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

Civilsdaily

Search results for: “”

  • A decade of placing research and innovation at the centre

    A decade of placing research and innovation at the centre

    Why in the News

    Over a decade, India has rebuilt its research base around new funding institutions and mission mode programmes, putting research and innovation at the centre of growth policy. The shift dates to the Prime Minister’s “Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan, Jai Vigyan, Jai Anusandhan” call at the 2019 Indian Science Congress. The test now is whether higher spending turns into frontier technology.

    How has the research architecture changed?

    1. Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF): It funds new research across universities, colleges and laboratories, and links academia, industry and government.
    2. The “valley of death”: This is the stage where a technology needs pilot scale demonstration and productisation just as its risk and capital needs rise sharply, so many ideas die.
    3. Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) Fund: The Rs 1 lakh crore fund is meant to bridge that gap with patient, risk tolerant capital, money that waits years for returns.
    4. Women in science: Women in Science and Engineering (WISE)-KIRAN, Gender Advancement for Transforming Institutions (GATI) and Vigyan Jyoti widen opportunities for women.
    5. The takeaway: India now has separate instruments for discovery and for taking technology to market, the stage where risk keeps private money away.

    What do the headline indicators show?

    1. Global Innovation Index (GII): India now ranks 38th, up from 81st a decade earlier.
    2. Publications: India ranks third globally in the volume of science and engineering publications.
    3. Research spending: Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) more than tripled in rupee terms in a decade, and stands at about 0.84% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
    4. Private share: The private sector’s share of GERD rose from 32.2% to 45.2% in that decade.

    Which missions carry the sectoral push?

    1. National Quantum Mission: It spans the full quantum stack, from computing and communication to sensing, metrology, materials and devices.
    2. IndiaAI Mission: It covers compute, datasets, skilling, foundational models and responsible artificial intelligence (AI).
    3. India Semiconductor Mission: It has approved 10 projects across six States, most of them chip packaging units. Semicon 2.0 pushes into equipment, materials, indigenous intellectual property (IP) and talent.
    4. BioE3 Policy: The Biotechnology for Economy, Environment and Employment policy spans bio based chemicals to precision biotherapeutics and space biotech. The bioeconomy, output from biology based industries, has grown nearly twentyfold in a decade.
    5. Deep Ocean Mission and Mission Mausam: They extend the approach to resource and climate security.

    How have space, nuclear, digital and start up sectors opened up?

    1. Space sector: The Indian Space Policy, 2023 and the Indian National Space Promotion and Authorisation Centre (IN-SPACe) opened launches and satellite making to private firms. Over 400 space start ups now operate.
    2. Nuclear energy: The Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act, 2025 allows private participation, subject to licensing, safety and regulatory requirements.
    3. Digital public infrastructure: Built on the JAM trinity of Jan Dhan accounts, Aadhaar and mobile phones, it grew through the Unified Payments Interface (UPI), DigiLocker and Account Aggregator.
    4. Start up ecosystem: Since Startup India in 2016, India has become the world’s third largest start up ecosystem, backed by the Fund of Funds and Atal Innovation Mission.

    Challenges

    1. Spending still low: GERD remains far below leading research economies. Some estimates put it lower still, near 0.64% of GDP.
    2. Thin researcher base: India has about 260 researchers per million people, against over 4,000 in the United States and the United Kingdom.
    3. Private funding below half: Business still funds less than half of India’s research.
    4. Procedural delays: Delays in procurement, approvals and compliance slow research and its conversion into products.

    Way Forward

    1. Ease of doing research: Apply NITI Aayog’s ROPE framework (Removing Obstacles and Promoting Enablers) to cut procurement and approval delays.
    2. Spending target: Raise GERD towards 1.5% of GDP through private investment, tax incentives and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds.
    3. Research beyond elite institutions: Use ANRF grants to build research capacity in State universities and colleges.

    Conclusion

    India has built the institutions and missions of a research led economy, but its spending, researcher base and private funding still trail the economies it competes with. Whether the new research foundation and the RDI Fund reach researchers and start ups at the riskiest stage is the test.

    Key numbers

    1. GERD in rupees: Rs 79,355.89 crore (2013-14) to Rs 2,44,767.81 crore (2023-24).
    2. Bioeconomy: about $10 billion (2014) to about $195.3 billion (2025), projected $300 billion by 2030.
    3. Start ups: over 2 lakh registered start ups and over 130 unicorns.
    4. Semiconductor projects: two fabs and eight packaging units.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2019] Atal Innovation Mission is set up under the (a) Department of Science and Technology (b) Ministry of Employment (c) NITI Aayog (d) Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship ANSWER: (c)”

  • India’s science problem is not talent, but priorities

    India’s science problem is not talent, but priorities

    Why in the News

    Each October, the Nobel announcements revive the question of why India, with an enormous pool of scientific talent, rarely features among the laureates. The gap lies in priorities: India presses scientists to build products and commercialise research, and underinvests in the basic science from which such technologies emerge.

    What is basic science, and why must it come first?

    1. What it is: Basic science is investigator driven, curiosity led research that need not promise a patent, product or technology. It is like a building’s foundation, unseen but carrying everything above it.
    2. Why it comes first: Technology cannot be produced on demand. Eg. A diagnostic platform needs years of work on disease biology, pathogen behaviour, host response, biomarkers and molecular mechanisms first.
    3. Pressure for products: Scientists are pushed to “develop technologies”, “build products” and “commercialise research”. These are legitimate goals, but they fund the final product stage and neglect the discovery stage.
    4. The takeaway: Funding only near term products cuts off the discoveries that future products depend on, so India’s problem is priorities, not talent.

