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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Governance

Important aspects of Society

  • Lock, don’t shut

    Context

    Economy is a living machine — cannot be simply turned off and on. Even in lockdown, it needs to be kept alive.

    Movement of goods exempted

    • Essential and non-essential distinction removed: It is, welcome that the Centre has now exempted transportation of all goods from the lockdown’s provisions, without distinction of “essential” and “non-essential”.
    • When goods aren’t the culprit — it didn’t make sense, in any case, to allow bureaucrats and local authorities to decide what is essential and hold up trucks carrying material deemed non-essential.
    • One cannot expect officials or state border police to have intimate knowledge of production processes and inputs that go into every good, essential or otherwise.
    • The purpose of a lockdown is to minimise physical human interaction and maintain social distancing even if people have to meet.
    • Blocking movement of goods, far from achieving that objective, only results in overcrowding and snarls at check posts.

    How allowing Industrial establishment to operate matters?

    • Allowing industrial establishment to operate: There’s no reason why even industrial establishments cannot be permitted to run during the lockdown.
    • Again, it shouldn’t matter whether these units are producing essential or non-essential goods. What matters is only social distancing.
    • Right step by the Punjab government: The Punjab government has taken the right step of permitting all factories in the state to resume operations, subject to their being able to provide in-house lodging, food and medical facilities to workers and ensure no overcrowding at the plant.
    • Mass exodus could have been avoided: Most factories today, whether in Punjab, Haryana and Delhi or Maharashtra, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, are manned by migrant labourers from Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and other eastern states.
    • Had measures to retain this workforce within or close to the premises of factories been in place — instead of a blanket order to shut down — the current situation of a mass exodus of labourers and the attendant risk of COVID-19 transmission may have been avoided.
    • Difficulty in getting the labour back: It isn’t going to be easy for the closed units to get this labour back even when the lockdown ends.

    Conclusion

    • The economy needs to be kept alive: An economy is ultimately a living machine — one that cannot simply be turned off and on. Even in lockdown, it needs to be kept alive and whirring.
    • Difficulty in resumption: The danger from mechanically ordered closure of activities is that resumption becomes difficult. Rebuilding broken supply chains is easier when things are allowed to run even if at low key so that the system can respond when demand returns.
    • Lockdown is not an end in itself: Combating COVID-19 should obviously be the government’s top priority now. Lockdown is a necessary part of that strategy, but cannot be an end in itself. It is necessary primarily for social distancing, which can also be achieved without bringing the wheels of commerce to a complete halt.

  • Regulating the Private Health Sector to Eliminate COVID-19

    Context

    The current COVID-19 crisis that India is battling has brought into sharp focus the public health system’s inadequacy to cope with it.

    Contradictory scenario between public and private healthcare delivery

    • The contrast between public and private: Hospitals with state-of-the-art equipment rivalling five-star hotels in their facilities are mushrooming mostly in cities even as the overburdened public hospitals are valiantly fighting to cope. 
    • Dismal picture in rural areas: As far as the rural areas are concerned, the community health centres and primary health centres and sub-centres present an even more dismal picture in terms of availability of medicine stock, trained para-medical staff, and doctors and nurses.
    • However, it is not as if urban hospitals offer patients excellent care. A common and widely held general misperception is that the private healthcare system is better than the public one.
    • Why private is not always better? Complaints of non-transparent billing, demanding exorbitant sums in advance even in a medical emergency, and cutting corners in services are all too familiar, as are cases of the denial of services.
    • In semi-rural areas and towns, the private sector is not necessarily similar to hospitals in cities.
    • The private hospitals in these areas are small and have basic infrastructure and limited medical and non-medical staff. Unlike the cities, the power and water supply in these areas also constitute a problem to the functioning of these hospitals.

    Problems in the public healthcare system

    • Within the public sector health system, there are a number of trends again that add to the dismal picture.
    • A high number of patients: Doctors in the public hospitals deal with an overwhelming number of patients majorly from the poor and marginalised sections.
    • Issue of contractual staff: Health activists have also pointed out that the growing trend of contractual hiring of paramedical and allied staff leads to an insecurity among them, and thus affects overall caregiving to patients.
    • Consequently, the poor patients’ families, frustrated by the lack of infrastructure and services, turn their anger upon the doctors and nurses.
    • What are the implications? The constant vilification of the public hospital staff coupled with starving these hospitals of resources has led to the view that the private hospitals are “much better” despite their exorbitant rates.

