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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Fundamental Rights,DPSP

1. History + Evolution
2. Features
3. Amendments
4. Basic Structure

  • Lok Sabha approves Demands for Grants of ₹50 Lakh Cr

    Why in the News?

    The Lok Sabha has passed the Demands for Grants of various Ministries for the financial year 2025-26, approving an expenditure of more than ₹50 lakh crore.

    What are Demands for Grants?

    • Demands for Grants refer to the expenditure estimates that require approval from the Lok Sabha under Article 113 of the Constitution of India.
    • These demands are essentially requests for funds by different ministries to cover their respective expenditure needs.
    • The Demands for Grants cover:
      • Revenue expenditure: Routine expenses for the functioning of government.
      • Capital expenditure: Investment-related spending, such as infrastructure and development projects.
      • Grants to States/UTs: Funds allocated to state governments and Union Territories for various purposes.
      • Loans & advances: Amounts lent to other entities or bodies.
    • Each ministry or department presents its own demand for grants.  Larger ministries may have multiple demands depending on the scope of their activities.
    • Types of Expenditures in Demands for Grants:
    1. Voted expenditure: It refers to the part of the budget that requires approval from the Lok Sabha. This expenditure can be debated and voted on by members of the House.
    2. Charged expenditure: It includes items like the President’s salary, judges’ salaries, debt servicing, and other such payments. This expenditure does not require a vote and is automatically passed.
    • Voting on Demands for Grants:
      • Exclusivity of Lok Sabha: Only the Lok Sabha has the power to vote on Demands for Grants.
      • Voting Process: Voting applies only to votable expenditure, with each demand voted on separately.
      • Guillotine Process: If time runs out for discussion, the Speaker applies the guillotine, automatically approving remaining demands.

    Constitutional Provisions on Demands for Grants

    • Article 113: Requires the President’s recommendation before any demand for a grant can be made.
    • Article 114: Money cannot be withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund of India without parliamentary approval.
    • Article 115: Allows supplementary grants if the budget is insufficient.
    • Article 116: Provides for Vote on Account and Vote of Credit if the budget is not passed before the start of the financial year.
    [UPSC 2024] Consider the following statements regarding the financial procedure in the Indian Parliament:
    1. The Appropriation Bill must be passed by the Lok Sabha after the Demands for Grants are voted upon.
    2. At the Union level, no demand for a grant can be made except on the recommendation of the President of India.Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
    (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • PAC flags Failure of Swadesh Darshan Scheme

    Why in the News?

    The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has criticized the Ministry of Tourism for the poor execution of the Swadesh Darshan Scheme and highlighted lapses in planning, approvals, and project execution.

    About Public Accounts Committee (PAC):

    • The PAC was established in 1921 under the Government of India Act, 1919.
    • It consists of 22 members, with 15 from the Lok Sabha and 7 from the Rajya Sabha, who are elected annually.
    • The Chairman of the committee is traditionally selected from the Opposition since 1967.
    • The PAC plays a crucial role in examining the audit reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), focusing on public expenditure.
    • It ensures that funds are utilized efficiently, and it checks for irregularities, corruption, waste, and inefficiencies in government spending.

    About Swadesh Darshan Scheme (SDS):

    • The Swadesh Darshan Scheme was launched in 2015 by the Ministry of Tourism.
      • Objective: Developing theme-based tourist circuits such as Buddhist, Coastal, Heritage, and Eco-tourism circuits in India, emphasising sustainable tourism.
    • The scheme is 100% centrally funded, and it provides financial assistance to state governments, Union Territory administrations, and central agencies for the development of tourism infrastructure.
    • Swadesh Darshan 2.0 scheme (which began from January 2023) adopts a more holistic approach, shifting from circuit-based tourism to a destination-centric model.
      • This new version aims to encourage private sector investment in tourism and hospitality, aligning with India’s ‘Vocal for Local’ and Aatmanirbhar Bharat vision.
      • It prioritizes long-term growth and the development of sustainable tourism destinations.
      • The Challenge-Based Destination Development (CBDD) is a sub-scheme under Swadesh Darshan 2.0, focusing on the competitive development of tourism destinations.
      • This initiative aims to foster sustainability, digitalization, skill development, MSME support, and effective management, ensuring that the tourism sector thrives in a more modern and organized manner.

