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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Governance

Important aspects of Society

  • e-governance, as a critical tool of governance, has ushered in effectiveness, transparency and accountability in governments. What inadequacies hamper the enhancement of these features?

    The 2nd ARC’s 11th Report (2008) envisioned “SMART Governance”, Simple, Moral, Accountable, Responsive, and Transparent, through e-governance.

    E-governance ushering in effectiveness

    Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT)- saved more than

    Unified Payments Interface (UPI) – Revolutionised digital payments with real-time, low-cost, interoperable transactions. Eg: 20+ billion transactions/month

    Aadhaar-Based Authentication – Universal digital identity enables paperless, presence-less service delivery at scale.

    DigiLocker – Digital storage of documents enables instant verification across services.

    PM Gati Shakti – Inter-Ministerial Convergence

    E-governance ushering in transparency

    Open, competitive procurement on Government e-Marketplace (GeM) eliminates discretion and middlemen.

    CoWIN Platform – Real-time vaccination tracking with public dashboards ensured transparent COVID response.

    Online RTI Portal

    Open Government Data Portal – data.gov.in publishes datasets across ministries for citizen scrutiny and research.

    e-Procurement and e-Tendering – reduces corruption opportunities.

    E-governance ushering in accountability

    CPGRAMS Grievance Redressal – enables time-bound resolution and tracking by citizens.

    MyGov – Direct policy participation through online consultations, polls, and feedback mechanisms.

    Social Audit via MGNREGA – Online MIS publishes worksite details, wages, attendance

    Aspirational Districts Dashboard – Real-time performance ranking of 112 districts on 49 indicators

    Inadequacies hampering e-governance

    Digital Divide – Eg: Rural internet penetration 59.06% vs urban 131.45% (TRAI Q1 2025).

    Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities- Eg: cybercrime losses in 2024 – 206% rise (I4C, MHA 2025).

    Data Privacy Concerns – Weak enforcement of data protection exposes citizens to misuse risks.

    Poor Digital Literacy – Eg: Only 38% women have ever used internet (NFHS-5, MoHFW).

    Inadequate Infrastructure – Internet connectivity, electricity, devices remain insufficient in remote regions.

    Capacity Constraints – lower level government staff lack training in digital tools, data analytics, AI skills.

    Targeting and verification errors exclude genuine beneficiaries from welfare schemes. Eg: PM-Kisan validation errors stranded 2.18 crore families (Dvara Research).

    Departmental Silos – Ministries operate in isolation; lack integrated digital data ecosystems for governance.

    Faulty validation processes. Eg: Aadhaar-PDS biometric failures linked to Simdega starvation death, Jharkhand (NHRC).

    Linguistic Barriers – English-dominant interfaces exclude regional language users from accessing services.

    Measures for Effective Implementation

    Bridge Digital Divide – Saturate rural connectivity through BharatNet expansion and affordable smartphones distribution.

    Mass Digital Literacy Drive – Scale PMGDISHA and Mission Karmayogi to all citizens and government employees.

    Citizen Co-creation – Engage citizens through MyGov, hackathons, and pilot testing before scaling projects.

    Outcome-Based Monitoring – Real-time dashboards, third-party audits, beneficiary feedback for course correction.

    Adopt Global Best Practices – Estonia’s X-Road, Once-Only Principle for seamless inter-departmental data sharing.

    For Viksit Bharat 2047, robust ICT governance demands inclusion, security, capacity, and citizen-centric design.

  • What are the aims and objects of the recently passed and enforced, The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024? Whether University/State Education Board examinations, too, are covered under the Act?

    The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, was enacted to curb widespread malpractices, paper leaks, and organised cheating in recruitment and entrance examinations conducted by central authorities.

    Aims and Objectives of the Act

    Provide clear legal framework to deal with issue of paper leaks

    Defining Unfair Practices – Includes leakage of question papers, tampering of answer sheets, manipulation of computer systems, and collusion with officials or service providers.

    Empowering Examination Authorities – Allows surprise checks, blacklisting of service providers, and enhanced oversight mechanisms.

    Authorises the Centre to refer cases to Central Investigation Agencies for probing large-scale malpractices.

    Enables setting up of special courts for time-bound adjudication of offences.

