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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • Suspension of MLAs

    • Some legislators were suspended for one year by the Maharashtra Assembly for alleged disorderly conduct.
    • The unusually long period of suspension has been questioned by the Supreme Court, which is hearing a challenge to the Assembly’s action.

    A case in apex court

    • The court has reserved its judgment after hearing elaborate arguments.
    • The main question before the court is whether suspension for a whole year is valid.

    Suspending MLAs: A fact check

    • Each state has their individual rules for the conduct of assembly. These rules provides for the suspension of MLAs.
    • Under Rule 53 of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Rules, 1960, only the Speaker has the power to suspend MLAs indulging in unruly behavior.
    • Therefore, the motion to suspend cannot be put to vote as this would allow the Government to suspend as many Members of Opposition as it sees fit.

    Constitutional ground behind this suspension

    • The Court referred to Article 190 (4) of the Constitution which says that if for a period of 60 days, a member of a House, without its permission, is absent; the House may declare his or her seat vacant.
    • Suspension of MLAs beyond this period would lead to their disqualification.

    What did the Supreme Court observe?

    • Suspension of the MLAs would amount to punishing the constituencies as a whole.
    • Each constituency has equal amount of right to be represented in the House, observed the court.
    • The apex court observed that any state cannot create a constitutional void, a hiatus situation for any constituency.
    • It said the House cannot suspend a member beyond 59 days.

    What does the State government say?

    • Counsel for the State government has argued that there is no limitation on the power of the legislature to punish for breach of privilege or disorderly conduct in the course of its proceedings.
    • Once the power to punish a member for disorderly conduct is recognized, there can be no judicial review of the manner in which it is exercised.
    • Further, during suspension, a member continues to hold office, but only loses their voice in the legislature.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • How to fix the anti-defection loophole

    Context

    It is time that we took a fresh look at the Tenth Schedule to our Constitution.

    Shortcomings of the anti-defection law

    • Partisan nature of Speaker: Paragraph 3 of the Tenth Schedule was omitted by the Constitution (91st Amendment) Act, 2003, which came into effect on January 1, 2004.
    • Paragraph 3, as it existed prior to the amendment, protected defectors as long as one-third of the members of a political party formed a separate group. 
    • In the context of small assemblies, one-third of the members could easily be cobbled together.
    • Often, the speaker of the assembly was seen to be collaborating with the political party in power to protect the defectors under the one-third rule.
    • Such partisan conduct of the speakers is at the heart of a non-functional Tenth Schedule.
    • The seeming political bias of the speakers acting as tribunals is apparent from how disqualification petitions are dealt with.
    • We have seen this happen in Manipur, Goa, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and other jurisdictions.
    • Allowing two-third members to merge with another party: After the omission of paragraph 3, paragraph 4 allowed for the protection of defecting members provided two-thirds of the members of the legislative party merged with another political party.
    • This provision has invariably been misused.
    • Constitutional flaw in provisions of paragraph 4: Third, there is a constitutional flaw in the manner in which the provisions of paragraph 4 have been enacted.
    • Paragraph 4(1) stipulates that a member of the house will not be disqualified from his membership where his original political party merges with another political party and he claims that he and other members have become members of the other political party or a new political party is being formed by such merger.
    • However, paragraph 4(2) provides that such a merger would be deemed to have taken place only if not less than two-thirds of the members of the legislative party agreed to such a merger.
    • This allows for clandestine corruption where two-thirds of the members of the legislative party are bought over, by means fair or foul, to either topple governments or to strengthen a razor-thin majority of the party in power.
    • This makes the entire provision unworkable and unconstitutional.
    • Prolonging the proceedings: We have witnessed situations where, even though the provisions of paragraph 4 are not ex-facie attracted, the speaker of the assembly makes sure that the proceedings are interminably prolonged so that the term of the assembly comes to an end before the proceedings under the Tenth Schedule against those ex-facie defectors have been concluded.

    Need for urgent attention to Article 164(1B)

    • This allows for the toppling of governments by inducements of various kinds.
    • The motivation is that a fresh election allows the disqualified member to be re-elected.
    • He then becomes a member of the assembly once again, as its term is not over and can also be appointed a minister.
    • Under Article 164(1B), such a defection has no real consequences.

