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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • British-era Act invoked to Block Internet in Punjab

    Introduction

    • The Union government invoked its authority under a colonial-era Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services Rules, 2017 to suspend mobile Internet in select districts of Punjab during Farm Protests 2.0.

    Mechanisms allowing Internet Shut-downs

    Authorities Purpose
    Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017 Home Departments in the states, state government review committee, central government (under this law, but rarely used) Enforces shutdowns for public emergency or safety reasons.
    Section 144 of the CrPC Local law enforcement authorities Enables shutdowns, particularly before 2017, to maintain public order and safety.
    The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Section 5(2) Home Secretary of the Union or state governments Allows blocking of messaging during a public emergency, safeguarding public safety, or protecting sovereignty and integrity.

     

    Constitutional Provisions for Right to Internet

    Constitutional Provision Explanation
    Anuradha Bhasin vs. Union of India and Ors. (2020) Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a) Grants the right to freedom of speech and expression, which encompasses access to information and the Internet.
    Faheema Shirin RK vs. State of Kerala and others (2019) Right to Education under Article 21A Guarantees the right to education for children aged 6 to 14;

    Internet access is crucial for modern education.
    K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy) vs. Union of India (2017) Right to Privacy under Article 21 Protects the fundamental right to privacy, and Internet access is often used for secure communication.
    Anuradha Bhasin vs. Union of India and Ors. Freedom to Practice Any Profession or Carry on Any Trade, Business, or Occupation under Article 19(1)(g) Ensures the freedom to conduct various trades, businesses, and professions, often requiring Internet access.

    Landmark Precedence: Anuradha Bhasin Judgment (2020)

    • Supreme Court’s Ruling: In January 2020, the Supreme Court of India recognized access to the Internet as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution.
    • Restrictions Guidelines: The Court mandated that any government-imposed Internet restrictions must be temporary, limited, lawful, necessary, and proportionate. It also emphasized judicial review.

  • Rescuing grace from disgrace

    Full text: President Murmu's address to Parliament's Budget Session - Rediff.com

    Central Idea:

    The article discusses the tradition of presidential and gubernatorial addresses to Parliament and Legislative Assemblies in India, highlighting the ceremonial and ritualistic nature of these events. It emphasizes the need for reform to streamline these addresses, suggesting a shift towards shorter, more concise speeches akin to the British practice, to save time and enhance efficiency in legislative proceedings.

    Key Highlights:

    • Presidential and gubernatorial addresses in India are steeped in tradition, characterized by elaborate ceremonies and rituals.
    • The speeches are drafted by the government of the day, with little involvement from the heads of state, leading to lengthy and sometimes tiresome readings.
    • Past presidents like R. Venkataraman and K.R. Narayanan exhibited meticulousness in reviewing draft speeches, suggesting improvements that were generally accepted.
    • Similar experiences were observed at the state level, with governors making suggestions for changes to their addresses, sometimes leading to unexpected challenges.
    • The article reflects on instances of political civility, where suggested changes were acknowledged and accommodated, despite time constraints.
    • Despite the ceremonial nature of these addresses, controversy and turbulence in legislative assemblies have been on the rise, fueled by accusations and counter-accusations.
    • The root cause of the problem lies in the disconnect between the writers and readers of these speeches, raising questions about ownership and relevance.
    • The author proposes adopting a more concise format for these addresses, similar to the British model, to refocus attention on legislative business and mitigate political polarization.

    Key Challenges:

    • Resistance from governments accustomed to using these addresses as platforms to showcase their achievements and plans.
    • Convincing stakeholders about the efficacy of shifting towards shorter, more focused speeches.
    • Overcoming entrenched traditions and resistance to change within the political system.
    • Balancing the ceremonial aspects of these addresses with the need for efficiency and relevance in legislative proceedings.
    • Addressing political polarization between central and state governments, which may hinder collaborative efforts towards reform.

