Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Search results for: “”

  • Breach of 1.5 degrees Celsius temperature threshold now ‘unavoidable’, says Emissions Gap Report

    Why in the News

    Global climate assessments have moved from holding that a narrow window to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius was still open to accepting that crossing it is now “unavoidable”. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) says so in its annual Emissions Gap Report, and sets a new task: keep warming well below 2 degrees Celsius and bring it back to 1.5 degrees by the end of the century.

    What does the Emissions Gap Report now say?

    1. What it is: UNEP’s yearly check of how far world emissions are from the Paris path, released before each year-end climate conference. It works like a report card comparing marks scored with marks needed.
    2. The Paris goal: The Paris Agreement (2015) aims to hold warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius of pre-industrial levels. The report says decades of insufficient climate action make exceeding it unavoidable.
    3. Lost option: The chance to stay within 1.5 degrees, or to allow only a limited overshoot (crossing the limit for a time before coming back under it), has been lost.
    4. Managing the overshoot: Countries must now limit how long and how far warming stays above 1.5 degrees, and set a credible path back below it.
    5. The takeaway: The aim shifts from preventing a breach of the limit to managing and reversing one.

    How has the scientific consensus shifted?

    1. Best case at 1.8 degrees: UNEP’s Limiting Overshoot report, released last month, found that even the best case now takes warming to at least 1.8 degrees Celsius.
    2. Return path in question: The open question is whether countries’ actions can pull warming back to 1.5 degrees after that peak, sometime in the second half of this century.
    3. First admission: The Limiting Overshoot and Emissions Gap reports are the first authoritative climate reports to accept that a breach of 1.5 degrees is inevitable.
    4. IPCC’s earlier view: Most assessments until now, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)‘s, held that a narrow, shrinking window remained if countries acted faster.

    Who is driving emissions, and where are they heading?

    1. Falling priority: Climate change has slipped down the international agenda, particularly since the current US President’s second term began last year.
    2. United States: The second biggest emitter added more than 133 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (all greenhouse gases counted by warming effect) in 2025, the largest rise anywhere.
    3. China and India: Emissions grew in China as well. At least one dataset shows India, the world’s third largest emitter, slowing marginally.
    4. Global total: Worldwide emissions stayed close to the previous year’s level, at about 58.4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.
    5. Uncertain direction: Some datasets show a fall of about 0.1 billion tonnes, smaller than the margin of error, so the 2025 trend cannot be called.

    Challenges

    1. Reversing the peak: Pulling warming back down needs emissions to fall steeply, not merely stop rising.
    2. Rising big-emitter output: The two largest emitters, China and the United States, both increased their emissions last year.
    3. Finance gap: Steeper cuts in developing economies depend on climate finance from richer countries, which remains short of what is needed.

    Way Forward

    1. Stronger national plans: Countries should raise their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the national climate plans filed under the Paris Agreement, at the coming climate conference.
    2. Credible return pathways: Governments should set out how they will bring warming back down after the peak, as the report asks.
    3. Faster emissions data: National inventories should report sooner and more precisely, so the global trend is known.

    Conclusion

    The Paris temperature goal has moved from a limit to be defended to a level the world must return to after crossing it. What to watch is whether the year-end climate conference produces national plans strong enough to make that return credible.

    Key numbers

    1. Emissions growth since 2016: 0.8% a year (Emissions Gap Report).
    2. Emissions growth, 1990 to 2016: 1.7% a year.

    Back2Basics: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

    1. What it is: The UN body that sets the global environmental agenda and coordinates environmental work across the UN.
    2. When it was created: In 1972, after the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment at Stockholm that year.
    3. Headquarters: Nairobi, Kenya, making it the first UN agency headquartered in a developing country.
    4. Other assessments: Besides the Emissions Gap Report, it publishes the Adaptation Gap Report and the Global Environment Outlook.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2016] The term ‘Intended Nationally Determined Contributions’ is sometimes seen in the news in the context of (a) pledges made by the European countries to rehabilitate refugees from the war-affected Middle East (b) plan of action outlined by the countries of the world to combat climate change (c) capital contributed by the member countries in the establishment of Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (d) plan of action outlined by the countries of the world regarding Sustainable Development Goals ANSWER: (b)”

  • Foreign hand bogey is wearing thin. Bury it

    Why in the News

    The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief’s Dussehra speech at Nagpur spoke of a “western storm”, a global conspiracy to destabilise regimes, naming India alongside France, Albania, Bangladesh and Nepal. It came as student protests resumed over the Chief Election Commissioner’s conduct of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, a fresh house to house verification of voter lists. The speech revives the old “foreign hand” explanation for domestic unrest.

    What is the “foreign hand” theory, and why has it returned?