    What do the research leaders do differently?

    1. Research spending gap: India’s gross expenditure on research and development (R&D), or GERD, meaning total R&D spending by government, business and universities, is only about 0.64% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). China is approaching 2.7%.
    2. Higher spenders: The United States (US) spends about 3.4% of GDP on R&D, and South Korea over 5%.
    3. Who funds research: Business funds about 40% of India’s R&D, against roughly three quarters in the US and China. So India both spends too little (a scale gap) and gets too little from business (a private participation gap).
    4. China’s lesson: As its R&D investment grew, China connected discovery to engineering, manufacturing and markets, and became a major supplier of affordable technology. Eg. It produced around 80% of the world’s solar photovoltaic (PV) modules and battery cells in 2024.

    Why does the push for quick results work against discovery?

    1. Short, micromanaged grants: Research is funded over short durations with heavy administrative oversight, so questions that take years to answer go unasked.
    2. Convenient metrics: Publication counts, journal impact factors, patents and grant utilisation are easy to count, but they do not necessarily measure discovery.
    3. Penalty for failure: A young scientist who pursues an unconventional question, fails and changes direction is penalised for not producing an immediate product.
    4. Unused advantage: India’s vast and diverse population is a natural setting for research, but a system chasing quick outputs leaves it unused.

    Challenges

    1. Thin researcher base: India has about 260 researchers per million people, against over 4,000 in the US and the United Kingdom (UK).
    2. Bureaucratic bottlenecks: Delays in procurement, approvals and compliance slow research.
    3. Lab to market gap: Weak conversion of research into patents, products and commercial use leaves even good discoveries stranded.
    4. Brain drain: Many of India’s best researchers leave for better funded systems abroad.

    Way Forward

    1. Protected basic science window: Reserve a defined share of competitive funding for investigator driven research that need not promise a patent, product or technology.
    2. Three portfolios: Divide research funding into discovery, translation and deployment portfolios, each with its own timelines and success metrics.
    3. Long duration funding: Fund projects for longer, with rigorous scientific review but less administrative micromanagement.
    4. National shared infrastructure: Open genomics, proteomics, advanced imaging, biobanks, structural biology, artificial intelligence (AI) and computational platforms to all institutions.
    5. Discovery based evaluation: Reward originality, reproducibility, important questions and new datasets, and let young scientists pursue one question for 10 to 15 years without penalty.

    Conclusion

    India’s research system rewards quick, countable outputs over discovery, so more money alone will not close its gap with the research leaders. Whether funding agencies reserve money for curiosity led work and change how they judge scientists will decide India’s capacity for Nobel level discovery.

    Key numbers

    1. R&D spending, Germany and Japan: over 3% and over 3.5% of GDP respectively.
    2. China’s electric car output: about 70% of global production (2025).

    Initiatives for Research and Development

    1. Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF): Set up under the Anusandhan National Research Foundation Act, 2023, it funds and coordinates research across universities, laboratories and industry.
    2. Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) Scheme: A Rs 1 lakh crore initiative to raise private sector participation in high impact R&D.
    3. Ramanujan Fellowship: The Department of Science and Technology’s fellowship draws mid career Indian origin scientists back from abroad.
    4. INSPIRE Faculty Award: It supports early career researchers with Assistant Professor level funding and laboratory grants.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2019, GS3, 10 marks] How was India benefited from the contributions of Sir M.Visvesvaraya and Dr. M. S. Swaminathan in the fields of water engineering and agricultural science respectively?”

  • On women’s safety, move from reaction to prevention

    On women’s safety, move from reaction to prevention

    Why in the News

    Two recent sexual assaults on minor girls in Delhi, one inside a moving sleeper bus and one in a public park, have exposed failures in the safety of public spaces. The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognisance, acting without a petition. Harsher laws since 2012 have not made public spaces safer, so the response must move from reaction to prevention.

    What did the 2012 reforms change, and what did they leave undone?

    1. Justice J S Verma Committee: Set up after the 2012 Delhi gang rape, it traced sexual crime to a “failure of governance”. It warned that legal reform without institutional reform would remain incomplete.
    2. Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013: It carried many of the Committee’s recommendations into law. It created the offences of stalking and voyeurism, widened the definition of rape and made punishments stricter.
    3. Rape Crisis Cells: The Committee wanted one in every district. Each cell would be alerted once a First Information Report (FIR) was registered, so it could give survivors legal aid, trauma counselling and psychological support.
    4. One Stop Centres (Sakhi): The government introduced these in 2015, but the automatic, police linked crisis response the Committee envisaged has never been fully implemented.
    5. The takeaway: India rewrote its rape laws but not the institutions that enforce them, the exact gap the Committee had warned about.

    What do the recent cases and data show?

    1. Sleeper bus case: A 17 year old girl was allegedly gang raped inside a sleeper bus that travelled nearly 47 km before she was abandoned.
    2. Park case: A 16 year old girl was allegedly raped at knifepoint in a Delhi park by three men posing as police officers.
    3. Reported rapes: National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data for 2024 show that Delhi registered 1,058 rape cases.
    4. Rape rate and underreporting: That is 14 per lakh women, counting only reported cases. Many crimes stay hidden by fear, stigma and silence.
    5. September cases: At least 13 sexual assault cases were reported in Delhi in September alone.