    State-wise variation in healthcare

    • States subject: Health is a state subject, and it is well known that the health delivery systems are not uniform across states.
    • Kerala a role model: Kerala is often held up as a role model generally, and even now in the manner in which it has dealt with the COVID-19 crisis.
    • The dismal system in North India: As it is, certain states in North India have abysmal healthcare systems, and a couple does not have any testing facilities, the media has reported.

    Getting the private sector involved in COVID-19 testing

    • Undoubtedly, at present, the private sector must be involved in screening, tests and treatment for COVID-19.
    • The highly trained professionals in this sector can contribute enormously by helping scale up the testing efforts.
    • Importance of large-scale testing: In South Korea too, it was large-scale testing that was instrumental in reducing mortality rates.
    • The pricing issue: Services across sectors must not be priced differently at a time like this. The media has reported that there is a difference of opinion between the government and private sector on the price of COVID-19 tests flowing from the prices of test kits.
    • Need for the protocol: A clear and non-negotiable protocol for the private sector must be established regarding the present crisis and how the government is going to help financially and otherwise in dealing with it.

    Way forward

    • Regulate the testing, screening and treatment facilities: The experience with the government offering subsidies to hospitals, especially in urban areas in terms of land and other concessions, has not borne out desired objectives such as better care for the poor.
    • Taking a cue from this, the testing, screening, and treatment facilities must be regulated in terms of pricing and quality.
    • Focus on strengthening the public health system: The Supreme Court has held healthcare to be a fundamental right under Article 21. The biggest lesson of the current crisis is that political will must focus on strengthening the public health system.

    Conclusion

    The finance minister has announced a package of `1.7 lakh crore to deal with this catastrophic situation. This is welcome, but long-term resource allocation to invigorate the public health system must be a continual and parallel process.

  • Sections 269 & 270 IPC invoked against those accused of spreading COVID-19

    Sections 269 & 270 IPC invoked are being invoked against persons who malignantly do any act which is likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life.

    Sections 269 and 270 of the IPC

    • Sections 269 (negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) and 270 (malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) come under Chapter XIV of the IPC.
    • The chapter is named ‘Of Offences Affecting The Public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency and Morals’.
    • While Section 269 provides for a jail term of six months and/or fine, Section 270 provides for a jail term of two years and/or fine.
    • In Section 270, the word ‘malignantly’ indicates a deliberate intention on the part of the accused.
    • During the coronavirus outbreak, penal provisions, such as Sections 188, 269 and 270 of the IPC, are being invoked to enforce the lockdown orders in various states.

    Earlier instances of invocation

    • Both Sections have been used for over a century to punish those disobeying orders issued for containing epidemics.
    • The Sections were similarly enforced by colonial authorities during outbreaks of diseases such as smallpox and bubonic plague.

  • PM-CARES Fund

    Our PM has called for donations to the newly instituted PM-CARES Fund which has been formed on popular demand to help fight the novel coronavirus.

    PM-CARES Fund

    • The fund will be a public charitable trust under the name of ‘Prime Minister’s Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund’.
    • The PM is Chairman of this trust and members include the Defence Minister, Home Minister and Finance Minister.
    • Contributions to the fund will qualify as corporate social responsibility (CSR) spending that companies are mandated to make.
    • The Fund accepts micro-donations as well.

  • [pib] National Teleconsultation Centre (CoNTeC)

    The Union Ministry of Health & Family Welfare has launched the National Teleconsultation Centre (CoNTeC).

     About CoNTeC

    • The CoNTeC is a Telemedicine Hub established by AIIMS, New Delhi, wherein expert doctors from various clinical domains will be available 24×7 to answer the multifaceted questions from specialists from all over the country.
    • It is a multi-modal telecommunications hub through which 2 way audio-video and text communications can be undertaken from any part of the country as well as the world at large.
    • The modes of communication will include simple mobile telephony as well as two way video communications, using WhatsApp, Skype and Google Duo.
    • The CoNTeC is also fully integrated with the National Medical College Network (NMCN) to conduct a full fledged Video Conference (VC) between the 50 Medical Colleges.

    How to Contact the CoNTeC?