    1. What it is: The theory blames domestic protest on secret plots hatched abroad and malevolent external forces. It works like blaming an outside agitator for a strike instead of hearing the workers’ complaint.
    2. Origin in the 1970s: Prime Minister Indira Gandhi used the “foreign hand” theory to delegitimise mounting unrest against her government. Ruling elites have recycled it ever since against Opposition agitation and public resentment.
    3. Revival now: The RSS chief and members of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government now use the same alibi. Student protests had wound up in July before resuming.
    4. Outreach versus alarm: In August, on a three nation tour in the RSS’s centenary year, the RSS chief spoke in America of India’s “destiny”, “duty” and “diversity”. The Nagpur speech struck the opposite note.
    5. The takeaway: Calling protest foreign-made lets a government skip the harder question of why its own citizens are angry.

    Why does the theory weaken democratic accountability?

    1. Denial of agency: The theory treats protesters as tools of outside forces, so it disrespects their legitimate concerns.
    2. Delayed reckoning: It postpones an honest reckoning by the government with its own blind spots and abdications, meaning duties it has failed to perform.
    3. Political and intellectual bankruptcy: Blaming domestic turmoil on plots abroad shows the government has no answers of its own. It does not prove a plot.
    4. Contradicts its own record: Falling back on the “foreign hand” goes against the government’s own success in engaging with a changing world and handling global change.

    What really drives the unrest, at home and abroad?

    1. Global pressures: All nations, India included, operate amid global pressures, foreign interests and constraints. These do not explain why citizens feel anxious and alienated.
    2. Domestic causes: The principal reasons sit at home, in plain sight:
      • economic mismanagement;
      • rising corruption;
      • the closing of channels of communication;
      • the clampdown on forums of accountability.
    3. Lesson, not conspiracy: Protests in India and other countries share one lesson. Complacent leaderships practise politics as usual, so they lose touch with the people.
    4. Youth and social media: Young people feel this disconnect most, and social media amplifies their frustration across countries.

    Challenges

    1. Delegitimised dissent: The “foreign hand” label is being used to put down young protesters on the streets instead of engaging them.
    2. Closed institutions: Legislatures and parties retreat behind denial and self-serving stories, so protesters find no forum to be heard.
    3. Blurred threat assessment: Blaming every protest on foreign plots makes genuine external interference, which security agencies must track, harder to separate from ordinary dissent.

    Way Forward

    1. Open institutions: Political institutions, legislatures and parties should rethink their roles and open their doors to protesters.
    2. Fix domestic causes: The government should address the grievances behind the protests, from corruption to weakened accountability forums.
    3. Resist glib narratives: The government should reject easy stories that tie tariffs, the protests at Jantar Mantar and unrest in Dhaka, Kathmandu and Paris into one foreign plot.
    4. Evidence for attribution: Any claim of foreign involvement in unrest should rest on evidence placed before accountable institutions, not on speeches.

    Conclusion

    The “foreign hand” explanation gives a ruling establishment an alibi, but it leaves the grievances of young protesters unanswered and the protests unresolved. What to watch is whether the government engages the protesters over the electoral roll revision or keeps casting their protest as a foreign plot.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2021, GS3, 15 marks] Analyse the multidimensıonal challenges posed by external state and non-state actors, to the internal security of India. Also, discuss measures required to be taken to combat these threats”

  • Modi and Tusk discuss trade ties, India’s plan to ease impact of Ukraine war

    Why in the News

    India and Poland have created a new Defence Industry dialogue and set a target to double bilateral trade by 2030, up from about $6 billion. The talks in New Delhi, on the Polish Prime Minister’s first visit to India in that office since 2010, produced no signed agreement. India also discussed its undisclosed “four-point proposal” to ease the effects of the Russia-Ukraine war.

    What did India and Poland agree on?

    1. Partnership scope: The two sides discussed cooperation in space, transport, renewable energy and technology. The Polish Prime Minister said the two countries have no “conflicts of interest”.
    2. Trade target: Companies on both sides are to build trusted supply chains, meaning dependable sources of goods from each other, to reach the trade goal from a low base.
    3. EU trade deal: Trade is expected to rise once the India-European Union (EU) Free Trade Agreement is signed in December, since Poland is an EU member.
    4. Business links: A large Polish business delegation will engage Indian firms in Delhi and Bengaluru on rail transport, clean coal and mining, where Poland has developed technology.
    5. The takeaway: The visit set targets and dialogues, so its value depends on what follows.

    Why are defence deals on hold?

    1. New dialogue: The Defence Industry dialogue covers cooperation in security, technology and hardware.
    2. Classified information pact: No defence deal will be signed before an Agreement on Mutual Protection and Exchange of Classified Information, which sets rules for guarding shared secret data. It is still under negotiation.
    3. Poland’s concern: Poland fears that technology shared with India could leak to Russia, given the India-Russia defence partnership.
    4. India’s sensitivity: India is wary of Poland’s defence relationship with Pakistan.

    What does each side seek from the other on the global stage?

    1. UNSC backing: Poland supports India’s candidature for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for 2028-29, and a permanent seat in a reformed Council.
    2. G-20 ambition: Poland wants Indian support to join the G-20, the forum of the largest economies. The United States President has invited the Polish Prime Minister to this year’s G-20 in Florida, where Poland is expected to submit its request.
    3. Trillion-dollar club: India congratulated Poland on joining the group of nations with trillion-dollar economies.

    What is India’s four-point proposal on the Russia-Ukraine war?