    PYQ:

    [UPSC 2007] Consider the following statements:

    1. The Chairman of the Committee on Public Accounts is appointed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha.

    2. The Committee on Public Accounts comprises Members of Lok Sabha, Members of Rajya Sabha, and a few eminent persons of industry and trade.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

     

  • India ranked 24th out of 33 countries in Free Speech Index

    Why in the News?

    A global survey by The Future of Free Speech, a US -based think tank, has ranked India 24th out of 33 countries in terms of support for free speech.

    The right to freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, allowing citizens to express their opinions freely. This right includes various forms of expression like speech, writing, art, and digital media, RTI, and even the right not to speak. However, it is subject to reasonable restrictions as outlined in Article 19(2), including security, public order, and decency.

    About the Free Speech Index

    • The Future of Free Speech, an independent U.S.-based think tank released this report titled ‘Who in the World Supports Free Speech?’.
    • It evaluates public attitudes towards free speech across 33 countries, highlighting trends, regional variations, and challenges to freedom of expression worldwide.
    • It emphasized the decline in support for protecting controversial speech, despite strong abstract support for free speech in many countries.

    India’s Ranking:

    • India is ranked 24th out of 33 countries in the 2024 Global Free Speech Index, with a score of 62.6.
    • While Indians generally consider free speech important, 37% of respondents support restrictions on criticizing government policies, which is the highest percentage among the surveyed countries.
    • India is an exception to the general trend, as public support for free speech does not align with actual protections, pointing to increasing government restrictions on expression.

    Global Highlights:

    • Norway (87.9) and Denmark (87.0) lead the rankings, demonstrating strong commitment to free speech and dissent.
    • Indonesia (56.8), Malaysia (55.4), and Pakistan (57.0) showed the biggest improvements, although they still ranked lower on the scale.
    • Several democratic nations, including the US, Israel, and Japan, have seen a decline in free speech support since 2021.
    • Countries like Hungary (85.5) and Venezuela (81.8) scored high, indicating a disconnect between government-imposed restrictions and public attitudes towards free speech.

    PYQ:

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

    [2018] Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement?

    (a) Article 14 and the provisions under the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution.
    (b) Article 17 and the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV.
    (c) Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III.
    (d) Article 24 and the provisions under the 44th Amendment to the Constitution.

     

  • Appointment of Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG)

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court has decided to examine a plea challenging the current process of appointing the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).

    About Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG):

    Details
    Role and Importance
    • Established under Article 148 of the Indian Constitution.
    • Ensures efficient and lawful use of public funds.
    • Audits financial accounts of Consolidated Fund of India, state funds, and public sector undertakings.
    • Acts as a watchdog over government financial expenditure.
    • Plays a critical role in maintaining financial accountability in governance.
    Appointment and Term
    • Appointed by the President of India under a warrant.
    • Serves a 6-year term or until the age of 65, whichever is earlier.
    • Must take an oath to uphold the Constitution and perform duties impartially.
    • Removal can only occur for misbehaviour or incapacity, through a special majority in both Houses of Parliament.
    Independence of the CAG
    • Independence from the government: Ineligible for any government office after leaving office.
    • Salary and Expenses: Equal to a Supreme Court judge, with expenses charged to the Consolidated Fund of India.
    • No Ministerial Representation: No minister can represent the CAG or assume responsibility for their actions.

     

    Issues with the Appointment of the CAG

    The current process for appointing the CAG is seen as problematic due to the centralized control by the Union government.

    • The CAG is appointed by the President on the advice of the government, raising concerns about potential executive influence over a key independent body.
    • Critics argue that this process compromises the CAG’s independence and calls for a neutral selection committee involving the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, and Chief Justice of India.
    • This would ensure that the CAG is appointed transparently and impartially, free from political interference.
    • Historically, the lack of clear guidelines in Article 148 regarding the CAG’s appointment has allowed executive interference, much like the early years of judicial appointments.

    Supreme Court interventions have already reformed appointment processes for bodies like the Election Commission and Central Vigilance Commission, and similar reforms for the CAG are necessary to protect its autonomy.