    Why do harsher laws not prevent these crimes?

    1. Routine activity theory: A crime becomes likely when three conditions meet: a motivated offender, a vulnerable target and the absence of capable guardianship, meaning no one watching who could stop it.
    2. Missing guardianship: Dark parks, non functional closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras, unverified buses and thin police patrols weaken guardianship. They do not create criminals, but they give offenders the opportunity.
    3. Beccaria’s principle: Cesare Beccaria, of the classical school of penology, argued that the certainty of punishment, not its severity, is the real deterrent.
    4. Severity without certainty: India already provides life imprisonment and the death penalty for rape in specified circumstances. Offenders still expect to evade detection because surveillance is weak and investigations are delayed.
    5. State’s duty: A harsh law rarely enforced deters less than a moderate law enforced with certainty. So prevention depends on the state making public spaces safe, not on harsher penalties.

    Challenges

    1. Unaudited public spaces: Roads, parks, buses, metro stations, subways and footbridges get no regular independent check of lighting, cameras or police presence.
    2. Untracked commercial buses: Private buses run without live tracking, so a crime can travel for kilometres unnoticed.
    3. No departmental accountability: Lapses in surveillance, licensing or patrolling punish the offender but rarely the department that failed.

    Way Forward

    1. Independent safety audits: Audit every vulnerable public space in Delhi for lighting, CCTV functionality, emergency response systems and police visibility.
    2. Tracking commercial buses: Make Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking and live surveillance compulsory on all commercial buses, linked to transport authorities.
    3. Departmental accountability: Act against the responsible department alongside criminal prosecution whenever a serious offence exposes failures in surveillance, licensing or patrolling.

    Conclusion

    Women in Delhi are failed less by a shortage of laws than by unlit, unwatched and untracked public spaces, so the burden of safety still rests on their own precautions rather than on the state’s preparedness. Whether the Supreme Court’s proceedings yield enforceable standards for public spaces and buses, with officials answerable for lapses, is what to watch.

    Government Initiatives for Women’s Safety

    1. Mission Shakti, Sambal component: Its safety vertical runs the Women Helpline and Nari Adalats, community forums that resolve disputes.
    2. Nirbhaya Fund: It funds Women Help Desks in over 13,000 police stations.
    3. Safe City Projects: Run in eight major metros, they use artificial intelligence enabled CCTV and panic buttons.
    4. Zero FIR: Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) lets a woman file an FIR at any police station, whatever its jurisdiction.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS4, 10 marks] We are witnessing increasing instances of sexual violence against women in the country. Despite existing legal provisions against it, the number of such incidences is on the rise. Suggest some innovative measures to tackle this menace.”

  • Warming Himalayas demand a rethink on development

    Warming Himalayas demand a rethink on development

    Why in the News

    Calls for climate resilient, hazard averse development, which avoids known hazard zones, in the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR) have gone unheeded as climate induced disasters grow frequent and severe. The Nepal floods of August, set off by a collapse of ice and rock, warn that such collapses can happen anywhere in these mountains.

    Why are Himalayan glaciers and slopes becoming unstable?

    1. Thinning glaciers: Warming tips the balance between winter snow accumulation and summer melt, so glaciers retreat and thin. Ice once far colder now sits near minus 2 degrees C.
    2. Meltwater lubrication: Meltwater pools in supraglacial lakes on the surface and carves moulins, vertical shafts to the bedrock. The pressurised water there lets the glacier slide faster.
    3. Fracturing channels: Water channels beneath (subglacial) and within (englacial) the glacier exert forces that fracture the ice.
    4. Thawing permafrost: Permafrost, ground or rock at or below 0 degrees C, holds steep rock walls together like mortar. As it melts, rock avalanches, landslides and debris flows follow.
    5. The takeaway: Warming weakens both the ice and the frozen rock holding Himalayan slopes together, so collapses grow more likely across the range.

    What does the evidence on Himalayan warming show?

    1. Twice the global rate: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) say high mountain Asia is warming at 0.3 degrees C per decade, nearly twice the global average.
    2. Ice loss doubled: Reports by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) in March 2026 found ice loss rates across the Hindu Kush Himalaya have doubled since 2000.
    3. Uneven warming: The western Himalaya is warming faster than the central and eastern stretches, with night time minimum and winter temperatures rising most.

    What happened in Nepal’s Langtang valley?

    1. The collapse: A 600 m wide section of ice and rock broke from the northern flank of Langtang Himal at 5,600 m.
    2. Early warning signal: Researchers from the British Antarctic Survey recorded unusually high ground temperatures two days before the collapse, using sensors 10 km away.
    3. Dam burst flood: The mass dammed the Lhende Khola, a tributary of the Bhote Koshi. When the dam broke, a flood of concrete like mud travelled 170 km down the valley into central Nepal.
    4. Loss and damage: Nepal emits about 0.1% of global greenhouse gases yet bears this cost, which grounds its demand for loss and damage compensation.

    Why must Himalayan development be rethought?

    1. Committee findings: The Avay Shukla Committee and the Ravi Chopra Committee both recommended restricting major hydropower, or subjecting construction above 2,200 m to detailed expert review.
    2. Chenab-Beas link: The proposed river linking project needs an 8.7 km tunnel through the steep Pir Panjal Range near Koksar, Himachal Pradesh, at 3,140 m.
    3. Diversion logic: Diverting more water from the western rivers of the Indus system looks logical on paper. Its impact on a fragile ecosystem makes the project avoidable.