    1. Undisclosed plan: India has not made the proposal public. It is discussing it with Moscow and Kyiv to forge an agreement between Russia and Ukraine.
    2. Proposal’s aims: The proposal seeks to:
      • stop attacks on civilians;
      • allow grain and energy exports from both countries through the Black Sea;
      • end attacks on ships and seafarers, including many Indians who have been casualties in the four-and-a-half-year war.
    3. Not mediation: The stated position is that India is not “mediating” but is in close contact with both sides on the proposal.

    Conclusion

    India and Poland have widened their partnership on paper, and its delivery now waits on two pending agreements. What to watch is whether the India-EU agreement is signed and the classified information pact concluded.

    Back2Basics: India-EU Free Trade Agreement

    1. Scope: A treaty removing or reducing customs duties on goods traded between India and the EU’s 27 member states.
    2. Negotiating history: Talks restarted in June 2022 after a long gap and were concluded in January 2026.
    3. Tariff concessions: The EU will drop tariffs on 99.5% of the items India exports to it, and India has given concessions on 97.5% of traded value.
    4. Roll out: After the signing, the deal needs passage in the European Parliament, and implementation is expected in early 2027.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “No direct PYQ traced in the provided files. Thematic PYQ: [2026] The Chancellor of Germany visited India in January 2026. Which of the following is/are NOT correct in terms of outcomes? 1. MoU between All India Institute of Ayurveda and University of Hamburg 2. MoU on Youth Hockey Development between Hockey India and German Hockey Federation 3. Establishment of a bilateral dialogue mechanism on the Indo-Pacific 4. Opening of an Honorary Consul of Germany in Lucknow (a) 2 and 3 (b) 1 and 4 (c) 3 and 4 (d) 1 only ANSWER: B”

  • Tied by geography, divided by politics

    Why in the News

    Bangladesh’s new Prime Minister, whose Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) returned to power in February 2026, is expected to visit New Delhi in November or December. The visit comes amid a mutual suspicion rooted in the 1971 Liberation War, which the overthrow of Sheikh Hasina in August 2024 has deepened.

    Why does 1971 divide as much as it binds?

    1. Gratitude and resentment: Bangladesh’s elites have wavered between gratitude for India’s role in their liberation and resentment that India had to play liberator, a role they felt was theirs.
    2. Liberation narrative: Nations cherish stories in which they free themselves. The Mukti Bahini, Bangladesh’s liberation fighters, fought, but India delivered the decisive military blow against Pakistan.
    3. West Bengal fear: Dhaka feared that India’s policy would run through Hindu-majority West Bengal, whose cultural ties could weaken Bangladesh’s separate identity. Open borders revived memories of the Hindu bhadralok (gentry) dominating pre-Partition Bengal.
    4. The takeaway: The liberation that created the bond also created the resentment, so 1971 cuts both ways.

    How did geography and identity politics deepen distrust?

    1. Encircling geography: Bangladesh is almost surrounded by India, across a border of over 4,000 km, and its main rivers rise in or cross India. So fear of Indian domination entered its nationalism.
    2. Islamic redefinition: Governments after Sheikh Mujib distanced themselves from India. Ziaur Rahman redefined Bangladeshi nationalism in Islamic terms, replacing the linguistic nationalism of the liberation movement.
    3. Counterweights: Dhaka sought closer ties with Pakistan, China and the United States. What New Delhi read as anti-Indianism was, for Dhaka, strategic autonomy, a weaker neighbour’s freedom to choose its partners.
    4. Partisan split: The Awami League carried the secular, Bengali-nationalist legacy of 1971 and favoured India, and the BNP stayed suspicious. Attitudes to India became part of the contest over national identity.

    How did India’s bet on Sheikh Hasina backfire?

    1. One-party bet: India tied its interests to Ms. Hasina and the Awami League. As her rule grew authoritarian, New Delhi was seen as putting its security above Bangladesh’s democracy.
    2. Crisis of 2024: Her overthrow was a crisis for Indian policy, and her flight to India fed suspicion that New Delhi had propped up the old order.
    3. Extradition irritant: India’s refusal to extradite her keeps the “Hasina question” a major bilateral irritant.

    Why can neither side afford alienation?

    1. Engagement resumed: Both capitals have compelling reasons to avoid permanent alienation, and functional engagement has resumed.
    2. Interest outlasts gratitude: India cannot expect gratitude for 1971 to be the permanent base of Bangladeshi foreign policy. Gratitude fades, but national interest tied to identity endures.
    3. Indispensable neighbour: No tie with Beijing, Islamabad or Washington can replace India, which is vital to Bangladesh’s connectivity.
    4. Shared security: The two countries’ security and stability are bound together, which is the most important legacy of 1971.

    Challenges

    1. Teesta deadlock: A 2011 draft for 50:50 sharing of Teesta waters has not been implemented.
    2. Ganga treaty renewal: The Ganga Waters Treaty, 1996 expires in December 2026, with disputes over Farakka Barrage water levels.
    3. China’s inroads: Bangladesh has re-engaged China on the Teesta River Management Project. Eg. Upgrading the Lalmonirhat airfield near the Siliguri Corridor.
    4. Pakistan thaw: Bangladesh and Pakistan began trading directly in 2025 and revived direct flights and military contacts.
    5. “India Out” rhetoric: Anti-India campaigns run on Bangladeshi social media and campuses.