    • A single mobile number (+91 9115444155) can be dialled from anywhere in the coutnry/world by COVID-19 treating doctors to reach the CoNTeC which has six lines that can be used simultaneously at present.
    • This number of lines can be increased in future if needed.
    • The incoming calls will be picked up by the CoNTeC Managers, who will then handover the call to the appropriate expert doctors from the clinical domains as desired by the calling specialists managing the COVID-19 cases anywhere in the country.
    • The Managers will guide the callers in establishing a two way video call using the WhatsApp, Skype or Google Duo as preferred by the caller.
    • The callers from the NMCN network can connect anytime using the Telemedicine infrastructure at their end.

  • After the lockdown

    Context

    Lockdown announcement has not been matched by national strategy — on containing fallout for poor.

    Two arguments advanced against lockdown

    • India’s decision to lock down was necessary. Two arguments are being advanced against it.
    • The first argument: India is a poor economy, with millions at the margins of subsistence, who cannot bear the consequences of a lockdown. The density and living conditions in India make social distancing difficult in many cases.
    • The second argument: It is that the extent of community transmission does not justify such drastic measures.

    What are the justifications for the lockdown?

    • The only hope: Precisely because millions in India are vulnerable and will not later have the possibilities of quarantining or medical care, the only hope we have of securing their lives is to slow down the spread of the virus as much as possible.
    • And the only shot you have at it is when community transmission is possibly still at manageable levels.
    • There is, therefore, a bit of bad faith in using the poor as the basis for expressing scepticism at the need for a lockdown. That is the most insidious form of privilege.
    • The risks of any catastrophic spread will be even more incalculable for the poor.

    Underscoring the importance of federalism and decentralisation

    • States responding in innovative ways: One of the more encouraging things has been the way in which several state governments like Punjab, Odisha, Kerala, Delhi and others have come into their own, innovating under difficult circumstances.
    • Role of panchayat and local officials: The much-neglected panchayat and local officials are key nodes in keeping track of possible cases and the creation of quarantining infrastructure.
    • Role of frontline workers: It would also be churlish not to acknowledge the ways in which most of the frontline workers of the state are responding, learning and innovating in this situation.
    • Federalism and decentralisation: If anything, this crisis is bringing home the importance of both federalism and decentralisation as central to a resilient governance architecture.

    The preparation and follow-up of the lockdown

    • But the national preparation and follow-up to take full advantage of the lockdown do not inspire full confidence.
    • Lack of strategy: The announcement of the lockdown has not been matched by a commensurate national strategy.
    • This is manifest, in the early signals on the following two important aspects:
    • Containing the economic fallout for the poor.
    • Building up the health infrastructure.
    • It is, admittedly, early days; but the signs are not good.

    Economic fallout for the poor

    • Focus is not on the poor: In the entire framing of the problem, the poor have been at best an afterthought, at worst expendable damage.
    • Steps taken not adequate: Steps like health insurance cover for frontline workers, increased food rations, are welcome steps. But a crisis of this magnitude required assurance to the most vulnerable that no stops will be pulled to secure their futures.
    • Instead, what you got was incrementalism of the worst kind, masquerading as a big commitment.
    • Low cash transfer: The cash transfers, in particular, through different schemes, are shockingly low.
    • Need for the unprecedented social security support: This crisis is one of the rare instances where economists and even bankers, from across the political spectrum, have rallied around the intellectual argument for unprecedented levels of social security support.
    • So the government’s “support by stealth” strategy is even more mystifying.
    • Impact of lockdown on migrant labour: The magnitude of the crisis unleashed for migrant labour could have been avoided with a little forethought.
    • What could have been done? Early announcement of cash transfers, shelter and food availability, would have obviated the need for migration.

    Opacity on the health infrastructure side

    • Issue of testing: Opacity is often a consequence of scarcity. And nowhere is this more manifest than in our discussion of testing.
    • Underutilisation of capacity: Everyone understands that India has the scarce testing capacity, though it seems it is also under-utilising what it has.
    • No clear testing strategy: The government is procuring more testing kits. But what is worrying is that there seems to be no publicly articulated statement of what exactly our testing strategy is, given the scarce resources.
    • But there is still no sense of how we plan to put a testing strategy in place (not just numbers of tests, but where can they be optimally deployed), that will minimise the need for future lockdowns.
    • What objectives is it trying to meet? There is more than a whiff of suspicion that there is a view that more testing might spread more panic.
    • Or it might put more pressure on the health care system than it can handle.
    • India has never understood that health expenditure is not an expenditure; it is an investment.
    • Building up of health infrastructure: The success of the lockdown strategy is premised on an unprecedentedly vigorous building up of health infrastructure to fight the pandemic.
    • There is a commitment by the Centre to infuse an extra Rs 15,000 crore in this sector. Some steps are being taken in building up capabilities, including ramping up production of ventilators and masks.
    • Need for warlike mobilisation: This is an area where India needs almost a warlike mobilisation, to make sure we have enough testing, tracking, frontline workers, logistics and equipment in place to make sure that the duration of a lockdown is minimised or a repeat is not necessary.
    • The creation of this kind of infrastructure will pay huge dividends even in non-pandemic times.