    Way forward

    • 1] Ensure impartiality of Speaker: Speakers, when elected must resign from the party to which they belong.
    • At the end of their term, there should be a cooling-off period before they can become members of any political party.
    • 2] Omit Paragraph 4 through Amendment: Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule should be omitted by moving a constitutional amendment.
    • 3] Make disqualification for 5 years: All those disqualified under paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule should neither be entitled to contest elections nor hold public office for five years from the date of their disqualification.
    • Article 164(1B) should be omitted by moving a constitutional amendment.
    • Set time limit to decide petition for disqualification: All petitions for disqualification of members under paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule should be decided, by adopting a summary procedure, within a period of three months.

    Consider the question “Has anti-defection law succeeded in curbing the defections and ensuring the stability of the elected governments? Give reasons in support of your argument.”

    Conclusion

    If our polity wants to get rid of open corruption, it needs to take urgent steps to plug existing loopholes that have made the Tenth Schedule unworkable.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

    Back2Basics: Article 164(1B)

    • A member of the Legislative Assembly of a State or either House of the Legislature of a State having Legislative Council belonging to any political party who is disqualified for being a member of that House under paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule shall also be disqualified to be appointed as a Minister under clause (1) for duration of the period commencing from the date of his disqualification till the date on which the term of his office as such member would expire or where he contests any election to the Legislative Assembly of a State or either House of the Legislature of a State having Legislative Council, as the case may be, before the expiry of such period, till the date on which he is declared elected, whichever is earlier.

  • Keeping the spirit of federalism alive

    Context

    Conscious recognition of the federal character of our polity is essential to protect our national character.

    Federal spirit and ideas in Indian Constitution

    • Conscious of the differential needs of the populations of different states, the drafters of the Constitution made provisions for an equitable share of powers and responsibilities among different levels of governments. 
    • The lists in the 7th Schedule of the Constitution — Union, state and concurrent — are an example of this division, wherein each level of government has its own sphere, enabling context-sensitive decision-making.
    • Local self-government: Later, institutions for local self government were added through the 73rd and 74th amendments, which strengthened grass roots democracy.
    • Division of responsibility: Article 246 and Article 243 G provide for this division of responsibilities.
    • Finance Commission: Article 280 provided for the constitution of Finance Commission to define the financial relationship and terms between the Union and states.
    • Inter-State Council: Article 263 provided for the establishment of an Inter-State Council for smooth transition of business between the Union and states and resolution of disputes.
    • The inter-state tribunals, the National Development Council and other informal bodies have served as vehicles of consultations between the Union, states and UTs.
    • Rajya Sabha: Apart from these institutions and the Rajya Sabha, the Constitution makers also left much scope for consultative and deliberative bodies so as to strengthen the spirit of cooperation and federalism.

    Steps against the spirit of federalism

    • The Planning Commission has been scrapped.
    • The Inter-State Council has met only once in the last seven years while the National Development Council has not met at all. 
    •  The tenure of the 15th Finance Commission was mired in controversy and many states expressed apprehensions about devolution.
    • The GST has already taken away much of the autonomy available to states and has made the country’s indirect tax regime unitary in nature.
    • Article 370 was removed without consulting the state legislature.
    • Parliament legislated on “agriculture”, entry no. 14 in the state list, to enact the three contentious farm laws, overstepping its jurisdiction and imposing a law on the states.
    •  The New Education Policy has been flagged as encroaching on the federal nature of the polity.
    •  The BSF’s jurisdiction was extended in Assam, West Bengal and Punjab without any consultation with the concerned states.
    • The constitutional office of governor has come under scrutiny several times for encroaching on the powers of state executive and legislature.

    Conclusion

    It should be underlined that Article 1 of our Constitution declares that “India that is Bharat is a union of states”, and that devolution of powers is necessary in such a setting.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Supreme Court upholds validity of OBC quota in NEET admissions

    The Supreme Court has pronounced its decision upholding the constitutional validity of providing 27% quota to Other Backward Classes (OBC) in NEET All India Quota (AIQ) seats for UG and PG medical courses.

    What is the issue?