    Challenges

    1. No preventive technology: No technology can prevent such collapses, so only their impact downstream can be reduced.
    2. Transboundary hazards: Collapses and floods start in one country and strike another, so national monitoring alone cannot warn in time.
    3. Projects climbing higher: Hydropower and tunnels keep moving into high, unstable terrain.

    Way Forward

    1. Shared early warning: Build regional real time data exchange, backed by satellite, drone, acoustic and hydrological sensors on glacier fed rivers.
    2. Glacial lake drainage: Monitor glacial lakes continuously and drain them by engineering where feasible.
    3. Slope based zoning: Zone flood plains by valley slope, siting infrastructure higher above the riverbed where steep slopes concentrate damage.
    4. Elevation cap: Impose a firm ban on hydropower construction above a defined elevation.
    5. Project moratorium: Pause all IHR projects until each is reassessed for environmental impact, hazard averseness and climate resilience.

    Conclusion

    Himalayan development is still planned for mountains that warming has already made unstable. The test is whether new hydropower and river link projects are reassessed against permafrost and slope risk before approval.

    Government Initiatives on Himalayan Glacial Hazards

    1. National GLOF Risk Mitigation Project: A Rs 150 crore project against glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) covering Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Uttarakhand.
    2. Central Water Commission monitoring: It monitors 902 glacial lakes and uses a risk indexing framework to prioritise the most dangerous.
    3. Mandatory GLOF studies: After the 2023 Sikkim flood that destroyed the Teesta-III dam, GLOF assessments are mandatory for new dams.
    4. Disaster authority outreach: The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA)‘s Committee on Disaster Risk Reduction works with Himalayan States to identify high risk lakes.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS1, 10 marks] Bring out the relationship between the shrinking Himalayan glaciers and the symptoms of climate change in the Indian sub-continent.”

  • Climate body faces deadlock over timeline of new reports

    Why in the News

    Report timelines at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are usually approved in “a matter of minutes”, but after nearly three years of debate its members still cannot agree when to publish the next assessment, a deadlock unprecedented in its history. Representatives of its 195 member states were expected to meet in plenary at Addis Ababa, seen as the last chance to fix dates before the UN climate talks of November 2028.

    What is the IPCC, and why does the timing matter?

    1. What it is: The IPCC is the UN body that reviews published climate science for governments. It works like an examiner who reads all the research and writes the textbook negotiators use.
    2. Policy weight: Its assessments have informed every major UN climate agreement for three decades.
    3. Three reports: The next (Seventh) assessment cycle will cover the extent and causes of climate change, vulnerabilities and adaptation, and options to stop warming getting worse.
    4. The 2028 link: At the November 2028 talks, governments assess progress towards the Paris Agreement (2015) goals in a global stocktake, which guides climate finance and national emission targets.
    5. The takeaway: Without agreed dates, countries could decide the next phase of action without consensus on critical questions, such as how far some warming might be reversible.

    What are members divided over?

    1. Chairs’ work plan: Scientists chairing the report groups proposed approving all three reports by September 2028. A French co-chair said the plan rests on workload, not the summit’s timing.
    2. Opponents’ demand: Countries opposing the plan want the second and third reports pushed into 2029.
    3. Coalition alarm: A coalition of countries pushing for more robust action is alarmed that the reports might miss the 2028 talks.
    4. Political pressure: Some governments criticise climate policies as hurting industrial competitiveness or barring emerging economies from cheaper, more polluting fuels.
    5. US exit: The United States, the IPCC’s biggest funder, quit the organisation in January 2026.

    Why do India and other developing countries want more time?

    1. Developing country bloc: India, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China want more time so that scientists from less resourced countries can contribute meaningfully.
    2. Practical barriers: Some scientists struggle to publish new research in time, or to take time off regular jobs for unpaid IPCC work.
    3. Thin representation: Developing countries have long argued their perspectives are underrepresented, because fewer of their experts take part and their researchers have fewer resources to publish peer reviewed studies.
    4. India’s position: India’s representative at the IPCC called it “short-sighted” to tie the body’s value solely to the 2028 talks. He said issues of “equity and inclusivity” are in some instances “simply ducked”.

    Challenges

    1. Consensus rule: The IPCC decides by consensus among member governments, so a determined group can stall even a routine work plan.
    2. Funding gap: The loss of its biggest funder strains the budget that supports authors and meetings.
    3. Science without dates: Negotiators may enter the 2028 review relying on the Sixth assessment, completed in 2023.
    4. Credibility risk: A science body seen as split along political lines loses authority with both sides.

    Way Forward

    1. Staggered approval: Agree firm dates now, letting the first report precede the 2028 talks if the others need more time.
    2. Fund participation: Expand the IPCC Trust Fund support that pays for developing country experts to attend and contribute.
    3. Wider evidence base: Use the IPCC’s existing provision for regional and non peer reviewed literature to capture research from less resourced countries.
    4. Replace US money: Other members should widen contributions to cover the US withdrawal.

    Conclusion

    The IPCC’s next assessment has no agreed timetable, and the dispute is as much about whose science is counted as about dates. Whether the Addis Ababa plenary fixes publication dates before the next global stocktake is the milestone to watch.