    [UPSC 2012] In India, other than ensuring that public funds are used efficiently and for intended purpose, what is the importance of the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG)?
    1. CAG exercises exchequer control on behalf of the Parliament when the President of India declares national emergency/financial emergency.
    2. CAG reports on the execution of projects or programmes by the ministries are discussed by the Public Accounts Committee.
    3. CAG reports are available to the Parliamentary Committees.
    4. While dealing with the audit and accounting of government companies, CAG has certain judicial powers for prosecuting those who violate the law. Select the correct answer using the code given below:
    (a) 1, 3 and 4 only (b) 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

     

  • Definition of ‘Tribe’ in India

    Why in the News?  

    At the recent Indian Anthropology Congress officials from the Anthropological Survey of India (AnSI) and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) called for a shift in defining tribes.

    Instead of a rigid binary classification—tribe or not—they advocate for a “spectrum of tribalness”.

    About Scheduled Tribes (STs)

    • STs are defined under Article 366(25) of the Indian Constitution as “such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this Constitution.“
    • Under Article 342, the President notifies STs for each State/UT after consultation with the Governor, and modifications can only be made by Parliament through legislation.
    • Currently, 705 STs are notified across 30 States/UTs, comprising 8.6% of India’s population (2011 Census).
    • They are mainly concentrated in Central India (Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, etc.) and the North-East.

    Existing Criteria for ST Classification (Lokur Committee, 1965)

    • The Lokur Committee (1965) laid down 5 key criteria for classifying STs:
    1. Primitive Traits
    2. Distinctive Culture
    3. Geographical Isolation
    4. Shyness of Contact with the Community at Large
    5. Backwardness
    • Criticisms of Existing Criteria:
      • Termed obsolete, condescending, and colonial by scholars.
      • Many communities today do not fully meet all criteria.
      • Fails to reflect regional diversity, historical coexistence, and social changes.
      • Overly dependent on a binary view of ‘tribe’ vs. ‘non-tribe’, leading to inclusion-exclusion conflicts (e.g., Meitei ST demand in Manipur).

    Proposal for a ‘Spectrum of Tribalness’

    Recent academic and policy discussions (e.g., at the Indian Anthropology Congress) advocate for a paradigm shift:

    • Replace binary classification with a “spectrum of tribalness” or matrix of indicators.
    • Use a broader set of 100-150 indicators, including:
      • Marriage, kinship systems, language, rituals, governance structures, cultural materiality (e.g., headgear, weaponry) etc.
    • Assign weightage to each indicator to determine the degree of tribalness.

    PYQ:

    [2024] Consider the following statements:

    1. It is the Governor of the State who recognizes and declares any community of that State as a Scheduled Tribe.

    2. A community declared as a Scheduled Tribe in a State need not be so in another State.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

     

  • The Indian university and the search for a V-C 

    Why in the News?

    Various groups have raised concerns about the Draft UGC Regulations, 2025, which outline qualifications for appointing and promoting university teachers and aim to maintain standards in higher education.

    What are the primary reservations expressed regarding the Draft UGC Regulations, 2025?

    • Reduced Role of State Executives in V-C Appointments: The draft regulations limit the State government’s involvement in the search-cum-selection process, despite State universities being funded and established by State legislatures. Example: In the Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi vs State of Gujarat (2019) case, the Supreme Court ruled that State executive members cannot be part of the V-C selection committee, reducing their influence.
    • Broadening of Eligibility Criteria for Vice-Chancellors: Expanding the eligibility to include individuals from public policy, government, and private sectors may dilute academic rigor and expertise. Example: Between 2010 and 2018, the UGC regulations required 10 years of professorship or equivalent academic experience, ensuring a focus on research-based qualifications.

    Why has the Supreme Court of India ruled against the involvement of the State executive in the selection process of Vice-Chancellors?

    • Ensuring Compliance with UGC Regulations: The Court upheld the UGC’s 2018 regulations, which specify that only a UGC representative, not a State executive member, should be included in the search-cum-selection committee. Example: In Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S vs Dr. Rajasree M.S. (2022), the Court invalidated the V-C’s appointment because the selection process did not follow UGC norms.
    • Preventing Arbitrary Appointments: The Court held that allowing State executives to influence the selection process could lead to biased or politically motivated appointments, compromising merit-based selection. Example: In Dr. Premachandran Keezhoth vs The Chancellor, Kannur University (2023), the Court declared the V-C appointment void due to the involvement of the State executive, reinforcing the need for an independent selection process.
    • Preserving Autonomy and Neutrality: The Court emphasized that the Vice-Chancellor’s appointment process should be free from political or administrative influence to maintain the academic institution’s autonomy and impartiality. Example: In Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi vs State of Gujarat (2019), the Court ruled that State executive members cannot be part of the selection committee to prevent undue influence.