    Main terms for answer quality enhancement:

    • Presidential address
    • Gubernatorial address
    • Ceremonial
    • Ritualistic
    • Legislative proceedings
    • Political polarization
    • Tradition
    • Efficiency
    • Reform

    Important Phrases:

    • “Land of largely unquestioned custom, ceremonials, and rituals”
    • “Suggesting changes by them difficult”
    • “Saving of time and the avoiding of tedium”
    • “Political civility”
    • “Root of the problem”
    • “Ornament of convention”
    • “Collective body of legislators”
    • “Innovative and self-denying Chief Minister”

    Quotes:

    • “When I am asked to read these Addresses, I feel like saying ‘Rashtrapati Bhavan’ and sitting down!” – R. Venkataraman
    • “The speech was not mine, it was yours.” – Unnamed speaker to Nitish Kumar
    • “Who Owns that Speech?” – Professor A.R. Venkatachalapathy

    Anecdotes:

    • R. Venkataraman’s meticulous review of draft speeches, despite tight timeframes.
    • Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee’s prompt action to rectify an oversight in a gubernatorial address.
    • The Governor of Bihar officiating a seamless legislative ceremony, earning appreciation from the Chief Minister.

    Useful Statements for critical approach in answer writing:

    • “The root of the problem lies in the foundational dichotomy of one agency writing the speech and another reading it.”
    • “Presidents and Governors will, I think, be relieved with such a rearrangement.”
    • “It will take an innovative and self-denying Chief Minister to start the reform to rescue a custom, ceremony, and ritual of grace from disgrace.”

    Examples and References:

    • Instances of past presidents and governors suggesting changes to draft speeches, with varying degrees of acceptance and acknowledgment.
    • Comparison with the British practice of brief, outline-focused speeches by the head of state.

    Facts and Data:

    • Terms of past presidents and governors mentioned in the article (e.g., R. Venkataraman, K.R. Narayanan).
    • References to specific events, such as the oversight in printing a gubernatorial address.

    Critical Analysis:

    • The article presents a nuanced critique of the ceremonial nature of presidential and gubernatorial addresses, highlighting inefficiencies and challenges.
    • It underscores the importance of streamlining these addresses to enhance legislative efficiency and mitigate political polarization.
    • The proposed reform aligns with the need for modernization and adaptation within the Indian political system.

    Way Forward:

    • Advocate for collaborative efforts among stakeholders to initiate reform and streamline the process of presidential and gubernatorial addresses.
    • Emphasize the benefits of shorter, more focused speeches in enhancing legislative efficiency and relevance.
    • Encourage political leaders to prioritize the collective interests of legislators and citizens over traditional ceremonies and rituals.

  • Governor’s Address: Insights from R. Venkataraman’s Perspective

     Introduction

    • The recent episode in the Tamil Nadu Assembly, where Governor R.N. Ravi declined to deliver the customary address, has reignited debates surrounding the significance of the Governor’s Address.
    • He actually walked out in response to an insult of National Anthem in TN Assembly.

    President’s/Governor’s Address

    • Constitutional mandate: Articles 87 and 176 of the Constitution confer authority upon the President and Governor, respectively, to address the legislature.
    • Occasions for Address: The addresses are reserved for two specific occasions: the commencement of a new legislative session post-election and the inauguration of the annual legislative session.
    • Significance: Termed the President’s or Governor’s Address, these speeches are pivotal for initiating legislative proceedings.

    Governor’s Address to the State Legislature: A Constitutional Obligation

    • Prescribed Duties: Article 176 delineates the Governor’s obligation to address the Legislative Assembly at the onset of each legislative year and post-general elections, with both Houses convened if a Legislative Council exists.
    • Procedural Norms: Established rules govern the time allocated for deliberating the address’s contents, ensuring parliamentary discourse.

    Global Parallels: Similar Practices across Democracies

    • Cross-National Comparison: Analogous provisions are observed in democratic nations worldwide.
    • State of the Union: In the United States, it manifests as the “State of the Union” address (1790), while in the United Kingdom, it is the Queen’s Speech (1536), heralding the parliamentary year’s commencement.
    • Indian Context: India’s Presidential Address mirrors the British model, reflecting the ceremonial role of the President, a sentiment echoed during the Constitution’s framing by Dr. B R Ambedkar.

    Features of the Address Content

    [A] Address Content: Proposals and Achievements

    • Legislative Agenda: The President’s or Governor’s speech encapsulates legislative proposals and government policy initiatives, coupled with a retrospective glance at previous accomplishments.
    • Government Input: Inputs for this address are curated from various government ministries, embodying the administration’s agenda.

    [B] Authorship and Agency: Government Responsibility

    • Constitutional Mandate: Governed by constitutional mandate, both the President and Governor are obligated to adhere to the Cabinet’s advice (1950) in their functions, including address preparation.
    • Policy Reflection: Hence, the address is meticulously crafted by the government, serving as a reflection of its policy stance.