    Conclusion

    The prime minister is constantly asking the citizens to mobilise, and most of them respond. But it about time the state mobilises: On an economic stimulus that is truly meaningful and health infrastructure push that inspires confidence.

  • Home and nation

    Context

    A 21-day lockdown is extraordinary. Government, people must come together to ensure that supply chains and social trust must not break.

    An unprecedented move

    • A 21-day nationwide lockdown: The way we conduct ourselves in these 21 days will be critical in our fight against the coronavirus.” With these words, Prime Minister announced a measure unprecedented in India’s 72-year-old history.
    • Never have the people of the country been asked to stay within the confines of their homes for this long a period, not even when the country has fought wars.
    • Yet extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures. As the PM underlined, “stringent social distancing and staying within the Lakshman Rekha of our homes is the only prevention against the coronavirus”, the only way to break its transmission cycle.

    Challenges and consequences

    • There will be social and economic consequences and the PM did not equivocate on the challenges. He spoke of the vulnerable sections, and, as in last week’s speech, emphasised the imperative to be compassionate.
    • He lauded the frontline workers, doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers, expressed gratitude to safai karamcharis and praised the private sector and civil society.
    • A reworked social compact — more compassionate — will be necessary to confront the challenges posed by the lockdown.
    • It is now up to civil society, government agencies, the healthcare and corporate sectors to take their cues from the PM’s speech and ensure that the burden of fighting the pandemic does not fall too heavily on those at the margins, the migrant and daily wage labourers, the rickshaw pullers and others for whom these 21 days could prove to be the toughest.
    • Centre and state to work together: The Centre and state governments will need to work together, setting aside their political differences, to ensure that there is no shortage of essential commodities and the supply chains are not broken.

    Measures to mitigate the impact

    • Earlier in the day, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had announced a slew of measures that could soften the blow of a 21-day lockdown.
    • The deadline for filing of income taxes for the financial year 2018-19 has been extended, as has the last date for filing GST returns.
    • Sitharaman also announced that the threshold for taking companies through the insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings has been increased from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 1 crore.
    • This will prevent creditors from taking small and medium-sized companies, who may be facing temporary cash flow management issues due to the lockdown, and hence are unable to meet their obligations, through the IBC process.
    • The Centre has also advised state governments to transfer funds to construction workers from the cess fund collected by the labour welfare boards.

    Conclusion

    As the PM said, “21 days is a long period”. It’s now up to the authorities and the people to own and implement his message — to ensure that not just supply chains, but also social trust, isn’t broken.

  • Legal Provisions Used By Law Enforcement Agencies To Control The Spread Of Coronavris

    To enforce a full lockdown to contain the spread of COVID-19, law enforcement agencies have taken the help of various legal provisions in CrPC and IPC.

    • The orders issued to curb the spread of the coronavirus have been framed under the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, which lays down punishment as per Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
    • Similarly, Sections 269 and 270 IPC are being invoked against persons who malignantly do any act which is likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life.

      Sections 269 and 270 of the IPC

      • Sections 269 (negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) and 270 (malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) come under Chapter XIV of the IPC.
      • The chapter is named ‘Of Offences Affecting The Public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency and Morals’.
      • While Section 269 provides for a jail term of six months and/or fine, Section 270 provides for a jail term of two years and/or fine.
      • In Section 270, the word ‘malignantly’ indicates a deliberate intention on the part of the accused.
      • During the coronavirus outbreak, penal provisions, such as Sections 188, 269 and 270 of the IPC, are being invoked to enforce the lockdown orders in various states.

      Earlier instances of invocation

      • Both Sections have been used for over a century to punish those disobeying orders issued for containing epidemics.
      • The Sections were similarly enforced by colonial authorities during outbreaks of diseases such as smallpox and bubonic plague.

    What is Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code?

    • Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, provides penalties for disobeying any regulation or order made under the Act.
    • These are according to Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant).
    • It is not necessary that the offender should intend to produce harm, or contemplate his disobedience as likely to produce harm.
    • It is sufficient that he knows of the order which he disobeys, and that his disobedience produces, or is likely to produce, harm.