    • The petitioners, several NEET aspirants, had argued that since the top court had limited reservation to 50% in the Indira Sawhney judgment, the government should have first applied to the court before tinkering with the quota calculations.
    • The court further confirmed that there was no need for the Centre to have got the prior consent of the Supreme Court before introducing OBC quota in the AIQ seats under NEET.
    • The court reasoned that material affluence of certain individual members of a socially backward group or ‘creamy layer’ could not be used against the entire group to deny it the benefits of reservation.

    What is the background of this case?

    • The government introduced OBC/EWS quota before the counselling of NEET counselling.
    • The candidates applying for NEET PG were not provided any information on the distribution of the seat matrix.
    • Such information is provided by the counselling authority only after the counselling session is to begin.

    Key observations of the Apex Court

    • The SC has held that reservation is not at odds with merit.
    • It observed that ‘merit’ could not be narrowed to the limit of success in open competitive exams.
    • Merit of a person is a sum total of “lived experiences” and his or her struggle to overcome cultural and social setbacks, observed the SC.

    Why is this a landmark judgment?

    • Merit cannot be reduced to narrow definitions of performance in an open competitive examination, which only provides formal equality of opportunities , said the SC.
    • Current competencies are assessed by competent examinations but are not reflective of excellence, capability and potential of an individual.

    Major justifications for Reservations

    • Exams did not reflect how social, economic and cultural advantages that accrued to certain classes contributed to their success in them, the court noted.
    • Examinations are not a proxy for merit.
    • Merit should be socially contextualized and re-conceptualized.
    • Reservation is not at odds with merit but furthers its distributive impact, Justice Chandrachud observed.

    Constitutionality of the decision

    • The court held that the power of the State governments to provide reservations under Article 15 (4) and (5) of the Constitution was not an “exception” to Article 15 (1).
    • It enshrines the mandate that “the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, and place of birth or any of them”.
    • The court held that the power of the State government to craft reservations for the OBC amplified the principle of “substantive equality” manifested through Article 15 (1).

    Implications: Victory for States

    • In a significant victory for States such as Tamil Nadu, the court confirmed their power to make “special provisions” and provide reservations in educational admissions, whether in aided or unaided institutions.
    • TN provides government jobs for the advancement of “any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the SCs and STs”.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • The Question of OBC Reservation in Local Bodies

    The latest order in Rahul Ramesh Wagh v. State of Maharashtra &Ors makes it mandatory that the principles laid down by the Supreme Court for providing reservation to OBCs in local bodies shall be followed across the country.

    Let us understand the Case

    • Maharashtra had constituted a Commission to ascertain the backwardness of OBCs in June 2021.
    • But without waiting for an empirical report, an ordinance was promulgated to amend the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads Act, Panchayat Samitis Act and the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act.
    • They were aimed to conduct local body elections with OBC reservation.
    • This was struck down by the Supreme Court.

    The latest case arose out of the challenge made to the ordinance promulgated on the teeth of the Supreme Court judgments by the Governor of Maharashtra to conduct the local body elections by providing 27% reservation to OBCs.

    What did the SC observe now?

    • Reservation to OBCs in local body elections without empirical base can no more be sustainable in law.
    • The latest order in RR Wagh v. State of Maharashtra & others makes it mandatory that the principles laid down by the Supreme Court for providing reservation to OBCs in local bodies shall be scrupulously followed across the country.

    Which principles is the apex court talking about?

    • A five-judge Constitution Bench in the K. Krishnamurthy (Dr.) v. Union of India (2010) judgment said that barriers to political participation are not the same as barriers to education and employment.
    • Though reservation to local bodies is permissible, the top court declared that the same is subject to three conditions:
    1. to set up a dedicated Commission to conduct empirical inquiry into the nature of the backwardness in local bodies
    2. to specify the proportion of reservation required to be provisioned local body-wise
    3. such reservation shall not exceed aggregate of 50% cap of the total seats reserved for SCs/STs/OBCs taken together
    • This is famously referred as ‘Triplet Test’.

    Major takeaways of K. Krishnamurthy Case

    In this case, the Supreme Court had interpreted Article 243D(6) and Article 243T(6), which permit reservation by enactment of law for backward classes in local bodies respectively.