    Way Forward

    1. Restraint on rivers: India should use its far greater power with restraint and drop demands for reciprocity in sharing river waters.
    2. Stop invoking 1971: Indian diplomacy should stop leaning on its liberation role, which feeds resentment.
    3. Autonomy without hostility: Dhaka should pursue ties with others without defining its autonomy through knee-jerk opposition to India.
    4. Basin-wide management: Both should manage all shared rivers together through the Joint Rivers Commission.

    Conclusion

    The relationship rests on a geography neither side can change and a politics both keep reopening. What to watch is whether the expected visit moves river water sharing and the Hasina question forward.

    India-Bangladesh Relations

    1. Recognition: India was the first country to recognise Bangladesh as a separate state in 1971.
    2. Boundary settlement: The Land Boundary Agreement (2015) and the delimitation of the maritime boundary settled border disputes.
    3. Trade and credit: Bangladesh is India’s biggest trading partner in South Asia and the largest recipient of Indian Lines of Credit, over $8 billion.
    4. Shared rivers: The two share 54 rivers but have signed only two water treaties, on the Ganga and the Kushiyara.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “No direct PYQ traced in the provided files. Thematic PYQ: [2026, GS2, 15 marks] “China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has transformed South Asia from a regional space into a theatre of great power competition.” Analyse the strategic implications of the BRI for India’s security and regional influence in South Asia.”

  • 10,470 voters’ names changed in one Uttar Pradesh seat, FIR against officers

    Why in the News

    The electoral roll of Uttar Pradesh’s Pilibhit Assembly constituency, declared final after the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), was later altered through 10,470 correction entries that the State’s own inquiry has found irregular. The Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), Uttar Pradesh has ordered legal action, and a First Information Report (FIR) names two Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) and a computer assistant.

    How was a final voter list changed?

    1. What Form 8 is: Form 8 is the application to correct a voter’s entry in the electoral roll, such as a misspelt name. It is like asking a bank to fix an account name.
    2. The safeguard: Each correction needs a physical form and supporting records, and officials must follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) for claims and objections.
    3. What went wrong: Form 8 “corrections” were filed between May 31 and August 29, yet the office held no physical forms or supporting records for them.
    4. Fictitious names: Every approved correction was irregular. Online checks of Elector Photo Identity Card (EPIC) numbers showed voters’ and fathers’ names replaced by fictitious ones.
    5. The takeaway: A voter can stay on the roll and still lose the vote, because a name that does not match can be rejected at the booth.

    What action has been taken?

    1. FIR: The Assistant District Election Officer filed it in Pilibhit. It charges breach of official duty over electoral rolls and framing an incorrect electronic record “with the intention of causing injury”.
    2. Disciplinary steps: The computer assistant’s services at the Voter Registration Centre were terminated, and departmental proceedings were ordered against both AEROs.
    3. Procedure ignored: The FIR says the SOPs were not followed, and both offline and online records of the forms were missing.
    4. Wider scrutiny: The CEO has ordered a check of all Form 6 additions and Form 7 deletions between April 10 and October 21, with a report due by Friday. All irregular entries are being corrected.

    How did it surface, and what do parties allege?

    1. Voter complaints: An advocate found fictitious names in place of his own and his brother’s against their EPIC numbers, though election officials had verified his documents. A Samajwadi Party (SP) memorandum also flagged Pilibhit.
    2. Booth-by-booth check: A Congress team checked 3.48 lakh voters and found 13,150 entries with discrepancies, mostly made late at night or on holidays.
    3. Community allegation: The Congress and the SP allege that most altered entries belong to Muslims, who are roughly a quarter of Pilibhit district (Census 2011).
    4. Political stakes: The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won the Pilibhit seat in 2022 by fewer than 7,000 votes, and Assembly elections are months away.
    5. Party responses: The SP will check rolls in about 100 constituencies. The BJP says parties should scrutinise rolls during revision, not blame the Election Commission of India (ECI) later.

    Challenges

    1. Insider access: Officials approved corrections with no paper trail, so the roll was only as safe as its operators.
    2. Detection by chance: The advocate found the edits by chance, after overhearing a computer operator talking to a voter, not through any official check.
    3. Trust in revision: Edits after an SIR undercut the claim that the revision produced a clean roll.

    Way Forward

    1. Edit log: The ECI should log the official, time and scanned form behind every correction, and block any edit without a form.
    2. Voter alert: Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) should notify the registered voter before a correction to the voter’s entry takes effect.
    3. Statewide audit: The CEO should extend the scrutiny of post-roll edits to other constituencies, and restore affected voters in person, before the polls.

    Conclusion

    Pilibhit shows that a roll declared final after a full revision can still be rewritten from inside the system. What to watch is the district report on additions and deletions, and whether affected voters are restored before Uttar Pradesh votes.