    Back2Basics: Global stocktake

    1. What it is: A periodic review under Article 14 of the Paris Agreement of collective progress towards the agreement’s goals, held every five years.
    2. Inputs: It draws on the best available science, including IPCC reports, and on submissions from countries.
    3. First stocktake: It concluded at COP28 in Dubai (2023) with a call to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems and to triple renewable capacity.
    4. Purpose: Its outcome informs each country’s next Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), its national climate pledge.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2023, GS3, 15 marks] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has predicted a global sea level rise of about one metre by AD 2100. What would be its impact in India and the other countries in the Indian Ocean region?”

  • Police must protect individual rights, not political interests

    Why in the News

    Delhi saw an extraordinary mobilisation of state power to stop a protest demanding the removal of the Chief Election Commissioner, with over 7,000 people reportedly detained and 45 Metro stations shut. No reasons were disclosed for curbs on the whole Capital, reviving the question of whether police act on professional assessment or political wishes.

    What should decide whether a protest is stopped?

    1. Professional assessment: A restriction should follow the police’s own assessment of the actual risk, not the displeasure of those in power. It is like a referee applying the rulebook whichever team complains.
    2. Constitutional basis: Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms. Article 19(3) permits reasonable restrictions, including for public order.
    3. Dialogue before force: Police absorb anger meant for governments. They should first open dialogue, assess risks and negotiate workable arrangements.
    4. Legitimate versus violent protest: Jumping barricades, forming human chains and lying down to resist arrest are routine democratic protest. Stone pelting, assault and destruction demand lawful action.
    5. The takeaway: Police are meant to be facilitators who protect rights and enforce reasonable limits, not agents of the ruling party.

    What made the Delhi response disproportionate?

    1. Emergency scale: More than 250 railway services were cancelled, a measure fit for a grave public order emergency, yet no specific threat was disclosed.
    2. Message magnified: The spectacle handed the Cockroach Janta Party, the organiser, a publicity victory. The state prevented the gathering but magnified its message.
    3. Short notice argument: The stated reason, that the application arrived only three days before, is insufficient. Police deployed tens of thousands of personnel, so negotiation was possible too.
    4. Political suspicion: Sweeping restrictions without disclosed reasons invite the suspicion that professional judgement yielded to political wishes conveyed by a compliant bureaucracy.

    What does London’s handling of a contested march show?

    1. Armistice Day march: In November 2023, London’s Metropolitan Police Commissioner resisted political pressure to ban a pro Palestinian march on Armistice Day.
    2. Legal threshold: Under Section 13 of the UK’s Public Order Act, 1986, a march may be banned only for serious public disorder that lesser measures cannot prevent. The intelligence did not meet that test.
    3. Professional over political judgement: Political displeasure cannot substitute for a professional assessment.

    Why does police reform stall, and what would insulate policing?

    1. Opposition only accountability: Parties discover police accountability when in Opposition. Few press for the Supreme Court’s police reform directions in Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006).
    2. State Security Commission: A credible State Security Commission would set policing policy, evaluate performance and curb unwarranted political interference.
    3. Autonomy with accountability: Operational autonomy must come with recorded reasons, independent scrutiny of excessive force and transparent review of restrictions.
    4. Home Ministry layer: The Union Home Ministry should test whether extraordinary restrictions are necessary and advise ministers candidly. Merely transmitting political messages adds hierarchy without judgement.

    Challenges

    1. Training deficit: Negotiation, de-escalation and proportionate use of force cannot be improvised at a barricade, and constant deployment leaves little time to learn them.
    2. Divided control in Delhi: Delhi Police answers to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, not the elected Delhi government.
    3. Grievance displaced: Heavy curbs shifted attention from the original grievance to police conduct.

    Way Forward

    1. Negotiated protest plan: Agree a designated site, limited hours, attendance, volunteer marshals and conditions against violence, making organisers answerable.
    2. Evidence on both sides: Use body cameras, videography and liaison officers to document misconduct by protesters and police alike, enabling targeted action.
    3. Professional Home Secretary: Appoint an experienced internal security professional as Union Home Secretary to explain operational realities to ministers.
    4. Disclosed reasons: The government should explain why restrictions of this scale were necessary.

    Conclusion

    Shutting down the Capital to stop one protest does not show that democracy is secure. With another protest expected, the ruling establishment must weigh the cost of keeping a contested Chief Election Commissioner through mass deployment against restrictions it can justify.

    Police Reforms in India

    1. Colonial law: Policing in most States still rests on the Police Act, 1861, designed for colonial control.
    2. State subject: Police falls under Entry 2 of the State List, so each State must legislate its own reform.
    3. Other Prakash Singh directives: Two year tenure for the Director General of Police and key officers, separate investigation wings, a Police Establishment Board for transfers, and Police Complaints Authorities.
    4. Diluted compliance: The Justice K.T. Thomas Committee found that 17 of 18 States passing new police laws diluted the Court’s directions.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2023, GS3, 15 marks] What are the internal security challenges being faced by India? Give out the role of Central Intelligence and Investigative Agencies tasked to counter such threats.”

  • How India should respond to green card crackdown

    Why in the News

    The United States has suspended Indian technology firms from PERM, the labour certification that opens the door to an employment based green card (US permanent residence). Indian IT began retreating from visa dependent delivery years ago, so the real question is whether work moving to India creates jobs for graduates.

    What is the PERM suspension, and whom does it hit?