    [C] Flexibility vs. Normative Adherence: Presidential/Governor Discretion

    • Adherence to Protocol: While refusal to deliver the address is impermissible, deviations from the prepared script are permissible.
    • Instances of Departure: Instances of Governors veering off the scripted path have transpired, although such actions remain rare for Presidents.

    Judicial Pronouncement: Upholding Constitutional Framework

    • Legal Precedent: The Supreme Court, in Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1975), underscored the President’s (or Governor’s) adherence to Cabinet advice across functions.
    • Contested Discretion: While discretion to modify the speech is contested, any departure from parliamentary norms may invoke debate.

    R. Venkataraman’s Perspective

    • Venkataraman’s Critique: R. Venkataraman, who served as President from 1987 to 1992, vehemently opposed the practice of Presidential and Governor’s addresses, deeming it a “British anachronism” and a “meaningless formality.”
    • Calls for Constitutional Amendment: Venkataraman repeatedly urged PM Rajiv Gandhi and Chandra Shekher to abolish this tradition through a Constitutional amendment, emphasizing its lack of relevance and inherent biases.

    Perceptions of the Address

    • Government’s Voice: Venkataraman viewed the address as a mere reflection of the ruling regime’s perspectives, rendering Presidents and Governors mere “mouthpieces” devoid of independent expression.
    • Controversies and Criticism: He expressed dismay over controversies surrounding Governors’ addresses in states like Maharashtra and West Bengal, condemning the opposition’s heckling of figures like Governor Nurul Hasan.
    • Symbolic Adjustments: Venkataraman, in presenting his maiden Presidential address in 1988, advocated for subtle changes like replacing “My government” with “The government,” aligning with India’s constitutional ethos framed by the people.
    • Legacy of British Colonialism: He underscored the incongruity of retaining British-era conventions in India’s democratic framework, emphasizing the need for symbolic adjustments to reflect the nation’s sovereignty.

    Conclusion

    • Symbol of Governance: The tradition of Presidential and Governor’s addresses, rooted in constitutional mandate, and symbolizes the fusion of ceremonial protocol with legislative functionality.
    • Executive-Legislative Nexus: As integral components of democratic governance, these addresses underscore the synergy between executive authority and parliamentary accountability, while navigating the delicate balance between tradition and evolving norms.

  • States do not violate Constitution in appointment of Deputy CM: Supreme Court

    Introduction

    • The Supreme Court recently dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of Deputy Chief Ministers in States, stating that the position does not breach the Constitution.
    • Despite lacking constitutional backing, Deputy CM play significant roles in state governments, raising questions about their powers, significance, and concerns.

    What is the Deputy CM Position?

    • Constitutional Status: Unlike the Vice President of India, the Deputy CM post is political rather than constitutional.
    • Origin: The post traces back to the Deputy PM position established in 1947 post-independence, leading to the evolution of Deputy CM roles in states.
    • Appointment and Tenure: Deputy CMs are appointed and removed at the discretion of the Chief Minister, who may appoint multiple Deputy CMs.
    • Historical Context: Anugrah Narayan Sinha of Bihar was the first Deputy CM post-Independence, with 12 states in India having Deputy CMs as of July 2023.

    Powers and Responsibilities

    • Rank and Pay: Deputy CMs hold a rank equivalent to cabinet ministers, receiving similar pays and perks.
    • Portfolio Allocation: They are entrusted with portfolios, although typically smaller in scale compared to the Chief Minister.
    • Financial Powers: Deputy CMs hold no specific financial authority, requiring approval from the Chief Minister for expenditures exceeding allocated budgets.
    • Administrative Role: They facilitate governance and administration, acting as a bridge between the ruling party and its allies.

    Significance of Deputy CMs

    • Political Stability: Deputy CMs contribute to coalition government stability by bridging gaps between ruling parties and allies, reducing incidents of anti-defection.
    • Representation and Trust: Their presence ensures better representation of communities, fostering public trust in governance.
    • Succession and Accountability: Deputy CMs serve as potential successors to the Chief Minister, promoting transparency and accountability in government.

    Concerns and Suggestions

    • Lack of Constitutional Backing: Raises concerns about role ambiguity and potential exploitation by Chief Ministers.
    • Multiplicity of Appointments: No limit on the number of Deputy CMs can lead to appeasement and governance complexities.
    • Complexity in Governance: Overlapping roles with cabinet ministers may complicate governance and administration.