    Key numbers

    1. Form 8 applications in Pilibhit: 13,779 filed.
    2. By officer’s tenure: 4,717 forms under the first AERO and 9,062 after his successor took charge on July 17.
    3. Pilibhit Lok Sabha seat (2024): Won by the BJP by over 1 lakh votes.

    Back2Basics: Electoral Registration Officer (ERO)

    1. Legal basis: Section 13B of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 provides an ERO for every Assembly constituency.
    2. Role: The ERO prepares and revises the constituency’s electoral roll and decides claims and objections.
    3. Assistants: AEROs assist the ERO in this work.
    4. Hierarchy: EROs work under the District Election Officer and the State’s Chief Electoral Officer.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2026, GS2, 10 marks] Is the right to vote a fundamental right? Discuss the position of the Election Commission of India while undertaking the revision of electoral rolls. Can it also examine the question of citizenship of voters?”

  • ECI’s course correction is welcome, need for accountability remains

    Why in the News

    The Election Commission of India (ECI) has moved from denying the objections of two of its own Election Commissioners (ECs) to rolling back several of the decisions they contested. The reversals followed a newspaper investigation showing the two ECs had objected on record 14 times in 10 months. Still unresolved is who answers for decisions taken alone where the law requires joint ones.

    Why did the Election Commissioners’ objections matter?

    1. Multi-member Commission: The ECI has a Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two ECs. Like a three judge Bench, it must decide unanimously or by majority, so no member may act alone.
    2. What was contested: The objections concerned the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), a door-to-door re-check of every voter entry. One EC called changes to Form 6, the application to add a voter, “illegal and unauthorised”.
    3. The takeaway: The roll-backs concede the dissent had substance.

    What has the ECI reversed?

    1. Form 6: The ECI dropped the changes for States without an SIR. The Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Maharashtra wants Form 6 adapted for readmitting deleted electors, so they face no criminal liability for a false undertaking.
    2. Readmitting deleted electors: Booth level officers (BLOs), the field verifiers, will visit homes of those flagged for “logical discrepancy”. CEOs will hold readmission camps in SIR-completed States for eligible deleted electors.
    3. ECINet audit: Technical experts will check whether ECINet, the ECI’s single digital platform, complies with the law.
    4. Summary revision resumed: The Special Summary Revision (SSR), the routine roll update, has resumed. Its suspension allegedly denied millions of first-time voters enrolment.
    5. Form 7 and machine-readable rolls: The ECI has capped objections under Form 7, the form to object to an entry, after allegations of misuse. Parties will get machine-readable rolls, a long-pending demand.

    Why do the reversals not settle accountability?

    1. Contradictory logic: The SSR has the same stated aims as the SIR. Electors deleted months ago as “ineligible” may now re-enrol, so one irrational step replaces another.
    2. Unexplained appeals: Over 16 lakh appeals in West Bengal remain unexplained.
    3. Cost of the exercise: The SIR neither identified the “ineligible” nor added the “eligible”, which normal revision could have done, and it caused mass anxiety.
    4. Illegalities unaddressed: Responsibility is still to be fixed for unilateral decisions, the contested form changes and software that obstructed Electoral Registration Officers (EROs).
    5. Reluctant transparency: The ECI published deleted electors’ names only after a Supreme Court order last year.

    Who must now fix responsibility?

    1. Supreme Court: Responsibility now rests with the Court, which watched the SIR unfold but largely let the ECI be a judge in its own cause, deciding objections to its own conduct.
    2. Two possible verdicts: The Court may uphold the decisions, leaving the aggrieved to seek redress, or rule them illegal, as it did with the Tamil Nadu Governor’s actions.
    3. Propriety questions: It remains open whether the CEC should step back from official work until exonerated, and whether Parliament will act against a constitutional authority the Court holds responsible.

    Challenges

    1. Insecure tenure for dissenters: An EC can be removed on the CEC’s recommendation, unlike the CEC, so dissent carries personal risk.
    2. Financial dependence: The ECI’s budget is not “charged” on the Consolidated Fund of India, meaning spent without a vote, so it needs annual approval.
    3. Dissent kept internal: Objections recorded on file did not change decisions until they were reported.

    Way Forward

    1. Equal removal protection: Parliament should give ECs the CEC’s removal protection, as the Tarkunde (1975) and Goswami (1990) Committees suggested.
    2. Recorded votes: The ECI should record each member’s vote on every decision, so majority rule can be checked.
    3. Charged expenditure: Parliament should charge ECI expenses on the Consolidated Fund, as the Law Commission’s 255th Report recommended.

    Conclusion

    The roll-backs repair part of the harm of the revision, but not the breach of the Commission’s collective decision-making. What to watch is the Supreme Court’s verdict on the alleged illegalities and whether Parliament acts on it.

    Election Commission of India

    1. Constitutional basis: Article 324 gives the ECI superintendence, direction and control of electoral rolls and of elections to Parliament, State Legislatures, President and Vice-President.
    2. Appointment ruling: Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023) set a panel of the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and the Chief Justice of India until Parliament legislated.
    3. Appointment law: The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 replaced the Chief Justice with a Cabinet Minister.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2026, GS2, 10 marks] Is the right to vote a fundamental right? Discuss the position of the Election Commission of India while undertaking the revision of electoral rolls. Can it also examine the question of citizenship of voters?”