    • It held that barriers to political participation are not the same as that of the barriers that limit access to education and employment.
    • However, for creating a level playing field, reservation may be desirable as mandated by the aforementioned conditions.
    • Above articles provide a separate constitutional basis for reservation, as distinct from what are conceived under Article 15 (4) and Article 16 (4) which form the basis for reservation in education and employment.

    Reception of the Krishnamurthy Judgment

    • The Indian political class usually displays apathy to the law declared by the courts as contrary to the enacted law.
    • The 2010 judgment was not acted upon and the constitutionality of the enacted reservation was challenged.
    • This resulted in the 2021 judgment of a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court.

    What can be concluded from the aspirant’s perspective?

    • Maharashtra Legislative Assembly passed a resolution to stall the local body elections in the wake of the judicial interference.
    • Elections, undoubtedly, must be held on time.
    • Since Judiciary does not usually interfere into Elections, States often seek to bypass the OBC reservation issues.

    Conclusion

    • Had the governments stuck to the law as mandated by Article 141 of the Constitution, this quandary wouldn’t have arisen.
    • Much of the judiciary’s time could have been saved.
    • Rule of law is not just a set of letters, but it has to be followed in spirit.

    Back2Basics: Article 141 of the Constitution

    • It stipulates that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all Courts within the territory of India.
    • Thus, the general principles laid down, by the Supreme Court are binding on each individual including those who are not a party to an order.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Democratise and empower city governments

    Context

    The “State Finances, Study of Budgets of 2021-22” report, correctly identify the role of the city governments in meeting the challenges the pandemic has thrown up, the report also points to the draining of resources.

    What the RBI report says about the role of local governments

    • The report highlights the frontline role played by the third-tier governments by implementing containment strategies, healthcare.
    • Due to this, their finances have come under severe strain, forcing them to cut down expenditures and mobilise funding from various sources.
    • Need for functional autonomy: The RBI further commented that the functional autonomy of civic bodies must increase and their governance structure strengthened.
    • Empowering financially: This could happen by ‘empowering them financially through higher resource availability.
    • The RBI did echo the recommendations of the 15th Finance Commission report on local bodies that emphasised city governance structures and financial empowerment.
    • Limited coverage of property tax: The RBI report also highlights the limited coverage of property tax and its failure in shoring up municipal corporation revenues.
    • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data show that India has the lowest property tax collection rate in the world — i.e., property tax to GDP ratio. 

    Issues faced by city governments

    • During the pandemic, while leaders from the Prime Minister to Chief Ministers to District Magistrate were seen taking a call on disaster mitigation strategies, city mayors were found missing.
    • The old approach of treating cities as adjuncts of State governments continues to dominate the policy paradigm.
    • The general approach towards urban empowerment has remained piecemeal in India.
    • The first intervention to understand ‘the urban’ (though there are references in the Five Year plans) and plan with a pan-Indian vision took place in the 1980s when the National Commission On Urbanisation was formed with Charles Correa as its chairperson.
    • Another important intervention was in the first half of the 1990s with the Constitution 73rd and 74th Amendments. 
    • The latter refers to urban reforms — empowering urban local bodies to perform 18 functions listed in the 12th Schedule.
    • However, there is no mention of financial empowerment.
    • The only exception to the rule has been the people’s plan model of Kerala where 40% of the State’s plan budget was for local bodies (directly) with a transfer of important subjects such as planning, etc.

    How to achieve functional autonomy for city government

    • This should happen with three F’s: the transfer of ‘functions, finances and functionaries’ to city governments.
    • There are nearly 5,000 statutory towns and an equal number of census towns in India.
    • Nearly 35% of the population lives in urban centres.
    • And, nearly two-thirds of the country’s GDP stems from cities and almost 90% of government revenue flows from urban centres.
    • Before value-added tax and other centralised taxation systems, one of the major earnings of cities used to be from octroi.
    • But this source of revenue collection was taken away by the State and the central governments.
    • Instead, finance commissions recommended grants to urban local bodies based on a formula of demographic profile. 
    • In such a situation, it is difficult for the towns to sustain their ability to perform their bare minimum functions, especially with the latest Pay Commission recommendations.
    • This has resulted in burdening people more with taxes and further privatisation/outsourcing of the services of the municipalities.
    • The often-cited example is how cities in the Scandinavian countries manage their functions well — from city planning to mobility to waste management.
    • But the truth is that a chunk of the income tax from citizens is given to city governments.
    • A committee formed by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development to review the 74th constitutional amendment recommended that 10% of income tax collected from the cities was to be given back to them as a direct revenue grant from the central government.