    Future Perspectives

    • Clarity and Limitations: Need for a defined role and limitations for Deputy CMs to simplify governance structures.
    • Political Literacy: Enhancing awareness among citizens about the role and function of Deputy CMs is essential for informed governance.

  • Supreme Court’s Inquiry into Amending the Preamble

    preamble

    Introduction

    • A public interest litigation filed by former Rajya Sabha MP Dr. Subramanian Swamy seeks to delete the words “Socialist” & “Secular” from the Preamble to the Constitution of India.
    • The case questions the validity of the insertion of these words via the 42nd Constitution Amendment of 1976 during Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s tenure.
    • It argues that the amendment was beyond the amending power of the Parliament under Article 368.

    Why discuss Preamble?

    • Original Draft: The Preamble was adopted on November 26, 1949, by the Constituent Assembly of India, setting out the Constitution’s guiding purpose and principles.
    • 1976 Amendment: The 42nd Constitution Amendment introduced the words “Socialist” and “Secular” to the Preamble, altering its initial declaration.
    • Legal Implications: The insertion faces scrutiny over its legality and alignment with the Constitution’s foundational principles.

    Amending the Preamble

    • Judicial Inquiry: During the hearing, Justice Datta remarked on the amendability of the Preamble. He pondered if the Preamble could have been amended earlier (by the 42nd Amendment Act in 1976) to include the words Socialist and Secular while retaining the date of adoption (November 29, 1949).
    • Discussion on Academic Grounds: The judge prompted counsels to consider, academically, the feasibility of amending the Preamble while preserving its original adoption date.
    • Historical Context: Justice Datta noted that the Preamble, unique with its specified adoption date, underwent changes, but the inclusion of “Socialist” and “Secular” was a notable amendment.
    • Legal Challenge: The petition challenges the constitutionality of the insertion, arguing that it contradicts the Constitution’s original intent and undermines the citizens’ right to choose their political ideologies.
    • Kesavananda Bharti Precedent: The inquiry draws upon the landmark Kesavananda Bharti case (1973) where the Supreme Court held that the Preamble was an integral part of the Constitution and subject to amendment, provided it didn’t violate the Constitution’s basic structure.

    Addition of “Socialist” and “Secular”

    • The 42nd Amendment: During the Emergency imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1976, the terms “socialist” and “secular” were added to the Preamble through The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976.
    • Indira Gandhi’s Agenda: Indira Gandhi’s government aimed to emphasize a socialist and pro-poor image, aligning with slogans such as “garibi hatao” (Eradicate poverty). The addition of “socialist” highlighted socialism as a fundamental goal of the Indian state.
    • Distinctive Indian Socialism: The Indian version of socialism did not endorse complete nationalization but emphasized selective nationalization of essential sectors.

    Understanding “Secular”

    • Religious Diversity: India is home to diverse religious beliefs and practices. The term “secular” was added to the Preamble to promote unity and fraternity among people of various faiths.
    • State Neutrality: Secularism in the Indian context implies that the state maintains neutrality and impartiality towards all religions. It does not favor any particular religion as a “state religion.”
    • Secularism as Law: Articles 25-28 of the Constitution secure the secular nature of the Indian state.
    • Inherent in the Constitution: The philosophy of secularism was inherent in the Constitution even before the 42nd Amendment.

    Debates Surrounding “Socialist” and “Secular”

    • Consensus on Secularism: The concept of secularism was already part of the Constitution’s philosophy. The insertion of the word “secular” in the Preamble simply made explicit what was implicit in various provisions.
    • Constituent Assembly Discussions: The Constituent Assembly debated including these words in the Preamble but decided against it.
    • Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’s Perspective: Dr. B. R. Ambedkar argued that issues related to the state’s policy, organization, and economic aspects should be determined by the people, not dictated by the Constitution itself.
    • Ongoing Debates: Over the years, there have been petitions and discussions regarding the removal of “socialist” and “secular” from the Preamble. Some argue that these terms were added arbitrarily during the Emergency.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s inquiry into the amendment of the Preamble reflects a critical examination of constitutional principles.
    • The case raises fundamental questions about the scope of parliamentary amending power and the preservation of constitutional integrity.
    • The outcome of this legal challenge will have significant implications for the interpretation of the Constitution’s core values and the balance of power between Parliament and the judiciary.