  • Should children be involved in political campaigning?

    Why in the News

    Under current election law, urging children to “pester” their parents for votes is in bad taste but not a ground to set aside an election. The Madras High Court has dismissed a Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) candidate’s election petition against Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) founder and now Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay, and left it to Parliament to decide whether such campaigning should become one.

    What did the petition argue, and why did it fail?

    1. Undue influence: Undue influence is a corrupt practice, an act that can void an election, under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA). It means pressure amounting to “tyranny over the mind”, which overpowers the voter’s will.
    2. The appeal and the petition: Mr. Vijay asked young people to “pester your parents and elders to vote for the whistle”, his party’s symbol. The DMK candidate argued that this was undue influence.
    3. Court’s finding: The court found no evidence that the election was manipulated, because adult voters still had a choice.
    4. Court’s remarks: It called involving “tender children” in elections “in bad taste”, a sign of poor parenting and a “cheap and politically motivated act”.
    5. The takeaway: The law asks whether a vote was coerced, not whether a child was used to win it, so this kind of campaigning falls outside it.

    How does “pester power” turn children into campaigners?

    1. Youth appeal: The TVK won the State election in May largely on its appeal among young people.
    2. Pester power: In consumer marketing, firms aim campaigns at children so that they press parents into household purchases. The same method has now crossed into electoral marketing.
    3. Influence pathway: A child’s attachment to a celebrity produces enthusiasm, which becomes repeated requests to parents, which in turn presses on their vote.
    4. Indirect message: A candidate normally gives voters reasons to back him. This route says only “someone you love wants you to support me”.
    5. Signs of impact: Voters said they chose the whistle because “my son asked me”, and children refused to eat until “mama” (uncle) became Chief Minister.

    Is it participation or manipulation?

    1. Right to participate: The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), the treaty on children’s rights, recognises their right to take part in politics. But they should speak in their own voice, not a tutored one.
    2. UNICEF framework: The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) separates genuine participation from manipulation and tokenism. Helping children develop a voice is participation, but scripting them to deliver an adult’s message is not.
    3. Agency gap: Adults in one household often vote differently because each has agency, the capacity to decide for oneself. A grandchild lacks that agency, so a child’s appeal to a grandparent works on emotion alone.
    4. Persuasion itself: Children already know Mr. Vijay as an actor through his films and songs, so the appeal put undue pressure on them even if it changed no vote.

    Challenges

    1. High legal threshold: The “tyranny over the mind” test protects adult voters, so it cannot reach an appeal routed through their children.
    2. Proving effect: Courts cannot prove that people voted as they did because of the appeal, as the judgment itself noted.
    3. Permanent footprint: A video of a child campaigner stays online forever, though the child may regret it as an adult.

    Way Forward

    1. Precisely drawn law: Parliament should bar scripting children as campaign messengers, without barring their participation or voice.
    2. Ground for voiding: Parliament should decide, as the court suggested, whether such campaigning becomes a ground to set aside an election.
    3. Child labour parallel: Just as child labour laws limit children’s work, Parliament should enact a child campaigning law.

    Conclusion

    Election law protects the voter’s free will, but not the child used to reach that voter. What to watch is whether Parliament draws a narrow line between a child’s political voice and a child scripted as a campaign messenger.

    Corrupt Practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951

    1. Section 123 list: The corrupt practices that can invalidate an election include bribery, undue influence, appeals on grounds of religion or caste and booth capturing.
    2. Election petition route: An election can be questioned only through an election petition in the High Court within 45 days. Under Section 100 the Court declares it void where a corrupt practice is proved.
    3. Disqualification: Section 8A disqualifies a person found guilty of a corrupt practice. Eg. Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen (2017) held that seeking votes on religion or caste is one.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2025, GS2, 10 marks] Discuss the ‘corrupt practices’ for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Analyze whether the increase in the assets of the legislators and/or their associates, disproportionate to their known sources of income, would constitute ‘undue influence’ and consequently a corrupt practice.”

  • Prasar Bharati is not a public service broadcaster

    Why in the News

    The Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990 promised an autonomous public broadcaster, but the bodies meant to secure that autonomy have never been set up. Twelve years after a 2014 promise to recast Prasar Bharati on the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) model, the 138th “Mann Ki Baat” (the Prime Minister’s monthly radio address) shows the state still treats public airwaves as its own platform.

    What is Prasar Bharati meant to be?

    1. What it is: Prasar Bharati is the statutory corporation running All India Radio (AIR) and Doordarshan. Like the BBC, it was meant to be autonomous, editorially free and accountable to Parliament.
    2. Origins: The Emergency of 1975 made AIR and Doordarshan instruments of the regime. A BBC-style model drawn up by B.G. Verghese became the 1979 Prasar Bharati Bill, which lapsed.
    3. The Act: Introduced as “a charter of freedom” under Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression), it received assent but was enforced only in 1997.
    4. Section 12 duties: The corporation must inform, educate and entertain, and safeguard “the citizen’s right to be informed freely, truthfully and objectively”.
    5. The takeaway: The law already promises independence, so the failure is one of implementation.