    Stringent Punishments – Prescribes 3-5 years of imprisonment and fines up to , extendable for organised crimes, to restore public confidence.

    Addressing Organised Examination Crimes – Provides for property attachment and prosecution of institutions involved in organised cheating networks.

    Deterring Unfair Means – Prevents cheating, impersonation, and paper leaks, ensuring transparency, fairness, and credibility in examinations.

    Significance

    Ensuring Integrity of Public Examinations

    Deterring Organised Malpractices

    Protecting Merit and Equal Opportunity

    Enhancing Accountability of Examination Authorities

    Promoting Transparency and Trust

    Strengthening Governance and Fair Recruitment

    Coverage under the Act

    The Act applies to “Public Examinations” conducted by authorities listed in its Schedule or notified later by the Central Government.

    The Schedule presently includes:

    Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)

    Staff Selection Commission (SSC)

    Railway Recruitment Boards (RRBs)

    Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS)

    National Testing Agency (NTA) and other Central Government recruitment bodies.

    University and State Education Board examinations are not automatically covered unless specifically notified by the Central Government under Section 2 of the Act.

    Limitations of the Act

    Limited Coverage – State Boards and Universities are not automatically covered.

    No Dedicated Investigative Mechanism – Investigation left to DSP-level officers

    Technology Gaps – Insufficient use of digital tracking, encryption, and data protection tools to prevent leaks.

    Ambiguity in Defining “Unfair Means” – The broad wording may lead to subjective interpretation and misuse.

    Heavy reliance on Central Government notification powers may limit federal flexibility.

    Focuses mainly on punitive measures, not on systemic prevention and capacity-building.

    Judicial Burden – Creation of special courts without adequate infrastructure may lead to delays in trial.

    Training Deficit – Lack of awareness and training among invigilators and exam staff undermines effective implementation.

    The Act represents a major reform to uphold the integrity, fairness, and accountability of India’s examination system.

    Civil Services

  • The Doctrine of Democratic Governance makes it necessary that the public perception of the integrity and commitment of civil servants becomes absolutely positive. Discuss.

    The Doctrine of Democratic Governance implies that governance derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

    Under this doctrine, civil servants act as trustees of public interest, and hence, a positive public perception is vital for sustaining democratic legitimacy.

    Importance of Integrity and Commitment of Civil Servants

    Integrity ensures credibility of government institutions and strengthens citizen confidence in the administrative system. Eg- Swachh Bharat Mission, Beti Bachao Beti Padhao.

    Moral Legitimacy of Governance – A bureaucracy perceived as honest, impartial, and service-oriented upholds the ethical foundation of democracy.

    Efficient Policy Implementation – Committed civil servants execute programs objectively and transparently, reducing corruption and leakages. Eg- DBT

    A professional and non-partisan service ensures policy continuity and institutional resilience across political transitions.

    Social Justice and Inclusivity – Ethical and empathetic administration safeguards equity, rights, and participation of marginalized citizens.

    Economic and Institutional Performance – Integrity-driven governance promotes predictable policies, fostering investment and sustainable development.

    Whole-of-Government Approach: Encourages coordination and accountability across departments. Eg- PM gati Shakti Mission.

    Participative Democracy: Strengthens transparency and accountability through RTI, Citizen’s Charter, and Social Audits.

    Challenges Affecting Public Perception

    Corruption and favouritism. (Vohra Committee)

    Politicisation and arbitrary transfers.

    Lack of transparency in decision-making processes.

    Weak grievance redressal.

    Poor accountability frameworks.

    Measures to Strengthen Integrity and Public Confidence

    Adopt a Civil Services Code of Ethics based on integrity, impartiality, and objectivity (as recommended by 2nd ARC).

    Expand Mission Karmayogi to include modules on public service values, empathy, and accountability.

    Ensure secure tenure and protect officers from political pressure through Civil Services Boards (T.S.R. Subramanian Case, 2013).

    Citizen-Centric Accountability – legal Backing to Citizen’s Charters, and social audits.

    Technological measures – CPGRAMS and e-Office to minimise discretion and enhance accountability

    An ethical, efficient, and citizen-centric bureaucracy upholds the Doctrine of Democratic Governance, ensuring that power is exercised with integrity, fairness, and public trust.