  • Supreme Court’s Deliberation on Sub-Classification of Scheduled Castes

    Introduction

    • The Supreme Court’s recent deliberation on the sub-classification of Scheduled Castes (SC) within India’s reservation system raises questions about the balance of power between states and the Parliament.
    • This highlights the socio-economic implications of such sub-classification.

    Who are the Scheduled Castes?

     

    • Scheduled Castes (SC) represent an administrative classification that encompasses various castes, including both touchable and untouchable groups, consolidated for preferential treatment purposes.
    • This classification fails to acknowledge the internal distinctions among the castes grouped together under the SC category.
    • Despite reservations, the pre-existing internal differences among the listed Scheduled Castes persist, posing challenges to effective upliftment measures.
    • Constitutional Provisions:
    1. Article 341 of the Indian Constitution empowers the President to designate specific castes and classes as Scheduled Castes within states or union territories.
    2. Article 342 allows Parliament to include or exclude castes or tribes from this list. It elaborates on the term “Scheduled Castes,” encompassing castes, races, or tribes, or their subsets, as specified under Article 341.
    3. Parliament: Inclusion or exclusion of any group from these lists is done through legislation by the Parliament.

    Quest for Sub-Classification: SC Bench’s Examination

    • Questioning Tinkering with the List: Justice B.R. Gavai queries whether state-level preferential allotment to certain sub-castes affects the parliamentary power to manage the Presidential list.
    • Dismissal of “Balkanisation” Argument: The Bench dismisses concerns that sub-classification would lead to fragmentation of the SC list.
    • Argument for Homogeneity: Senior advocate Manoj Swarup argues that SCs form a homogeneous group and preferential treatment would perpetuate inequality.
    • Justice Gavai’s Counter: Justice Gavai challenges this view, highlighting the need for the upliftment of particularly backward groups within SCs.

    Why discuss this?

    [A] Socio-Economic Implications

    • Equality and Empowerment: Justice Vikram Nath underscores the aim of sub-classification as uplifting backward groups within SCs.
    • Ensuring Fairness: Justice Gavai emphasizes that preferential treatment should not exclude other deserving candidates from access to opportunities.

    [B] Political and Societal Considerations

    • Potential for Political Appeasement: Concerns raised about states using sub-classification for political gains and electoral advantage.
    • Judicial Review and Empirical Basis: Justice Gavai highlights the role of High Courts in scrutinizing state decisions based on empirical data.

    Why is the Sub-Classification needed?

    • Addressing Inequalities: Graded inequalities persist among SC communities, with some having limited access to services.
    • Disproportionate Representation: Certain sub-castes lack fair representation in employment and education due to current discrimination policies.
    • Overcoming Hierarchies: SCs vary socio-economically, with some progressing while others still face disadvantages.
    • Facilitating Mobility: Current policies hinder uniform benefits, leading to competition. Sub-categorization can aid in political empowerment and education.
    • Ensuring Justice: Targeted approaches are needed to address specific vulnerabilities within SC sub-groups.
    • Equitable Distribution: Sub-categorization prevents benefits from concentrating in certain groups, promoting fair resource allocation.

    Challenges Associated

    • Inequality: Sub-categorization may not effectively address disparities within Scheduled Castes, per recommendations from the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST), highlighting the need for existing schemes to reach the most backward communities first.
    • Federalism Issue: While a 2004 Supreme Court ruling barred states from unilaterally sub-categorizing SC lists, a 2020 judgment indicated states could decide benefit allocations within these lists, pending review by a larger Bench.
    • Identification Criteria Complexity: Determining sub-categorization criteria, as highlighted in judgments like State of Kerala v N M Thomas (1976) and E V Chinnaiah (2005), presents challenges in defining SCs due to socio-economic complexities.
    • Data Accuracy Challenge: Obtaining accurate socio-economic data for SC communities is difficult, hindering decision-making on caste categorizations and allocations.
    • Intra-group Disputes Risk: Sub-categorization may create internal divisions within SC communities, potentially exacerbating tensions as groups compete for affirmative action.
    • Fragmentation Risk: Sub-categorization could fragment the SC community, diluting their political and social identity, and weakening their collective advocacy for rights, as per concerns raised.

    Chief Justice’s Perspective

    • Artificial Backward Class Creation: Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasizes the need for states to demonstrate objective criteria, like lack of representation, for sub-classification.
    • High Court Review: Asserts that High Courts can review state decisions to ensure fairness and adherence to constitutional principles.