    1. What it is: PERM (Program Electronic Review Management) is the US Labour Department’s check that no qualified American was available for a job. It works like a no objection certificate for permanent foreign hiring.
    2. Indian dependence: Indians received over half of all PERM certifications in every full year from 2015 to 2023.
    3. Existing queue spared: About 3.56 lakh approved Indian EB-2 (advanced degree professional category) petitions awaited visas this June, and they are unaffected. The barrier falls on workers still seeking certification.
    4. US labour anxiety: Unemployment in computer and mathematics jobs rose to 3.3% in 2025, and software job postings are two thirds below their peak.
    5. The takeaway: The suspension spares those already queued but makes future settlement harder, which changes where firms place work.

    Why had Indian IT already moved away from visas?

    1. Visa approvals collapse: New H-1B (temporary US work visa for specialised jobs) approvals for TCS, Infosys, Wipro, HCL and Cognizant fell 84% in a decade.
    2. Shrinking H-1B share: The five firms’ share of initial H-1B employment approvals dropped from 14% to 2.2%.
    3. US Big Tech rise: Over the same period, approvals for Amazon, Microsoft and Google rose from 2,860 to 7,060.
    4. New delivery model: Indian firms increasingly hired locally in America and delivered work offshore.

    Why may restrictions move work abroad rather than to Americans?

    1. Offshore option: Firms move work abroad when US hiring and retention get harder. Eg. Microsoft employs over 22,000 people in India and Adobe over 8,000.
    2. Retention effect: Workers denied settlement prefer employers or countries offering security, so restriction moves work without creating equivalent jobs in America.
    3. Capability centre jobs: Employment at global capability centres (GCCs), the in house operations of multinationals in India, rose by almost a quarter in two years, to 2.36 million in FY2026.
    4. Cognizant shift: Since 2018, Cognizant has grown its Indian workforce by about a third and cut its North American workforce to 41,600.

    Why will relocated work not automatically help young Indians?

    1. Hiring slump: Net technology hiring has fallen to under a third of its FY2022 level, even as more work moves to India.
    2. AI effect: In an Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) survey of 651 IT firms, two thirds cut hiring after adopting AI. Over half cut entry level jobs.
    3. Skills mismatch: Relocated roles favour experienced workers and returnees over the 820,000 engineering graduates India produces yearly.
    4. Graduate unemployment: Graduates faced 11.2% unemployment last year, over three times the 3.1% rate across all education levels.
    5. Diaspora cost: The US supplied over a quarter of India’s remittances in 2023-24. Fewer Indians settling there could slow remittances and weaken diaspora networks.

    Challenges

    1. Per country cap: US law caps each country’s share of employment green cards, so Indians already face the longest queues.
    2. Junior roles shrinking: AI adoption removes the entry level tasks through which fresh graduates traditionally entered IT.
    3. US market dependence: North America is Indian IT’s largest market, so US curbs strike the industry’s core.

    Way Forward

    1. Higher value centres: Frame an effective policy for capability centres that attracts higher value work such as design and research.
    2. Predictable rules: Give multinationals predictable tax and transfer pricing rules (the prices one company’s units charge each other across borders), so relocated teams can grow.
    3. AI skilling: Fund skills that help experienced workers use AI.
    4. Preserve mobility: Keep negotiating skilled mobility with the US, since diaspora networks carry investment and remittances.

    Conclusion

    India stands to gain the work US restrictions push offshore, but that work favours experienced hands over fresh graduates. Unless policy turns relocated work into broader opportunity, many young Indians will be left behind.

    Key numbers

    1. PERM certifications to Indians: 51 to 58% of the total each year, 2015 to 2023.
    2. H-1B approvals, five Indian IT firms: 15,919 (FY2015) to 2,486 (FY2025).
    3. EB-2 green cards issued to India: 3,916 (FY2024).
    4. Microsoft’s India investment: $17.5 billion committed over 2026-29.
    5. Net technology hiring: 445,000 (FY2022) to between 60,000 and 135,000 a year thereafter.
    6. Remittances: $118.7 billion in 2023-24, 27.7% of it from the US.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2026, GS2, 15 marks] “India’s global diaspora acts as a living bridge, as a critical economic factor and knowledge network in transforming cultural heritage into geopolitical influence and strategic leverage worldwide.” Critically examine this statement.”

  • Comparing SIR 2002-04 and 2025-26

    Why in the News

    The 2002-04 revision of electoral rolls verified households door to door and treated a voter’s presence on the existing roll as evidence; the current Special Intensive Revision (SIR) makes voters prove their own eligibility. Amid renewed protests, around 13.3 crore names have been deleted across three phases, many of them possibly eligible voters.

    What is an SIR, and what power does it rest on?

    1. What it is: An SIR prepares the electoral roll afresh, house to house, instead of updating it. It works like a fresh census of voters.
    2. Legal basis: Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RP Act) lets the Election Commission of India (ECI) order a special revision of the roll for any constituency, or part of one, in such manner as it thinks fit.
    3. Rarely used: SIRs have been held on eight occasions, the last in 2002-04.
    4. Nationwide SIR upheld: The ECI decided in June 2025 on a nationwide SIR, starting with Bihar. In May 2026, the Supreme Court held an SIR for ‘many’ or ‘all’ constituencies in a State within the ECI’s constitutional mandate.
    5. The takeaway: The law leaves the method of an SIR to the ECI, so how it is done decides whether eligible voters stay on the roll.

    How was the 2002-04 SIR done?