    What happens if you violate the lockdown orders? 

    Under Section 188, there two offences:

    1) Disobedience to an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant, If such disobedience causes obstruction, annoyance or injury to persons lawfully employed

    Punishment: Simple Imprisonment for 1 month or fine of Rs 200 or both

    2) If such disobedience causes danger to human life, health or safety, etc.

    Punishment: Simple Imprisonment for 6 months or fine of Rs 1000 or both

    According to the First Schedule of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, both offences are cognizable, bailable, and can be tried by any magistrate.

    Triable By: Any Magis­trate

     

  • AYUSH Health-Wellness Centres

    What is the news: The Union Cabinet has approved the inclusion of AYUSH Health and Wellness Centre (AYUSH HWC) component of Ayushman Bharat in the National AYUSH Mission (NAM).

    • A total of 12,500 Ayush health and wellness centres throughout the country will be operationalised within a period of five years.
    • The implementation of the proposal will establish a holistic wellness model based on Ayush principles and practices focusing on preventive promotive, curative, rehabilitative and palliative healthcare by integration with the existing public health care system.

    Why such a move?

    • The move is aimed at establishing a holistic wellness model based on AYUSH principles and practices focusing on preventive, promotive, curative, rehabilitative and palliative healthcare by integration with the existing public health care system.
    • The National Health Policy 2017 has advocated mainstreaming the potential of AYUSH systems (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sows-rigpa and Homoeopathy) within a pluralistic system of Integrative healthcare.
    • The vision of the proposal is to establish a holistic wellness model based on AYUSH principles and practices, to empower masses for ‘self care’ to reduce the disease burden and out of pocket expenditure and to provide informed choice of the needy public.

    What is National AYUSH Mission (NAM)?

    • Department of AYUSH, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India has launched National AYUSH Mission (NAM) during 12th Plan for im­plementing through States/UTs.
    • The basic objective of NAM is to promote AYUSH medical systems through cost effective AYUSH services, strengthening of educational systems, facilitate the enforcement of quality control of ASU &H drugs and sustainable availability of ASU & H raw-materials.
    • It envisages flexibility of implementation of the programmes which will lead to substantial participation of the State Governments/UT.
    • The NAM contemplates establishment of a National Mission as well as corresponding Missions in the State level.

  • Need for re-orientation

    Context

    State universities will have to deliver more to the State where they are located

    Status of the state universities in India

    • Significance of state universities: Out of about a thousand higher education institutions (HEIs) that are authorised to award degrees in India, about 400 are state public universities.
      • These state universities produce over 90% of our graduates (including those from the colleges affiliated to them) and contribute to about one-third of the research publications from this country.
    • Poor quality: That their quality and performance is poor in most cases is accepted as a given today.
      • It is evidenced by their poor performance in institutional rankings,
      • the poor employment status of their students,
      • rather poor quality of their publications,
      • negligible presence in national-level policy/decision-making bodies,
      • poor track record in receiving national awards and recognition, poor share in research funding and so on.
    • Stated reasons for poor performance– Commonly stated reasons for these observations include government/political interference in the management of the university, lack of autonomy, poor governance structures, corruption, poor quality of teachers, outdated curricula, plagiarism, poor infrastructure and facilities, overcrowding, evils of the “affiliation” system and poor linkages with alumni and industry.
      • Symptoms of the problem: While many of these observations are no doubt valid, they appear to be only the symptoms and consequences of some deeper malaise and not the underlying cause.

    Core causative factors for the poor state of state universities

    • Lack of support: State universities are not supported the way Central universities are supported by the Central government as well as given patronage by the section of society.
      • It is as though State-level players do not have much stake in the stability and performance of the State university system.
      • What could be the reason for lack of support? One reason why State-level players do not feel compelled to back the State university system more strongly could be that the latter does not commit itself to anything that may be of particular interest and value to the State where the university is located.
    • What could be the solution? In order to receive much more funding and support from the State system then, State universities would have to commit to delivering lots more to the State and its people where they are located.
      • New vision and programmes: They must come up with a new vision and programmes specifically addressing the needs of the State, its industry, economy and society, and on the basis of it make the State-level players commit to providing full ownership and support to them.

    Conclusion

    The initiative to start a larger dialogue on the future of our State universities would have to be taken primarily by the academic community of these institutions.