    Way Forward

    • Legal Options: Explore legal avenues like a constitutional amendment for sub-categorization, leveraging existing provisions like Article 16(4).
    • Data Collection: Enhance data collection on socio-economic status through a caste-based census to inform policy formulation.
    • Creamy Layer Concept: Apply the “creamy layer” concept within SCs to ensure fair allocation of benefits based on income eligibility.
    • Transparent Criteria: Develop transparent criteria for sub-categorization, considering socio-economic status, education, and regional disparities.
    • Balanced Approach: Strike a balance between recognizing diversity within SCs and maintaining unity, ensuring policies address specific needs without fragmenting the community.

    Conclusion

    • As the case awaits judgment, the need for a nuanced approach that balances legal principles with social justice imperatives remains paramount.

  • In news: Appointment of Election Commissioner

    Introduction

    • The impending retirement of Election Commissioner Anup Chandra Pandey on February 14 signals a significant shift in India’s electoral procedures.
    • For the first time, his successor will be selected through a consultative process, departing from past practices of government discretion as per the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

    EC Appointments: Judicial Imperative

    • Supreme Court Intervention: In March 2023, the Supreme Court intervened to address the longstanding legislative gap surrounding the appointment of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs).
    • Emphasis on Independence: The Court emphasized the need for an independent Election Commission, paralleling other constitutional bodies with autonomous appointment mechanisms.

    CEC and EC Appointment Act, 2023: Key Provisions

    • Appointment Process: The Law establishes a Selection Committee comprising the Prime Minister, Union Cabinet Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition or the largest opposition party’s leader in the Lok Sabha.
    • Eligibility and Conditions: Eligible candidates must have held or hold positions equivalent to the Secretary to the central government, with salary parity to the Cabinet Secretary.
    • Removal Mechanism: The Law outlines the removal process, retaining the constitutional provision for the CEC’s removal akin to a Supreme Court Judge and ECs’ removal upon the CEC’s recommendation.

    Appointment of the CEC and ECs: Present Mechanism

    [A] Constitutional Provisions:

    • Part XV (Elections) of the Constitution outlines Articles 324-329, governing electoral processes.
    • The Constitution does not prescribe a specific legislative procedure for appointing the CEC and ECs.
    • Article 324 vests the responsibility of overseeing elections in an Election Commission comprising the CEC and other ECs, as determined by the President.
    • President appoints them based on the Union Council of Ministers’ advice, led by the Prime Minister.
    • Law Minister proposes suitable candidates to the Prime Minister, who advises the President on the appointments.

    [B] Removal:

    • Commissioners have the liberty to resign or be removed before completing their term.
    • The removal process for the CEC mirrors that of a Supreme Court judge, necessitating parliamentary action.
    • Removal of any other EC can only occur upon the CEC’s recommendation.

    Current Challenges and Concerns

    • Transparency and Independence: Concerns arise over the potential monopolization of the Selection Committee by ruling party members, undermining diversity and independence.
    • Executive Influence: Equating the salary of Election Commissioners with that of executive officials raises apprehensions regarding government influence.
    • Eligibility Criteria: Restricting eligibility to civil servants may limit diversity and expertise within the Election Commission.
    • Lack of Parity: Disparities in the removal process between the CEC and ECs raise questions about fairness and institutional autonomy.

    Way forward

    • Safeguarding Independence: Upholding the integrity and independence of the Election Commission remains paramount, necessitating robust oversight mechanisms.
    • Addressing Concerns: Mitigating concerns surrounding transparency, executive influence, and eligibility criteria is essential to foster public trust and confidence.
    • Continued Judicial Vigilance: Ongoing judicial oversight is crucial to ensure the effective implementation of electoral reforms and uphold democratic principles.

    Conclusion

    • The transition towards a consultative process for appointing Election Commissioners reflects a significant milestone in India’s electoral governance.
    • While the reform bill marks a commendable step towards enhancing transparency and inclusivity, addressing current challenges and safeguarding institutional independence will be pivotal in fostering public trust and strengthening democratic institutions.

  • Uttarakhand UCC dares Right to Form ‘Intimate Associations’

    Introduction

    • The recent enactment of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in Uttarakhand, specifically addressing live-in relationships, has sparked debates concerning individual freedom and state intervention.

    What are Intimate Associations?

    • It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects.
    • This includes family relationships and other deep, personal connections that are important to individuals.