    E-Governance

  • e-governance is not just about the routine application of digital technology in service delivery process. It is as much about multifarious interactions for ensuring transparency and accountability. In this context evaluate the role of the ‘Interactive Service Model’ of e-governance.

    The World Bank defines e-governance as the use by government agencies of information technologies that can transform relations with citizens, businesses, and other arms of government.

    E-Governance – multifarious interactions for ensuring transparency and accountability.

    Government to Citizen (G2C)

    UMANG, DigiLocker – Online service access.

    CPGRAMS – Grievance redressal & feedback.

    MyGov, Jan Bhagidari – Citizen participation.

    Aadhaar-DBT, PM-KISAN – Direct benefit transfers.

    Government to Business (G2B)

    MCA21, GSTN, NSWS – Digital compliance & licensing.

    GeM Portal – Transparent procurement.

    Invest India, Ease of Doing Business Dashboard – Single-window clearance.

    Government to Government (G2G)

    PRAGATI, e-Office – Inter-departmental coordination.

    PFMS – Fund tracking & financial accountability.

    Government to Employee (G2E)

    SPARROW – Online performance appraisal.

    iGOT-Karmayogi – Capacity building & training.

    e-Office, HRMS – Paperless workflow.

    Interactive service model

    Role of the ‘Interactive Service Model’ of e-Governance

    Citizen-Centric Governance: Shifts from departmental silos to integrated, citizen-focused service delivery. Eg- Sakala (Karnataka) – time-bound, transparent service guarantee.

    Bridging Government-Citizen Gap: through digital and doorstep access to services. Eg- MPeSeva in Madhya Pradesh.

    Participative and Responsive Governance through two-way interaction between citizens and government. Eg- MyGov portal.

    Trust-Based Model of Governance through transparency and proactive disclosure of information. Eg- Jan Soochna Portal (Rajasthan) – real-time public data access.

    Transparency and Accountability in Service Delivery: Enables real-time grievance tracking and service feedback loops. Eg- CPGRAMS, UMANG, GeM Portal.

    Ensures zero tolerance to corruption through traceable digital transactions. Eg- DBT has saved

    Empowered and Informed Citizens to shape governance outcomes. Eg- Open Government Data Portal, NDAP.

    From Ad hoc to Whole-of-Government Approach: Promotes integrated and citizen-centric service delivery.

    Challenges in Implementing the Interactive Service Model

    Digital Divide: Only 43% of rural households have internet access (NFHS-5, 2021), limiting inclusivity.

    Digital Literacy: Merely 10% of rural population is digitally literate (NSSO data, 2022).

    Data Privacy and Security Risks: Eg- CoWIN data leak.

    Institutional Resistance to adopt open data and feedback-based systems.

    Multiple portals without integration and interoperability hinder seamless user experience.

    Exclusion and inclusion errors in digital systems reduce trust in e-services. Eg- authentication errors in Aadhaar-linked DBT or ration delivery.

    Weak Common Service Centre (CSC) Infrastructure: poor connectivity, limited equipment, and untrained staff

    Lack of People-Centric Governance: Most government websites are only in English, not in vernacular languages, excluding non-English users.

    Way Ahead

    Strengthening Digital Infrastructure: Extend optical fibre connectivity under BharatNet to all Gram Panchayats.

    Promote citizen digital engagement and training through PMGDISHA and Digital India initiatives.

    Embedding Digital Literacy in Education: Integrate e-literacy programmes like e-Kidz and IT Clubs in school curricula.

    Business Process Reengineering (2nd ARC): Simplify procedures, ensure platform integration, and promote seamless inter-departmental coordination.

    Leverage 4th Industrial Revolution Technologies: Use AI, IoT, and blockchain for predictive governance and smart delivery systems.

    This can transform e-Governance into a trust-based, citizen-driven, and participatory governance model.

  • Public charitable trusts have the potential to make India’s development more inclusive as they relate to certain vital public issues. Comment.

    Public charitable trusts (PCTs) are non-profit legal entities and act as social capital institutions that complement the government in achieving inclusive and sustainable development.

    Role of Public Charitable Trusts in Promoting Inclusive Development

    Expanding Access to Education – Eg- Azim Premji Foundation Trust – runs 3500+ schools and Azim Premji University to democratize education.