    Who are the key stakeholders affected by the proposed changes in the search-cum-selection process?

    • State Governments and State Universities: The reduced role of State executives limits their ability to shape the leadership of State-funded universities, affecting regional educational priorities and innovation. Example: State governments argue that universities play a critical role in addressing local development needs, which may be overlooked if the selection process is centralized.
    • University Governance Bodies: University executive bodies lose direct influence over the V-C selection, reducing their ability to align leadership with institutional goals and academic vision. Example: Central University statutes follow a similar model where the Chancellor, UGC, and university bodies are key decision-makers, excluding executive government officials.
    • Academic and Non-Academic Professionals: The broadened eligibility criteria open leadership positions to individuals from non-academic backgrounds, changing the traditional focus on academic excellence. Example: The draft regulations allow candidates with experience in public policy or industry, which some argue may dilute the focus on academic scholarship.

    Which options should be suggested to balance the State executive’s concerns? (Way forward)

    • State Nominee with Specific Criteria: Permit the State executive to nominate one member to the search-cum-selection committee, provided the nominee is a distinguished academic with no active government role. Example: Similar to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) guidelines, the nominee could be a retired academic leader who is free from political affiliations.
    • Increased Consultation Mechanism: Introduce a pre-selection consultation phase where the State executive provides inputs on regional needs without directly influencing the final selection. Example: The university executive could hold formal discussions with the State to ensure the selected V-C aligns with local educational and developmental goals.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q The quality of higher education in India requires major improvement to make it internationally competitive. Do you think that the entry of foreign educational institutions would help improve the quality of technical and higher education in the country. Discuss.  (UPSC IAS/2015)

  • Preventive Detention is a ‘Draconian’ measure: SC

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court recently ruled against the Preventive Detention of a couple in Nagaland, emphasizing that constitutional safeguards must be strictly followed, and preventive detention cannot override fundamental rights.

    Court’s Key Observations: Preventive Detention as a ‘Draconian Measure’

    • Violation of Rights: The court ruled that depriving individuals of liberty without trial requires strict adherence to legal safeguards.
    • Lack of Justification: Authorities failed to prove that the detainees posed a credible future threat, rendering the detention unjustified.
    • Language Barrier: Detention orders were in English, a language the detainees did not understand, violating their right to be informed in an accessible manner.

    What is Preventive Detention?

    • Preventive detention is the detention of an individual without trial to prevent them from engaging in activities that may threaten national security, public order, or foreign relations.
    • Unlike punitive detention, it aims to prevent future crimes rather than punish past offenses.
    • Under Article 22 of the Constitution, preventive detention is allowed but with safeguards:
      • Time Limit: Maximum three months, extendable only if an Advisory Board (comprising High Court judges) approves.
      • Rights of the Detainee: Must be informed of reasons for detention (unless against public interest) and given the right to challenge it.
      • Judicial Review: Courts can strike down unjustified detentions.
    • Major Preventive Detention Laws:
      • Public Safety Act (PSA), 1978: Used in J&K; detention up to two years.
      • National Security Act (NSA), 1980: Up to one year for threats to national security.
      • Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (PITNDPS Act), 1988: For drug trafficking cases.
      • Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA), 1974: For economic offenses & smuggling.

    Supreme Court’s Landmark Rulings

    • Ameena Begum Case (2023): Preventive detention is an exception, not a routine measure.
    • Ankul Chandra Pradhan Case (1997): It aims to prevent threats, not punish individuals.
    • Harikisan vs Maharashtra (1962): Detention orders must be in a language the detainee understands.
    • Gold Smuggling Case (2024): Authorities must consider bail conditions before imposing detention.

    PYQ:

    [2021] With reference to India, consider the following statements:

    1. Judicial custody means an accused is in the custody of the concerned magistrate and such an accused is locked up in a police station, not in jail.
    2. During judicial custody, the police officer in charge of the case is not allowed to interrogate the suspect without the approval of the court.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

     

  • Suspension of MLAs

    Why in the News?