    Way forward

    • 1] Cities must be treated as important centres of governance, where democratic decentralisation can bring in amazing results.
    • There will be transparency and adequate participation of the people.
    • 2] Cities should not be considered as entrepreneurship spaces where the sole driving force is to make them competitive to attract investments.
    • 3] The resources required for quantitative and qualitative data must be immediately provided to the cities to ensure a disaster risk reduction plan keeping vulnerable communities in mind.
    • 4] A piecemeal approach such as the concept of ‘smart cities’ must be shunned altogether.
    • This approach further widens the gap between different sets of people.
    • 5] Leadership in the cities must be elected for a term of five years. 
    • Likewise, the third F, i.e., functionaries, must be transferred to the cities with a permanent cadre.

    Consider the question “The functional autonomy of civic bodies must be increased and their governance structure strengthened. This could happen by ‘empowering them financially through higher resource availability’. Comment.” 

    Conclusion

    Thus, in this exercise by the RBI, the good part is that there has least been a mention of cities, with local bodies as important centres of governance.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • National Commission for Safai Karamcharis gets 3-year extension

    The Union Cabinet has approved a three-year extension of the tenure of the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis (NCSK) that was set to end on March 31.

    About National Commission for Safai Karamcharis

    • The commission was set up in 1993 under the NCSK Act 1993 for a period of three years, which has been extended since then.
    • The NCSK Act is however ceased to have effect from February 29, 2004.
    • After that, the tenure of the NCSK has been extended as a non-statutory body from time to time through resolutions.

    Why was NCSK set up?

    • The commission helps in coming up with programmes for the welfare of sanitation workers.
    • It also monitors the implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
    • Till December 31, 2021, 58,098 manual scavengers had been identified.

    Need for eliminating Manual Scavenging

    • Undignified life (all the 6 Fundamental Rights are compromised, directly or indirectly).
    • It directly perpetuates castism.
    • Modern, Secular India has no place for such “professions”.
    • It no way suits India’s rising global profile – ‘super power’ aspirations.
    • Women are mostly disprivileged since most manual scavengers are dalit women.

    What else needs to be done?

    • Though the government has taken many steps for the upliftment of the safai karamcharis, the deprivation suffered by them in socio-economic and educational terms is still far from being eliminated.
    • Although manual scavenging has been almost eradicated, sporadic instances of their deaths do occur.

    Way forward

    • There is a continued need to monitor the various interventions and initiatives of the government for welfare of safai Karamcharis.
    • The govt must strive to achieve the goal of complete mechanization of sewer/septic tanks cleaning in the country and rehabilitation of manual scavengers.

    Try this question from CSP 2016:

    Q.’Rashtriya Garima Abhiyaan’ is a national campaign to:

    (a) rehabilitate the homeless and destitute persons and provide them with suitable sources of livelihood

    (b) release the sex workers from their practice and provide them with alternative sources of livelihood

    (c) eradicate the practice of manual scavenging and rehabilitate the manual scavengers

    (d) release the bonded labourers from their bondage and rehabilitate them

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”jine99bkvt” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here:[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

    Also try this question from our AWE initiative:

    Manual scavenging has been called as a worst surviving symbol of untouchability. Critically discuss the measures taken by Government to eradicate this practice? (250 W)

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • In news: Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956

    Karnataka CM has said irrigation projects are bogged down by river water sharing disputes and asked the Centre to ‘revisit the Inter-State River Water Disputes (IWRD) Act since the law is creating more disputes than resolving them’.

    About IWRD Act

    • The IWRD Act, 1956 aims to resolve the water disputes that would arise in the use, control and distribution of an interstate river or river valley.
    • Article 262 of the Indian Constitution provides a role for the Central government in adjudicating conflicts surrounding inter-state rivers that arise among the state/regional governments.
    • This act is confined to states of India and not applicable to union territories.
    • Only concerned state governments are entitled to participate in the tribunal adjudication and non-government entities are not permitted.