    Which parts of the Act were never implemented?

    1. Section 13: A 22-member parliamentary committee, elected from both Houses, was to oversee Prasar Bharati for Parliament. No government has constituted it.
    2. Sections 14 and 15: A Broadcasting Council was to receive complaints and guard political impartiality. It has never been set up, so no one can challenge an editorial decision.
    3. Section 10: A recruitment board meant to keep appointments free of government interference saw no action until July 2020, when the head of Bharat Prakashan, publisher of Panchajanya and Organiser, became chairman.
    4. Section 23: The Centre can still issue binding directions on what may or may not be broadcast.

    Does Prasar Bharati pass the public broadcaster test?

    1. UNESCO test: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defined public broadcasting in 2001 as neither commercial nor state-controlled.
    2. Engineering-heavy workforce: A manpower audit found almost half of the 25,000 staff in engineering, against a little over 10% at the BBC.
    3. Thin content staff: Content staff were under 20%, against about 70% at the BBC. So Prasar Bharati is staffed to run transmitters, not to make news and programmes.

    Why has autonomy never been delivered?

    1. Nehru’s formula: In 1948 Jawaharlal Nehru told the Constituent Assembly that broadcasting should be a semi-autonomous corporation, “otherwise not conducted as a government department”. That caveat has not been honoured.
    2. Supreme Court direction: Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting v. Cricket Association of Bengal (1995) held that airwaves are public property. Its direction for an independent authority to control them is unmet.
    3. Chanda Committee: The Chanda Committee concluded in 1966 that “a psychological transformation is necessary” in the government’s approach to broadcasting, and that change has not come.

    Challenges

    1. Ministerial answerability claim: Ministers insist they alone answer to Parliament, so they keep summoning AIR and Doordarshan officials.
    2. Bureaucratic control: Officers of the Indian Information Service, a government cadre, run daily broadcasting.
    3. No independent money: With no fund of its own, the Prasar Bharati Board depends on the Ministry for money.
    4. No complaints channel: The government told the Lok Sabha it got no formal complaints about autonomy last year, but with no Council, complaints have nowhere to go.

    Way Forward

    1. Parliamentary committee: Constitute the Section 13 committee so that Parliament, not the Ministry, oversees Prasar Bharati.
    2. Broadcasting Council: Create the regulatory council the Act names, to hear complaints and guard impartiality.
    3. Professional Board: Rebuild the Board, now filled with bureaucrats who defer to the Ministry, as a professional body, and transfer to it the assets and staff never handed over.
    4. Funding without strings: Design funding free of government strings and remove Indian Information Service officers from operational control.

    Conclusion

    Prasar Bharati’s autonomy fails for want of political will rather than law. The open question is whether citizens go to court to enforce the Act and the Supreme Court’s direction, or wait for a future Lok Sabha willing to act.

    Key numbers

    1. Public Service Broadcasting Day: 12 November, declared in 2000, marks Gandhiji’s only AIR broadcast, made in 1947 to two lakh refugees at Kurukshetra.
    2. Prasar Bharati Bill: A new version was introduced in 1989.
    3. BBC in India: Accused of a “continuing colonial mindset” after its 2023 documentary, the BBC split its Indian news operation from April 2024 to meet foreign-investment rules.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS2, 12 marks] What do you understand by the concept “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it cover hate speech also? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of expression? Discuss.”

  • SEBI eases rules for early share delivery

    Why in the News

    Shares that a seller hands over early will now count towards margin obligations (money a trader must deposit to cover the risk of a trade), instead of the investor or broker putting up extra funds against a sale already covered. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has amended its Early Pay-In (EPI) rules to this effect, from February 22, 2027.

    What is Early Pay-In?

    1. What it is: Early Pay-In lets an investor selling shares transfer them to the clearing corporation, the body that completes exchange trades, before the scheduled settlement date. It is like paying a bill before it falls due.
    2. Why it helps: The value of shares delivered early can be used to meet the margin requirement for the corresponding sale, which reduces the need to provide additional funds.
    3. The takeaway: Shares already handed over cover the seller’s delivery obligation, so counting them towards margin frees money that would otherwise be locked up.

    What has SEBI changed?

    1. Trade-date valuation: Clearing corporations will calculate the accepted EPI value, the share value that counts towards margin, on the trade date itself.
    2. Lower-of rule: The accepted value will be the lower of the value of securities delivered early or the value of securities sold. So a seller cannot claim margin credit beyond the sale itself.
    3. Same-day positions: For investors who buy and sell in the cash market (where shares change hands outright) on the same day, clearing corporations will calculate margin requirements after deducting the accepted EPI value.
    4. Broker relief: Brokers will not have to collect additional margin for these positions to the extent the accepted EPI value covers them.

    Who gains, and what must happen first?