    Strengthening Healthcare Access in underserved areas. Eg-Tata Trusts: Developed Cancer Care Network – 17 cancer centres in Tier-II cities.

    Promoting Rural Livelihoods and Skill Development – Eg- Aga Khan Rural Support Programme benefited 1.5 million rural households through watershed and women’s cooperatives in Gujarat and MP.

    Addressing Social Inequality and Marginalization – Eg-Smile Foundation runs Mission Education and Swabhiman programs benefiting 750,000 underprivileged children

    Environmental Sustainability – Invest in water conservation, renewable energy, and afforestation projects. Eg- Go Green Initiative of Wadia trust

    Disaster Relief and Humanitarian Response – Eg-Akshaya Patra Foundation delivered meals during COVID-19 lockdowns.

    Promoting Democratic Participation and Rights Awareness – Eg- Centre for Equity Studies promotes policy reforms for migrant and urban poor welfare.

    Promoting Research and Policy Innovation – Eg- PRIDE India documents and disseminates data on women’s representation in local governance.

    Challenges in the Functioning of Public Charitable Trusts

    Regulatory Complexity: Multiple laws (Income Tax, FCRA, Trusts Act) create compliance burden.

    Transparency Deficit: Eg- CBI report: <10% NGOs file audited financial statements.

    Urban Bias leaves rural regions underserved.

    Duplication: Overlap among similar welfare programs reduces efficiency.

    Funding Constraints – Heavy dependence on foreign or donor funding.

    Anti Developmental Role – Eg- IB Report – NGO activism leading to loss of 2% of GDP

    Way Forward

    Vijay Kumar Committee Recommendations: ‘Light regulation’ of NGO

    2nd ARC: enact a law to set up an independent National Accreditation Council

    Create formal government-NGO platforms (as in Kerala’s Kudumbashree).

    This can strengthen Public charitable trusts act as agents of equity and inclusion, aligning private philanthropy with public good.

  • The Citizens’charter has been a land mark initiative in ensuring citizen-centric administration. But it is yet to reach its full potential. Identify the factors hindering the realisation of its promise and suggest measures to overcome them.

    Originating in the United Kingdom (1991), India adopted Citizens’ Charters in 1997 to ensure administrative accountability.

    Importance in Citizen-Centric Administration

    Empowers Citizens: Transforms passive recipients into active stakeholders. Eg: Rights-based service delivery.

    Enhances Accountability: Holds specific officials responsible for service failures.

    Promotes Transparency: Clearly lists available services and required documents.

    Standardizes Quality: Establishes a uniform “benchmark” for public services. Eg: ISO certification.

    Grievance Redressal: Provides a structured mechanism for reporting dissatisfaction.

    Fosters Trust: Bridges the gap between the public and government through feedback loops.

    Time-Bound Delivery: Commits administration to strict deadlines. Eg: Passport issuance.

    Value for Money: Ensures taxpayers receive efficient services for their taxes.

    Factors Hindering Realisation of its Promise

    Vague Standards: Promises are often worded ambiguously rather than using quantifiable benchmarks. Eg: “Prompt service.”

    Lack of Legal Teeth: Voluntary nature means no penalties exist for violating charter commitments. Eg: Unenforceable timelines.

    Top-Down Approach: Centralized drafting ignores local ground-level constraints and resource availability. Eg: Uniform rural-urban charters.

    Resistance to Change: Bureaucratic inertia prevents officials from adopting a service-oriented mindset. Eg: Ignoring citizen feedback.

    Inadequate Infrastructure: Offices often lack the funds or manpower to meet promised standards.

    Poor Publicity: Awareness is often restricted to a small notice board inside the office.

    Static Nature: Most documents do not adapt to technological changes or evolving needs. Eg: Outdated manual forms.

    Siloed Operations: Focuses on individual departments rather than the citizen’s “end-to-end” journey.

    Language Barrier: Charters are often not available in regional or vernacular languages.

    Lack of Audits: Departments rarely publish independent evaluations of their adherence to standards. Eg: Missing annual reports.

    Stagnant Updates: A DARPG audit found several central charters haven’t been updated in over 5 years.

    Poor Grievance Disposal: Satisfaction rates for grievance redressal in many states hover below 40%.

    Successful Examples of Citizen Charters in India

    Passport Seva Kendra: clear timelines, digital tracking, and professional service environment

    Indian Railways: compensation, cleanliness standards, and punctuality targets.