    Jurisdictions over Rivers

    • River waters use / harnessing is included in states jurisdiction.
    • However, Union government can make laws on regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys to the extent such water resources are directly under its control when expedient in the public interest.
    • When union government wants to take over a interstate river project under its control by law, it has to take approval of the riparian states’ legislature assemblies before passing such bill in the Parliament per Article 252 of the constitution.
    • When public interest is served, President may also establish an interstate council as per Article 263 to inquire and recommend on the dispute that has arisen between the states of India.

    Resolution of disputes

    • Dispute resolution is a layered process, as mandated by the ISWD Act.
    • After receiving a complaint from a state, the Union government first tries to mediate. It is only when negotiations fail that the Centre is required to form a tribunal to adjudicate the dispute.
    • If a State Government makes a request regarding any water dispute and the Central Government is of opinion that the water dispute cannot be settled by negotiations, then a Tribunal is constituted.

    Constitution of Tribunal

    • Whenever the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act provides for a Tribunal.
    • The tribunal shall not only adjudicate but also investigate the matters referred to it by the central government and forward a report setting out the facts with its decisions.
    • The tribunal responsibility is not limited to adjudication of issues raised by the concerned states and but investigation of other aspects such as water pollution, water quality deterioration, flood control etc.

    Time-frame for dispute resolution

    • The tribunals have been allotted three years to arrive at a final decision, extendable by two years.
    • The 2002 Amendment to the ISWD Act specified a one-year limit on the timeline allowed to carry out the process of dispute resolution.

    Active tribunals in India

    • Ravi & Beas Water Tribunal (1986) – Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan
    • Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal II (2004) – Karnataka, Telangana, Andra Pradesh, Maharashtra
    • Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal (2010) – Goa,Karnataka, Maharashtra
    • Vansadhara Water Disputes Tribunal (2010) – Andra Pradesh & Odisha
    • Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal (2018) – Odisha & Chattisgarh

    Need for the IWRD Act

    • Major inter-state river basins: India has 25 major river basins, with most rivers flowing across states.
    • Equitable distribution of water: As river basins are shared resources, a coordinated approach between the states is necessary for the preservation, equitable distribution and sustainable utilization of river water.
    • Hydro-politics: Much recently, interstate rivers in India have become sites of contestations, fuelled by conflicting perceptions of property rights, flawed economic instruments for food security.
    • Sustainability: This has led to a lack of an integrated ecosystems approach, and the prevalence of reductionist hydrology for water resource development.

    Issues with IRWD Act

    • Centre’s dilemma: Since river water falls within the ambit of State Subjects, its governance remains confined to the limits of the state political discourse.
    • Interference of Judiciary: The apex court has limited the role of the tribunals to quantification and allocation of water between riparian states, and its own role is to be an interpreter of the awards and agreements.
    • Colonial award: The history of colonial rule has led to the creation of asymmetries between states, and the present water disputes stem from the reproduction of this imperial and colonial power relation.
    • Structural issues: Various operational characteristics of the tribunals as problematic, since they do not adhere to any established system.
    • Operational issues: For instance, the sittings are not routine, the functioning is outside the regular court system, and day-to-day or week-to-week hearings are few and far in between.

    Why this has become a sensitive topic?

    • Associated ethnicity: At the state level, river water is politically perceived as part of the larger issue of “regional sharing of resources,” which is linked with the ethnic and cultural identity of the state and its people.
    • Matter of autonomy: The political narrative around river disputes is subsumed within the question of regional rights, and any possibility of water sharing is seen as a compromise or infringement on the regional autonomy of a state.
    • Identity politics: Hence, the political narrative around the river disputes jumps to a larger scale of identity politics.

    Way forward

    • For such dispute resolution, all other recourses such as mediation and conciliation must remain viable options.
    • These should operate simultaneously along with adjudication and political consensus among the riparian states.
    • Directly approaching the Supreme Court may result in adversarial outcomes, with the conflict reaching a point of no return.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Mekedatu Dam Project

    The ‘Mekedatu march’ has been launched for the implementation of a project to build a reservoir on the Cauvery at Mekedatu near the Tamil Nadu border.