    Uttarakhand UCC on Intimate Associations

    • State Oversight: Section 381 of Uttarakhand’s common civil code mandates individuals intending to enter a live-in relationship to submit a “joint statement” before a Registrar, subjecting their intimate associations to state monitoring.
    • Regulatory Measures: The Registrar is empowered to conduct an “enquiry” to determine the legitimacy of the relationship, infringing on the privacy of consenting adults.
    • Registration Requirement: Couples must obtain a “registration certificate” from the State authority, imposing bureaucratic hurdles on the exercise of personal choice.
    • Scope of Freedom: The freedom to choose a partner and enjoy their society is integral to personal autonomy and individual liberty, safeguarded under Article 19(c) of the Constitution.

    Major Judgments upholding Intimate Associations

    Key Takeaway
    Lata Singh vs. State of UP (2006) Directed protection for inter-caste and inter-religious couples from harassment and violence.
    S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal & Anr. (2010) Declared sexual relations between consenting adults outside marriage as legal and within the right to privacy.
    Naz Foundation vs. Government of NCT of Delhi (2009) Decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults, declaring Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code as a violation of rights.
    Joseph Shine vs. Union of India (2018) Decriminalized adultery and declared it a violation of the rights to equality, dignity, privacy, and autonomy.
    Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India (2018) Affirmed the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals to express their sexual orientation and identity with dignity.
    Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M. (2018) Upheld the right to marry a person of one’s choice regardless of religion or caste, nullifying the annulment of a Hindu-Muslim marriage.
    Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India (2018) Condemned honour killings and violence against inter-caste and inter-religious couples, issuing guidelines for prevention and protection.
    Supriyo versus Union of India (2023) Refers to how State should not interfere with the freedom of consenting adults to form legitimate “intimate associations”.

    Critique of State Intervention

    • Infringement on Privacy: The UCC’s intrusive provisions undermine the autonomy and privacy of individuals by subjecting their relationships to state scrutiny.
    • Restriction on Freedom: Imposing regulatory requirements on live-in relationships contradicts established principles of personal liberty and restricts the exercise of fundamental rights.
    • Potential Discrimination: State interference in intimate matters risks perpetuating discrimination and infringing on the rights of consenting adults to form relationships of their choice.

    Arguments in Favor of such Associations

    • Fundamental Rights: Denying individuals the right to choose their partners violates fundamental rights and equality.
    • Union Recognition: Diverse couples lack legal recognition and access to marital rights and protections.
    • Promotion of Equality: Legalizing diverse relationships reduces discrimination and fosters inclusivity.
    • Positive Impact: Recognizing diverse unions positively impacts mental health and societal acceptance.
    • Secularism: Recognizing diverse relationships aligns with democratic principles and equality.

    Arguments Against

    • Preservation of Norms: Altering traditional marriage norms challenges societal expectations.
    • Cultural Preservation: Diverse relationships may conflict with cultural or religious beliefs.
    • Social Impact: Concerns exist regarding family structures and societal cohesion.
    • Legal Complexity: Legalizing diverse unions may introduce legal uncertainties and disputes.
    • Social Stigma: Societal stigma and discrimination persist against diverse relationships.

    Way Forward

    • Advocacy: Continued advocacy for rights and societal acceptance of diverse relationships.
    • Policy Reforms: Push for policy reforms to recognize and protect the rights of individuals.
    • Support Services: Offer counseling and support services to address stigma and legal challenges.
    • Community Building: Create safe spaces and support networks for individuals in diverse relationships.

    Conclusion

    • As debates continue, it is essential to strike a balance between regulatory measures and the protection of constitutional freedoms, fostering a society that values diversity and respects individual autonomy.

    Try this PYQ:

    Which Article of the Constitution of India safeguards one’s right to marry the person of one’s choice? (CSP 2019)

    (a) Article 19

    (b) Article 21

    (c) Article 25

    (d) Article 29

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”evnjpjihpe” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

  • Election Symbols Issue in Maharashtra

    Introduction

    • A faction within a political party led by the Maharashtra Deputy CM has been officially recognized as the legitimate group by the Election Commission of India retaining its election symbol.

    Also read:

    How are Symbols allotted to Political Parties in India?

    Election Symbol and its Significance

    • Electoral Impact: Election symbols play a crucial role in shaping the electoral fortunes of political parties, influencing voter perception and identification.
    • Transparency Concerns: The current system of symbol allotment warrants review to ensure transparency and fairness in the electoral process.

