Courts could result in unequal AI governance and inconsistent standards of justice, undermining the objective of technology enabled judicial reform.

  • Lifting Off, Reaching a New Space Milestone

    Why in the News:

    Skyroot Aerospace’s Vikram-1 successfully reached orbit, becoming the first India based private company to independently develop and launch an orbital rocket. With this achievement, India joins the United States and China as the only countries where a private company has achieved an orbital launch, six years after opening the space sector to private participation.

    What does the Vikram-1 launch signify about India’s position in the global private space sector?

    1. Exclusive club: India becomes only the third country after the United States and China where a private company has independently developed and launched an orbital rocket.
    2. Policy milestone: The achievement follows the 2020 space sector reforms, later institutionalised through the Indian Space Policy, 2023, which enabled greater participation by private players.
    3. Expanding ecosystem: India now has around 400 space start ups working across the space value chain, including launch vehicles, satellites, space electronics, and downstream applications.
    4. Growth potential: India’s space sector is valued at around Rs 70,000 crore, with the government projecting four to five times growth over the next decade.

    Why does the launch matter specifically for Low Earth Orbit (LEO), and what does that free ISRO to do?

    1. Emerging commercial market: The rapid increase in small satellites weighing from a few kilograms to a few hundred kilograms has created a fast growing commercial launch market, beyond the capacity of any single national space agency.
      • Term: Low Earth Orbit (LEO): The region of space located approximately 160 km to 2,000 km above Earth’s surface, where most modern communication, Earth observation, and small satellite missions operate.
    2. Division of responsibilities: As private companies undertake commercial satellite launches, ISRO can increasingly focus on high value scientific and strategic missions such as Chandrayaan, Gaganyaan, and future deep space exploration programmes.

    Does private launch capability mean independence from ISRO, or a different kind of dependency?

    1. Continued role of ISRO: The development of Vikram-1 relied significantly on ISRO’s infrastructure, testing facilities, and ecosystem, demonstrating a public private partnership model rather than complete private independence.
    2. India’s distinct model: Unlike the United States, where companies such as SpaceX independently develop technologies before partnering with NASA, India’s private space sector is expected to remain closely linked with ISRO for the foreseeable future.
    3. Competitive advantage: Indian companies like Skyroot Aerospace are expected to compete globally by leveraging India’s strengths in cost effective engineering, frugal innovation, and efficient manufacturing.
    4. Commercial challenges: The failures of companies such as Vector Launch and Virgin Orbit highlight the high financial risks and competitive nature of the commercial launch industry.

    Conclusion:

    The successful launch of Vikram-1 marks a major milestone in India’s transition towards a vibrant private space ecosystem, demonstrating the impact of the 2020 space reforms and the Indian Space Policy, 2023. While the achievement reflects the growing capability of Indian private industry, it also underscores the continuing importance of ISRO’s institutional support. Going forward, the long term success of India’s private space sector will depend on its ability to build commercially sustainable business models, expand global launch services, and strengthen public private collaboration in an increasingly competitive global space economy.