    What is the Mekedatu Project?

    • Mekedatu, meaning goat’s leap, is a deep gorge situated at the confluence of the rivers Cauvery and Arkavathi, about 100 km from Bengaluru, at the Kanakapura taluk in Karnataka’s Ramanagara district.
    • In 2013, then Karnataka announced the construction of a multi-purpose balancing reservoir project.
    • The project aimed to alleviate the drinking water problems of the Bengaluru and Ramanagara districts.
    • It was also expected to generate hydroelectricity to meet the power needs of the state.

    Issues with the project

    • Soon after the project was announced TN has objected over granting of permission or environmental clearance.
    • Explaining the potential for damage to the lower riparian state of TN, it said that the project was in violation of the final award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal.
    • It stated that the project will affect the natural flow of the river Cauvery considerably and will severely affect the irrigation in TN.

    What do the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal and the Supreme Court say?

    • The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, in its final order on February 2007, made allocations to all the riparian States — Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, apart from the Union Territory of Puducherry.
    • It also stipulated “tentative monthly deliveries during a normal year” to be made available by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu.
    • Aggrieved over the final order for different reasons, the States had appealed to the Supreme Court.
    • In February 2018, the court, in its judgment, revised the water allocation and increased the share of Karnataka by 14.75 thousand million cubic feet (tmc ft) at the cost of Tamil Nadu.
    • The enhanced quantum comprised 4.75 tmc ft for meeting drinking water and domestic requirements of Bengaluru and surrounding areas.

    What is Karnataka planning?

    • Encouraged by the Supreme Court verdict, Karnataka, which sees the order as an endorsement of its stand, has set out to pursue the Mekedatu project.
    • Originally proposed as a hydropower project, the revised Mekedatu dam project has more than one purpose to serve.
    • A hydropower plant of nearly 400 MW has also been proposed.
    • The Karnataka government has argued that the proposed reservoir will regulate the flow to Tamil Nadu on a monthly basis, as stipulated by the Tribunal and the Supreme Court.
    • This is why Karnataka has contended that the project will not affect the interests of Tamil Nadu farmers.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • How to deal with hate speech

    Context

    On January 12, 2022 , the Supreme Court of India agreed to hear petitions asking for legal action to be taken against the organisers of, and speakers at, the “Hardwar Dharma Sansad”.

    What constitutes hate speech

    • Hate speech is speech that targets people based on their identity, and calls for violence or discrimination against people because of their identity.
    • There is an absence of any legal or social consensus around what constitutes “hate speech.”
    • As societies around the world have long understood, the harm in hate speech is not restricted to direct and proximate calls to violence.
    • Inciting discrimination is part of hate speech: Hate speech works in more insidious ways, creating a climate that strengthens existing prejudices and entrenches already-existing discrimination.
    • This is why – with the exception of the United States of America – most societies define hate speech in terms of both inciting violence, but also, inciting discrimination.

    Challenges in dealing with hate speech

    • Legal challenge: Our laws – as they stand – are unequipped to deal with the challenges of hate speech.
    • The laws commonly invoked in such cases are section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (blasphemy) and section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (creating enmity between classes of people).
    • Hate speech will not always be self-evident: Hate speech, by its very nature, will not always trumpet itself to be hate speech.
    • Rather, it will often assume plausible deniability – as has been seen in the Hardwar case, where statements, worded with the right degree of ambiguity, are now being defended as calls to self-defence rather than calls to violence.
    • Any comprehensive understanding of hate speech is a matter of judgment, and must take into account its ambiguous and slippery nature.
    • Lack of social consensus against hate speech: No matter how precise and how definite we try to make our concept of hate speech, it will inevitably reflect individual judgment. 
    • If, therefore, social and legal norms against hate speech are to be implemented without descending into pure subjectivity, what is needed – first – is a social consensus about what kind of speech is beyond the pale.
    •  In Europe, for example, holocaust denial is an offence – and is enforced with a degree of success – precisely because there is a pre-existing social consensus about the moral abhorrence of the holocaust.

    Conclusion

    Achieving this social consensus is an immense task, and will require both consistent legal implementation over time, but also daily conversations that we, as a society need to have among ourselves.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)