    Taxpayers’ Charter: Defines rights like privacy and fair treatment.

    National Health Mission: Charters in government hospitals outlining free medicines and diagnostic services for the poor.

    Measures to Overcome Challenges

    Statutory Backing: Legally mandate service delivery through “Right to Services” Acts. Eg: MP Lok Sewa Act.

    Adopt Sevottam: Implement the 2nd ARC-recommended Sevottam model for quality management. Eg: IS 15700:2005 certification.

    Decentralized Drafting: Allow local units to customize charters based on specific resources.

    Technological Integration – Promote digital dashboards, online service tracking, and data-based performance monitoring. Eg: Sakala portal, Karnataka.

    Stakeholder Consultation: Conduct “Jan Sunwais” (public hearings) to update charters based on feedback.

    Independent Monitoring: Employ third-party NGOs to evaluate departmental performance annually. Eg: Quality Council of India audits.

    Capacity Building: Train frontline staff in technical aspects of service delivery through Mission Karmayogi.

    Awareness: Use social media and local languages to educate citizens. Eg: “Jago Grahak Jago” style ads.

    By aligning it with the 2nd ARC recommendations, it can evolve from a symbolic commitment to a practical framework for responsive, transparent, and citizen-centric governance.


  • Civil Society Organizations are often perceived as being anti-State actors rather than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify.

    CSOs are non-state, non-profit entities that represent citizens’ interests and act as intermediaries between the state and the people. However, their role oscillates between cooperation (as development partners) and confrontation (as watchdogs).

    Civil Society Organizations as Anti-State Actors – Arguments in Favour

    CSOs frequently expose corruption, inefficiency, and rights violations by state institutions. Governments perceive such actions as hostile scrutiny.

    Opposition to Government Policies and Projects – Eg- Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) opposed Sardar Sarovar dam project

    National Security Concerns – Eg- 2014 Intelligence Bureau Report claimed foreign-funded NGOs caused a “2-3% GDP slowdown” by delaying energy and mining projects.

    Mobilisation of Protests – CSOs lead agitations and mass movements that directly confront state authority. Eg- Anti-AFSPA protests in Manipur led by Irom Sharmila.

    Foreign Funding Suspicions – Eg- FCRA action against Greenpeace India for alleged anti-development activities.

    Use of PILs and Social Media Activism is perceived as obstruction. Eg- Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) filed petitions challenging the CAA and NRC.

    Civil Society Organizations as Non-State but Not Anti-State Actors – Arguments Against

    Complementing the State in Service Delivery – CSOs fill governance gaps in education, health, and rural development. Eg- Azim Premji Foundation Trust runs 3500+ schools

    Policy Advocacy – Eg- MKSS inspired the Right to Information Act (2005)

    CSOs empower citizens by promoting political awareness and participatory governance. Eg- ADR enhances electoral transparency through candidate data publication.

    Humanitarian and Relief Support – Eg- Akshaya Patra Foundation distributed 200 million meals during COVID-19; Goonj provided relief materials during Kerala floods.

    Promoting Inclusive Development – CSOs advance the goals of equity, gender justice, and social inclusion. Eg- Sakhi Resource Centre (Kerala)

    CSOs help India align with SDGs and climate commitments, enhancing India’s global standing. Eg- WWF-India and TERI partner with MoEFCC for biodiversity programs.

    Way Forward

    Vijay Kumar Committee Recommendations: ‘Light regulation’ of NGO

    2nd ARC: enact a law to set up an independent National Accreditation Council

    Create formal government-NGO platforms (as in Kerala’s Kudumbashree).

    Encourage Social Accountability Tools like Jan Sunwai, Community Scorecards, and Participatory Planning.

    Shift from Confrontation to Collaboration – seeing CSOs as governance partners, not adversaries

    NGOs are “integral cogs in the wheel of good governance”. A balanced partnership between genuine NGOs and the government is crucial for India’s progress.

  • E-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine.

    The World Bank defines e-governance as the use by government agencies of information technologies that can transform relations with citizens, businesses, and other arms of government.