    1. Door to door from the old roll: Under the May 2002 guidelines, enumerators verified households against a preliminary list built from the existing roll, with Panchayat members helping voluntarily.
    2. Layered supervision: Supervisors randomly checked a share of households and visited houses reported locked. Senior officers ran their own sample checks.
    3. Burden on new applicants: Only first time applicants had to prove citizenship. Following Lal Babu Hussein (1995), the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO), who decides inclusions, gave “probative value” (weight as evidence) to presence on the existing roll.
    4. Shifted electors transferred: Shifted electors were marked “S”, not erased, and enrolled at their new address in the same exercise.
    5. Bulk claims rejected: Bulk claims and objections were summarily rejected, and the roll was finalised only after every claim was disposed of.

    Where does the current SIR depart from 2002?

    1. Untraced voters excluded: Electors not found, or who did not return the form, were left off the draft roll, even past voters.
    2. Shifted voters re-applying: Shifted electors must file Form 8 or apply afresh through Form 6, the form for new voters. This breaches the ECI’s own Manual on Electoral Rolls (2023), which requires notice before deletion.
    3. Thinner supervision: The Bihar notification mandates only 10% random verification by supervisors.
    4. Burden shifted to voters: Electors must trace themselves or a parent to the last intensive roll, about two decades old, or produce citizenship documents.
    5. Software and bulk deletions: Software flagged “logical discrepancies”, such as spelling differences or parent-child age gaps outside 15 to 45 years, excluding lakhs. Bulk Form 7 objections were capped per person only on October 9.

    Challenges

    1. Contested Declaration: The legality of the declaration attached to Form 6 remains disputed.
    2. New voter form for old voters: Using Form 6 to re-enrol deleted electors treats long registered citizens as first time applicants.
    3. Appeal backlog: The procedure for disposing of a large number of appeals is cumbersome, so wrongly deleted voters wait.

    Way Forward

    1. Audit finalised rolls: Audit in detail the rolls finalised so far.
    2. Re-enrol at the door: Expedite eligible re-enrolment claims through home visits.
    3. Door to door in ongoing States: Make door to door enumeration the prescribed procedure where the SIR continues.
    4. Claims before finality: Finalise rolls only after disposing of all claims and objections.
    5. Pre-SIR rolls in force: Under the proviso to Section 21(3), use pre-SIR rolls for upcoming State elections until the new rolls complete due process.

    Conclusion

    The courts have upheld the ECI’s power to revise rolls, but not the method that has removed crores of names. Whether finalised rolls are audited and deleted voters re-enrolled before the next State elections is what to watch.

    Key numbers

    1. Deaths: around 2.7 crore deletions (20%).
    2. Duplicates: around 1.01 crore entries flagged.
    3. Absent, shifted and others: around 9.5 crore (71%), many possibly eligible.
    4. 2002 sample checks: supervisors at least 25% of households; Assistant EROs 12%, EROs 5%, District Election Officers 2%.
    5. Phase coverage: Phase II (October 2025 to February 2026) 9 States and 3 Union Territories (UTs); Phase III (from May 2026) 16 States and 3 UTs.

    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?”

  • Citing 50% cap, Karnataka HC strikes down law to hike quota for SC/ST

    Why in the News

    Karnataka’s higher quotas for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), which took total reservation to 56%, have been declared unconstitutional for crossing the 50% ceiling. A division bench of the Karnataka High Court struck down Sections 3 and 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and of appointments or posts in the services under the State) Act, 2022.

    What did the 2022 Act do, and why?

    1. What it is: The Act raised reservation for SCs and STs in State educational institutions and government posts. It took effect retrospectively from November 1, 2022.
    2. Quota hike: It raised two shares:
      • the SC quota from 15% to 17%;
      • the ST quota from 3% to 7%.
    3. State’s reasons: Citing the Nagamohan Das Commission, the Adi Committee and the K. Ratna Prabha committee, the State argued SCs and STs were under-represented in its services.
    4. Population argument: The Ratna Prabha committee found over 90% of Karnataka’s people are SC, ST or Other Backward Classes (OBC), and wanted reservation to match.
    5. The takeaway: Karnataka tried to tie reservation to population share, a basis the 50% rule does not accept.

    Why did the court strike it down?

    1. Section 3 struck down: Insofar as it takes reservation beyond 50%, it violates Articles 14 and 15, the guarantees of equality before law and against discrimination.
    2. Section 4 struck down: It violates Articles 14 and 16, the second guaranteeing equal opportunity in public employment.
    3. Indra Sawhney ceiling: In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), a nine judge bench fixed this ceiling on reservation under Articles 15(4) and 16(4). The limit cannot be stretched or tied to population share, but allows an exception in “extraordinary situations”.
    4. No extraordinary situation: The bench held that a subjective opinion that a class deserves a few points more is not extraordinary. Breaching the limit would undermine equality, a founding value of the Constitution.
    5. Open competition remains: Members of reserved classes can still compete for the remaining general seats and posts.

    Why did the missing consultation matter?

    1. Mandatory consultation: Articles 338(9) and 338A(9) require governments to consult the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) on major policies affecting these groups.
    2. Consultation too late: The State wrote to the Commissions nearly three years after enacting the law. The bench held that consultation, to be meaningful, “must precede the decision”.
    3. No adverse effect exception: It rejected the argument that consultation is needed only when a policy harms SCs or STs.

    Challenges

    1. Population based demands: States with large backward populations argue a fixed cap cannot match their share. Eg. Maratha reservation, struck down in Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil (2021).
    2. Undefined exception: Courts have declined to list what counts as extraordinary, so States keep testing the limit.
    3. EWS beyond the cap: The Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota upheld in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022) sits outside the ceiling, so States argue the cap is not absolute.
    4. Commissions sidelined: Late or skipped consultation reduces the NCSC and NCST to a formality.