    EC’s Powers in Symbol Disputes

    • Legal Framework: Para 15 of the Symbols Order, 1968, empowers the ECI to adjudicate disputes arising from splits within political parties.
    • Test of Majority: The ECI conducts a test of majority, considering all available facts and circumstances, to determine the legitimate faction.
    • Binding Decision: The decision of the ECI is binding on all rival sections or groups emerged after the split, applicable to recognized national and state parties.

    Historical Precedents

    • Pre-1968 Era: Before the Symbols Order, 1968, the ECI addressed disputes through notifications and executive orders under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.
    • High-profile Cases: Notable cases include the split of the Communist Party of India (CPI) in 1964 and the first split in the Indian National Congress in 1969.

    Options for Resolution

    • Symbol Freeze: The ECI may freeze the symbol to prevent either faction from using it until a final decision is reached, a process that typically involves lengthy hearings.
    • Legal Proceedings: Parties may resort to legal recourse if internal resolution or EC intervention fails to resolve the dispute.

    Alternate Resolution Mechanisms

    • Majority Test: EC primarily relies on testing the support within the party organization, particularly among elected MPs and MLAs, to determine faction legitimacy.
    • Registration as Separate Party: Splinter groups not recognized by the parent party may register themselves as separate entities and seek national or state party status based on electoral performance post-registration.

    Conclusion

    • The recognition of political factions by the Election Commission underscores the complexities of symbol allotment and intra-party disputes.
    • As the EC navigates these challenges, ensuring procedural fairness and upholding democratic principles remain paramount in fostering trust and integrity in the electoral process.

  • Understanding the Delimitation Exercise

    Delimitation

    Introduction

    • The impending delimitation exercise for Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies, based on the first Census after 2026, has sparked discussions and raised pertinent questions.

    Understanding Delimitation

    • Definition: Delimitation entails fixing the number of seats and boundaries of territorial constituencies, including the reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST), based on census data.
    • Constitutional Mandate: Article 82 (Lok Sabha) and Article 170 (State Legislative Assemblies) mandate readjustment of seats after each Census, performed by the Delimitation Commission.
    • Historical Precedent: Delimitation exercises were conducted post the 1951, 1961, and 1971 Censuses, highlighting its periodic nature.

    About Delimitation Commission

    • The Delimitation Commission is a high-powered committee entrusted with the task of drawing and redrawing of boundaries of different constituencies for state assembly and Lok Sabha election.
    • It is appointed by the President and works in collaboration with the Election Commission.
    • The Commission consists of –
    1. A retired or working Supreme Court Judge (chairperson)
    2. Election Commissioner
    3. Concerned State Election Commissioners
    • DC’s orders have the force of law and CANNOT be called in question before any court.
    • The orders are laid before the Lok Sabha and the legislative assemblies concerned, but they cannot effect any modifications in the orders.

    Need for Delimitation

    • Democracy and Representation: The essence of democracy mandates ‘one citizen-one vote-one value,’ necessitating periodic readjustment of seats to reflect population changes.
    • Freezing of Seats: Seats have been frozen since 1971 to encourage population control, with the freeze extended until 2026 through the 84th Amendment Act.

    Why is this exercise problematic?

    • Uneven Population Growth: Population disparities among states pose challenges, with some states experiencing rapid growth while others stagnate.
    • Options Discussed: Options include redistributing existing seats among states or increasing the total seats to reflect population changes.
    • Constituency Shrinkage: Electorates often lose their representation due to the merger of constituencies.

    International Perspectives

    • United States: The U.S. redistributes seats among states after each Census to maintain proportionality, ensuring minimal disruption.
    • European Union: EU Parliament uses a principle of ‘degressive proportionality,’ where seats are allocated based on population ratios.

    Way forward

    • Harmonizing Principles: Balancing democratic representation and federal principles is crucial. Capping Lok Sabha seats at the current 543 ensures continuity, while increasing State Legislative Assembly seats aligns with democratic representation.
    • Empowering Local Bodies: Strengthening democracy involves empowering grassroots institutions like panchayats and municipalities, enhancing citizen engagement and governance.

    Conclusion

    • The delimitation exercise presents a delicate balance between democratic representation and federal principles.
    • By adopting a nuanced approach that respects constitutional mandates while empowering local governance, India can navigate the complexities of delimitation, ensuring inclusive and effective representation for its diverse populace.