    An MLA was suspended from the Maharashtra Assembly for praising and justifying the actions of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb. This incident has sparked a debate on the rules and constitutional provisions governing the suspension of MLAs in India.

    What is the Suspension of MLAs?

    • Suspension of MLAs is a disciplinary measure imposed by the Speaker to maintain order and decorum in the House.
    • It is used when members engage in unruly behavior, disrupt proceedings, or violate parliamentary rules.
    • Duration can range from a single day to the remainder of the session.

    Rules Governing Suspension of MLAs:

    Rule 53 of Maharashtra Assembly
    • The Speaker can order a member to withdraw for grossly disorderly conduct.
    • If repeated, they can be suspended for the remainder of the session.
    “Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business” in Lok Sabha
    • Template for most state assemblies allows suspension for obstructing House business.
    • Suspension should not exceed the session.
    Maharashtra’s Suspension Practices vs Other States Maharashtra has no upper limit on suspension duration, unlike states like Odisha where it is capped at 7 days.
    Article 212 (1) [Protection of Legislative Proceedings]
    • Prevents courts from questioning legislative proceedings on procedural grounds.
    • Used to argue that courts have no jurisdiction over suspensions.
    Article 194 [Powers and Privileges of the Legislature] Grants legislative bodies the power to maintain order and discipline. Justifies suspensions beyond Rule 53.
    Article 190 (4) [Absence from Legislative Proceedings]
    • If an MLA is absent for more than 60 days without permission, their seat can be declared vacant.
    • Prolonged suspensions violate this provision.
    Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Section 151 (A) Mandates a by-election within six months if a seat becomes vacant. Supreme Court argues that suspensions beyond six months deprive constituencies of representation.

    Supreme Court Rulings on Suspension:

    (a) 2022 Supreme Court Ruling on Maharashtra BJP MLAs

    • In 2021, 12 BJP MLAs were suspended for one year for disrupting proceedings.
    • Judgment:
      • Suspensions beyond six months are unconstitutional.
      • Prolonged suspensions deprive voters of representation.
      • Governments could misuse suspensions to weaken the opposition.
      • The Speaker’s discretion is subject to constitutional limits.

    (b) Jambuwantrao Dhote Case (1964): Only Maharashtra MLA expelled for throwing a paperweight at the Speaker during Vasantrao Naik’s Government.

    PYQ:

    [2019] With reference to the Legislative Assembly of a State in India, consider the following statements:

    1. The Governor makes a customary address to Members of the House at the commencement of the first session of the year.

    2. When a State Legislature does not have a rule on a particular matter, it follows the Lok Sabha rule on that matter.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • Article 136 of the Indian Constitution

    Why in the News?

    Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar recently raised concerns over the wide usage of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution, stating that what was meant to be a “narrow slit” has now turned into a wide judicial intervention.

    What is a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136?

    • A SLP is an extraordinary appeal mechanism that allows the Supreme Court (SC) to intervene in any judgment, decree, or order passed by a lower court or tribunal, except in matters related to the Armed Forces Tribunal.
    • SLP is discretionary, meaning the SC is NOT obligated to hear every petition filed under Article 136.
    • The concept of SLP originates from the Government of India Act, 1935, which gave a similar power to the Privy Council in colonial times.

    Key Features of SLP:

    • Jurisdiction of Article 136:
      • The SC has the power to grant special leave to appeal against judgments of High Courts, tribunals, or other judicial bodies.
      • This allows the SC to examine cases that may not have a direct appeal provision under law.
    • Scope of Application:
      • SLPs can be filed in both civil and criminal cases.
      • It can be used even in cases where a High Court refuses to grant a certificate of appeal to the Supreme Court.
      • The SC may accept or reject an SLP without providing reasons.
    • Time Limit for Filing:
      • 90 days from the date of the High Court’s judgment.
      • 60 days if the High Court refuses to certify an appeal.
    • Judicial Discretion:
      • SLP is not an automatic right of appeal but is granted only in cases where the SC finds that a substantial question of law or injustice is involved.
      • Even if an SLP is accepted, the SC may later decline to interfere in the final decision.
    • Conversion into a Formal Appeal: If the SC grants leave under an SLP, the case turns into a full-fledged appeal, allowing both parties to present their arguments.