    Way Forward

    1. Data before breach: Back any claim of an extraordinary situation with current, quantifiable data, not only committee opinion.
    2. Consult first: Seek the NCSC’s and NCST’s views before drafting a reservation law.
    3. Redistribution within the ceiling: Use sub-classification of SCs and STs, allowed in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024), to spread benefits inside the existing limit.

    Conclusion

    Karnataka’s enhanced quotas now stand struck down, and no next step by the State has been reported. Whether it can show an extraordinary situation, after consulting the two national Commissions first, decides whether the higher quotas can return.

    Back2Basics: National Commissions for SCs and STs

    1. Origin: Article 338 first provided a Special Officer, the Commissioner for SCs and STs, to report to the President on constitutional safeguards.
    2. One commission, then two: The 65th Amendment Act, 1990 created a multi member National Commission for SCs and STs. The 89th Amendment Act, 2003 split it, adding Article 338A for the NCST.
    3. Powers: In an investigation, the Commissions have a civil court’s powers to summon persons and documents, and they report annually to the President.
    4. Limits: Their recommendations are advisory, and they cannot enforce a verdict.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2023] Consider the following statements : Statement-I: The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgements that the reservation policies made under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India would be limited by Article 335 for maintenance of efficiency of administration. Statement-II : Article 335 of the Constitution of India defines the term ‘efficiency of administration’. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I (c) Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect (d) Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct ANSWER: (c)”

  • Jantar Mantar de-notified: Who decides Delhi’s protest sites?

    Why in the News

    Protests in Delhi can no longer be held at Jantar Mantar, near the seat of power, and must move to Ramlila Maidan, Burari Ground in north Delhi or CBD Ground in east Delhi. Delhi Police de-notified Jantar Mantar, withdrawing its status as a designated protest site, on the advice of a Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) committee. The move comes amid barricading and a crackdown on protesters in central Delhi.

    What is a designated protest site, and who controls it in Delhi?

    1. What it is: A designated protest site is a place the police set aside for demonstrations, with rules on permission and crowd size, like a booked public venue for dissent. It aims to balance protest with traffic, public safety and residents’ rights.
    2. Constitutional right: Article 19(1)(a) guarantees free speech and Article 19(1)(b) the right to assemble peaceably. Both are subject to reasonable restrictions, including in the interests of “public order”.
    3. Delhi’s exception: Under Article 239AA(3)(a), the Delhi Legislative Assembly cannot make laws on public order, police and land. So Delhi Police function under the MHA and regulate permissions and conditions at designated sites.
    4. The takeaway: In Delhi, the Union government, not the elected Delhi government, decides where citizens may protest.

    What has changed at Jantar Mantar?

    1. Old conditions: Organisers had to apply 10 days in advance to protest at Jantar Mantar, which had a cap of 1,000 people.
    2. Larger, farther ground: Ramlila Maidan, already a designated site, holds around 50,000 people.
    3. Court protected space: In Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018), petitioners argued Ramlila Maidan was too far from the “concentration of ‘power’”. The Court agreed and kept part of Jantar Mantar Road open for regulated demonstrations.
    4. Prohibitory orders: Protesters have gathered at several places, including areas where gatherings are barred under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Section 163 lets authorities bar gatherings in urgent cases.

    How do courts separate law and order from public order?

    1. Three concentric circles: In Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar (1966), the Supreme Court called law and order, public order and security of the State three concentric circles. Public order is the narrower circle, so an act can disturb law and order without disturbing public order.
    2. Degree of restriction: In In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012), a law and order restriction “would be least intruding”, and public order “may qualify for a greater degree of restriction”. Every breach of peace is not public disorder.
    3. Practical difference: A law and order issue is a local disturbance, such as two people fighting on a street. Public order concerns disturbance to the wider community, such as large scale disruption of transport.

    How far can the police limit protest sites?

    1. Prior permission allowed: Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad (1972) let police require prior permission for public meetings on streets. The State cannot prohibit assembly on every public street or place.
    2. Earmarking allowed: The 2018 ruling held that in regulating demonstrations “particular areas can be earmarked”, balancing protesters’ rights with residents’.
    3. A law first: Law and order is not a valid basis to limit speech, and the police cannot invoke public order on their own. They must identify the law that gives them the power.
    4. Risk of closing sites: Dissent is the “lifeblood of a peaceful and law-abiding society”. Shutting protest sites on law and order grounds closes legitimate democratic channels and risks driving citizens to desperation.

    Challenges

    1. Permission as prohibition: Advance notice, caps and distant sites can turn regulation of protest into its denial.
    2. Blanket orders: Repeated prohibitory orders over wide areas restrict peaceful assembly. Eg. Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) on Section 144 orders.
    3. Residents’ rights: Large protests at central sites disrupt traffic and daily life. Eg. Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020), the Shaheen Bagh ruling.

    Way Forward

    1. Published criteria: Set out in law or notified rules how protest sites are designated and de-notified.
    2. Reasoned refusals: Require written reasons for refusing permission, with a quick appeal, and limit Section 163 orders to specific areas and periods.
    3. A central site retained: Keep a regulated space near the seat of power, as the 2018 ruling allowed.

    Conclusion

    Where Delhi may protest is now set by the Union government through its police, and the regulated space the Supreme Court preserved at the centre is gone. Whether courts treat the closure as regulation of assembly or as its prohibition is what to watch.

    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.”

More posts