    E-governance Projects

    Government to Citizen (G2C) – UMANG, DigiLocker

    Government to Business (G2B) – MCA21, GSTN, GeM Portal

    Government to Government (G2G) – PRAGATI, e-Office

    Government to Employee (G2E) – SPARROW, iGOT-Karmayogi

    Built-in Bias Towards Technology and Back-End Integration

    Infrastructure-Centric Approach: Focus on servers, networks, and databases rather than citizen interface.

    Neglect of ease of access for end-users. Eg- complexity in GSTN and MCA 21 portals.

    Exclusion Errors: Aadhaar authentication failures lead to denial of benefits. Eg- Jharkhand PDS (2017) saw 10-15% exclusion (NITI Aayog).

    Technology Outpacing Capacity: Rapid adoption of AI, blockchain, and analytics without adequate digital literacy or institutional capacity at the local level.

    Lack of User-Centric Designs

    Language and Accessibility Barriers: Most portals available only in English, excluding non-English users.

    Complex Interfaces and Poorly designed websites discourage participation. Eg- multiple logins and verification steps.

    Digital Divide and Exclusion: Only 43% of rural households have internet (NFHS-5, 2021).

    Most systems lack built-in feedback loops or grievance redressal.

    Absence of Design Thinking: Systems designed from administrative, not citizen, perspective

    One-Size-Fits-All Approach: Uniform design ignores regional, gender, and social diversity, affecting inclusivity.

    However, there are few Achievements

    UMANG App: Unified access to 2,300+ government services in 23 languages

    MyGov Platform: Enables citizen consultation and idea crowdsourcing.

    Jan Soochna Portal (Rajasthan): Promotes proactive disclosure of welfare data.

    eSanjeevani Telemedicine Platform: Over 18 crore consultations, with simple, accessible interface for rural users.

    BHASHINI: Supports 35+ Indian languages, breaking language barriers and enhancing inclusivity.

    PMGDISHA: Over 6.3 crore citizens trained in digital literacy.

    Way Forward

    Adopt Design Thinking: Involve citizens in service design and usability testing.

    Local Language Interfaces: Scale BHASHINI integration across all digital services.

    Social Audits and Human Interface: Combine digital governance with local institutions for last-mile trust.

    Strengthen Digital Infrastructure: Accelerate BharatNet Phase-II to connect all Gram Panchayats

    India must move toward “Technology with Inclusion” – ensuring no beneficiary is left behind.

    Civil Society Organisations

  • The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has to address the challenges faced by children in the digital era. Examine the existing policies and suggest measures the Commission can initiate to tackle the issue.

    The NCPCR, established under the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, is the apex body for safeguarding child rights under Articles 14, 15(3), 21, and 39(e)-(f) of the Constitution.

    Challenges Faced by Children in the Digital Era

    Online Sexual Exploitation: Increased exposure to pornography, grooming, and trafficking.

    Cyberbullying and Harassment: UNICEF (2019) – 1 in 3 Indian children faced online bullying.

    Privacy and Data Protection Issues

    Mental Health: Addiction, Self harm, Anxiety etc.

    Digital Divide: Unequal access to internet-based education deepens learning inequality

    Exposure to Harmful Content – Eg- Blue Whale Challenge.

    Deepfakes & AI Manipulation – Eg- Interpol flagged AI-generated child pornography.

    Functions and Powers of NCPCR

    Examine and Review Safeguards

    Inquire into Violations

    Advise on Policy and Legislation

    Monitor Implementation of child-related laws, such as the Juvenile Justice Act, POCSO Act, and RTE Act.

    Research and Awareness

    Inspect juvenile homes, observation homes, and child care institutions.

    Quasi-Judicial Powers: powers of a civil court

    Existing Policies and Initiatives

    IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 – Mandate removal of child sexual abuse content and ensure age-based content filtering.

    POCSO Act, 2012 (Amended 2019) – Covers online sexual abuse and child pornography.

    National Cybercrime Reporting Portal – Allows reporting of child cyber exploitation.

    Digital India & PM eVIDYA – Promote safe and inclusive digital learning.

    NCPCR Initiatives:

    POCSO e-Box – Online reporting of sexual abuse.

    Sammaan Portal – Tracks child abuse cases online.

    Guidelines on Online Child Safety (2020) during COVID.

    Guidelines for Ed-Tech Platforms – Protect children’s digital privacy and safety.