    1. Stated aim: The amendment eases margin requirements for both stockbrokers and investors.
    2. System upgrade: Brokers and clearing corporations get four months to upgrade their systems before the framework applies.

    Conclusion

    SEBI has amended the Early Pay-In framework so that early-delivered shares reduce margin calls on the same trade. The next milestone is its start date, by which brokers and clearing corporations must have upgraded their systems.

    Back2Basics: Clearing corporation

    1. What it does: A clearing corporation settles trades made on a stock exchange, so that the buyer receives the shares and the seller receives the money.
    2. Central counterparty: It becomes the buyer to every seller and the seller to every buyer, so one broker’s default does not stop settlement for others.
    3. Margins: It collects margins from its clearing members, mainly brokers, to cover the risk that a party fails to pay or deliver.
    4. Examples: NSE Clearing Limited (of the National Stock Exchange) and Indian Clearing Corporation Limited (of BSE, formerly the Bombay Stock Exchange) are regulated by SEBI.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2021] With reference to India, consider the following statements: 1.Retail investors through a demat account can invest in ‘Treasury Bills’ and ‘Government of India Debt Bonds’ in the primary market. 2.The ‘Negotiated Dealing System-Order Matching’ is a government securities trading platform of the Reserve Bank of India. 3.The ‘Central Depository Services Ltd’ is jointly promoted by the Reserve Bank of India and the Bombay Stock Exchange. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 (c) 3 only (d) 2 and 3 ANSWER: (b)”

  • GST reforms to be rolled out in phases, starting November 1

    Why in the News

    GST compliance is shifting from issuing notices over mismatched returns to redesigning the returns so that the mismatches do not arise. The process reforms announced by the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council earlier this month will be rolled out in phases, starting with administrative changes from November 1.

    What is being changed in GST returns, and why?

    1. GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B: GSTR-1 is a business’s monthly or quarterly statement of outward supplies (sales), and GSTR-3B is the summary return through which it pays tax. The two must agree, like a shop’s sales register and its tax bill.
    2. Mismatch notices: When the sales a business reports in GSTR-1 do not match the tax it declares in GSTR-3B, it gets a notice. Such mismatches account for nearly 80% of GST notices issued at present.
    3. Return redesign: The government is modifying GSTR-1 and improving the Invoice Management System (IMS), where buyers check their suppliers’ invoices, so that GSTR-3B needs no manual editing. Without edits, the two returns agree and no notice arises.
    4. Public draft: The Ministry of Finance will post the draft GST returns, shaped by industry representations, on the myGov.in portal on November 1. The public can comment till November 30.
    5. The takeaway: Getting the returns right at the source is meant to remove most notices, instead of chasing errors after filing.

    What changes in the first phase from November 1?

    1. Administrative changes only: The first phase covers changes that need only administrative processes, not an amendment of the law.
    2. Registration: Small sellers on e-commerce platforms get simplified GST registration, and every applicant follows one unified set of registration documents.
    3. Refunds and notices: Refunds will be faster. A GST notice will issue only once the amount crosses a Rs 10,000 threshold.
    4. Notifications ready: The legal department has approved the notifications and circulars on these process reforms, and they are due to be issued on Friday.

    What comes later, and why does it matter?

    1. Law changes: Changes that need an amendment to the GST law will be implemented from April 1, 2027.
    2. Supply chain integrity: The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) administers central GST. It expects successful returns reforms to resolve integrity issues in the supply chain, such as sellers and buyers reporting the same sale differently.
    3. Foundation for more reform: The CBIC calls the returns redesign the foundation for further GST reforms.

    Challenges

    1. Two-level amendment: A change in GST law needs the central GST law amended by Parliament and each State’s GST law by its legislature, after the Council recommends it.
    2. Conditional gains: The benefit depends on the redesigned returns being implemented successfully, a condition the CBIC itself sets.
    3. Adjustment for small firms: Small businesses and e-commerce sellers must adapt their accounting software and filing habits to new return formats.

    Way Forward

    1. Use the comment window: Industry bodies and small sellers should test the draft forms and flag mismatch risks before they are finalised.
    2. Synchronised amendments: The Centre and the States should time their GST law amendments so that the law changes take effect together.
    3. Track notices: The CBIC should publish data on mismatch notices after the redesign to show whether they fall.

    Conclusion

    The first phase of GST process reforms begins with administrative changes and a public draft of the new returns. The next milestones are the close of comments on the draft and the law changes due at the start of the next financial year.

    Back2Basics: Invoice Management System (IMS)

    1. What it does: IMS is a facility on the GST portal that lets a buyer accept, reject or keep pending each invoice its suppliers report.
    2. Why it matters: Invoices the buyer rejects or keeps pending stay out of GSTR-2B, its statement of input tax credit (credit for tax already paid on purchases), so disputes are settled before the return is filed.
    3. When it began: The facility was introduced on the GST portal in October 2024.
    4. Run by: The Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN), the company that runs the GST technology system.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2019, GS3, 10 marks] Enumerate the indirect taxes which have been subsumed in the goods and services tax (GST) in India. Also, comment on the revenue implications of the GST introduced in India since July 2017.”

More posts