    PYQ:

    [2021] With reference to the Indian judiciary, consider the following statements:

    1. Any retired judge of the Supreme Court of India can be called back to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge by the Chief Justice of India with the prior permission of the President of India.
    2. A High Court in India has the power to review its own judgement as the Supreme Court does.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither I nor 2

     

  • Why are PwDs worried about DPDP rules?

    Why in the News?

    The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) plans to complete public consultations on the draft Rules for the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, by March 5. Meanwhile, disability rights activists are urging changes to a key provision of the Act.

    Why are persons with disabilities concerned about a certain provision in the draft Rules of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023?

    • Infringement on Autonomy and Decision-Making Capacity: Section 9(1) clubs adult PwDs with children, requiring consent from a legal guardian for processing personal data. This undermines their ability to make independent decisions.
      • Example: An adult with a physical disability wanting to access online banking may be restricted if the platform requires guardian consent.
    • Lack of Clarity and Ambiguity in Implementation: The Act does not clearly outline how consent should be obtained across various disabilities and degrees of severity, leading to confusion.
      • Example: A person with limited cognitive impairment under “limited guardianship” may still be treated as entirely incapable.
    • Conflict with UNCRPD Principles: The provision conflicts with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), which emphasizes supported decision-making over substituted decision-making.
      • Example: Under the RPWD Act, a PwD may receive assistance only when necessary, but the DPDP Act assumes total incapacity if a legal guardian exists, contradicting the UNCRPD framework.
    • Concerns About Privacy and Data Security: Platforms may need to collect sensitive information (like whether a user has a disability) to verify guardianship status, raising privacy concerns.
    • Exclusion from Digital Services: The additional procedural burden on PwDs and data fiduciaries could lead to exclusion from essential digital platforms.

    How do guardianships for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) function? 

    • Governed by Two Laws:
      • Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPWD) Act, 2016:  Allows for limited guardianship, where PwDs are supported in making specific legal decisions. This aligns with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) by preserving decision-making autonomy.
      • National Trust (NT) Act, 1999: Provides for full guardianship for individuals with autism, cerebral palsy, intellectual disabilities, or multiple disabilities. This model is more paternalistic and conflicts with the UNCRPD’s emphasis on autonomy.
    • Practical Challenges: Although the RPWD Act emphasizes limited guardianship, PwDs often report that their guardians control all aspects of their lives. The NT Act’s rigid framework assumes a lack of decision-making capacity without defining clear standards for assessing it.

    How are legal guardians defined under the draft rules?

    • legal guardians: Under the draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, legal guardians are defined as individuals appointed through specific legal frameworks to act on behalf of persons with disabilities (PwDs).
      • Data Fiduciaries are required to verify the guardian’s appointment by a court of law, designated authority, or local-level committee under applicable guardianship laws.

    Who are data fiduciaries and data principals?

    • Data Fiduciaries: Entities (organizations, companies, or individuals) that collect, store, and process personal data while determining the purpose and means of such processing under the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023.
    • Data principals: Individuals whose personal data is being collected, processed, or stored. This term generally refers to users, consumers, or citizens under the DPDP Act.

    Where does the conflict lie?  

    • Presumption of Incapacity vs. Legal Recognition of Capacity: The DPDP Act assumes adult PwDs lack the capacity to give consent if a guardian is involved, whereas the RPWD Act recognizes their legal capacity and promotes their right to make decisions.
      • Example: A person with mild intellectual disability working in a corporate setting may need guardian approval for routine data-related tasks, despite their ability to understand and consent.
    • Data Privacy vs. Intrusive Verification: The DPDP Act may require platforms to collect and verify sensitive disability information, potentially breaching privacy rights, while the UNCRPD emphasizes the right to privacy without discrimination.
      • Example: An online service requiring disability verification for consent could store unnecessary sensitive data, increasing risks of unauthorized access or misuse.

    Way forward: 

    • Adopt a Supported Decision-Making Model: Align the DPDP Act with the RPWD Act and UNCRPD by recognizing limited guardianship and allowing PwDs to provide independent consent with appropriate support when needed.
    • Ensure Privacy and Minimize Data Collection: Limit the collection of sensitive disability information to essential cases, ensuring purpose limitation and data minimization while protecting PwDs’ privacy rights.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Impact of digital technology as a reliable source of input for rational decision-making is a debatable issue. Critically evaluate with a suitable example. (UPSC IAS/2021)