    POCSO e-Courts Project (2018) – to fast-track POCSO trials using digital case management systems

    Issues in the Existing Policies and Legal Framework

    Fragmented Mechanism: Overlap among NCPCR, IT Ministry, and police leads to poor coordination.

    Outdated Laws: IT Act 2000 and POCSO Act 2012 don’t address AI, dark web, or social media threats.

    Weak Child Data Protection: Data Protection Act 2023 lacks strong safeguards for children’s data and consent.

    Poor Enforcement of IT Rules: Platforms often ignore self-regulatory duties to remove harmful content.

    Limited Cyber Policing: Lack of trained cyber experts and forensic tools in law enforcement.

    Low Awareness: Parents, teachers, and officials unaware of digital risks and reporting mechanisms.

    Slow Justice Delivery: POCSO trials and cybercrime cases face long delays and low conviction rates.

    Unregulated Ed-Tech and Gaming: No clear norms for content, privacy, or addictive design in children’s apps.

    Measures NCPCR Can Initiate

    Strengthen Legal and Regulatory Framework: Recommend amendments to ensure strict age verification, child data protection, and content moderation.

    Establish Digital Child Protection Cell to track online abuse and emerging threats.

    Cyber Safety Education in schools and communities.

    Conduct periodic studies on children’s digital behaviour and risks for evidence-based policymaking.

    Build Capacity of Law Enforcement on cyber forensics and child protection laws.

    Advocate screen-time guidelines, parental supervision tools, and awareness on balanced digital habits.

    “The child is both a promise and a responsibility.” Thus, the 3R approach of Reform, Reorientation and Restructuring can enhance functioning of NCPCR as an effective Guardian of Child Rights.

    Comparison of Constitutions

  • “In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution, defeating the objectives of development.” Critically evaluate.

    Contemporary development models

    Neoliberal – privatization, and deregulation

    Technocratic Model – Data driven governance

    Donor-Driven Model

    PPP Model

    Participatory Development Model

    Decision-Making and Problem-Solving Not Close to Ground

    Centralized Policy Design, with limited input from grassroots institutions. Eg- Uniform guidelines under PMAY-Gramin

    Bureaucratic Hierarchies lead to delayed responses. Eg- delays in fund release under MGNREGA due to multi-tier approvals.

    Technocratic and Data-Centric Planning leads to exclusion of indigenous knowledge.

    Weak Decentralization – PRIs and ULBs lack fiscal and functional autonomy. Only 40% of states have functional District Planning Committees (NITI Aayog, 2022).

    Lack of Coordination – ministries and departments work in silos. Eg- Smart Cities Mission: 60% projects delayed due to poor coordination.

    Lack of Participatory democracy – Communities are treated as beneficiaries rather than partners in development.

    Political and Fiscal Centralization through centrally sponsored schemes

    Regulatory Capture – Eg- Nexus of Bureaucracy-Politicians-Corporate. (Vohra Committee)

    Counter-Argument

    73rd & 74th Constitutional Amendments empowered PRIs and ULBs for local governance and participatory planning.

    Gram Panchayat Development Plans (GPDPs) institutionalized bottom-up planning in over 2.6 lakh Panchayats.

    Aspirational Districts Programme (ADP) – Promotes data-driven local governance with district-level flexibility and real-time monitoring.

    PM Gati Shakti National Master Plan – Integrates 16 ministries on a GIS-based platform to align planning and execution at ground level.

    Mission Karmayogi – Builds capacity of field-level officials for local problem-solving and citizen-centric service delivery.

    Cooperative Federalism via NITI Aayog – Governing Council enable state-specific and local feedback-based planning.

    Community-Led Models – Swachh Bharat Mission and Jal Jeevan Mission emphasize village-level implementation and monitoring.

    State Level Measures – Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign

    Way Forward

    Capability Approach – increase spending on Health (2.5%of GDP) and Education (6% of GDP)

    Adopt Best Practices – Participatory Budgeting in porto alegre brazil

    Decentralized Governance based on principle of subsidiarity.

    “Growth becomes meaningful only when it expands human freedom and capability.” – Amartya Sen

    For this, decision-making authority and problem-solving responsibilities should be at the grassroots level.

    Social Justice

    Government Policies and Interventions for Welfare Schemes for Vulnerable Sections