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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • How the Seventh Schedule affects delivery of public goods

    Context

    Without delegation of funds, functions and functionaries, local governments are unable to respond to pressure from citizens who demand greater efficiency.

    Background of the Seventh Schedule

    •  Article 246 of the Constitution mentions three lists in the Seventh Schedule — union, state and concurrent lists.
    • The present Seventh Schedule and union (at that time Federal) list, state (at that time Provincial) list and concurrent lists are inherited from that 1935 piece of legislation.
    • It states that “Notwithstanding anything in the two next succeeding subsections, the Federal Legislature has, and a Provincial Legislature has not, power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List I in the Seventh Schedule to this Act.”

    Delivery of public goods

    • Ignoring that narrow and technical definition of public good, loosely, we understand “public good” as something that must be delivered by the government.
    • It cannot, or should not, be delivered by the private sector.
    • Notwithstanding the use of private security guards, most people will agree “law and order” is a public good.
    • Most public goods people will think of are efficiently delivered at the local government level, not Union or state level.
    •  There is a Seventh Schedule issue that is thus linked to the insertion of a local body list.
    • Countervailing pressure by citizens increasingly demands efficient delivery of such public goods.
    • But without delegation of funds, functions and functionaries, presently left to the whims of state governments, local governments are unable to respond.

    Need for the review of the Seventh Schedule Lists

    • No local body list: Most public goods people will think of are efficiently delivered at the local government level, not Union or state level.
    • There is a Seventh Schedule issue that is thus linked to the insertion of a local body list.
    •  But without delegation of funds, functions and functionaries, presently left to the whims of state governments, local governments are unable to respond.
    • The Rajamannar Committee — formally known as Centre-State Relations Inquiry Committee suggested constitution of a High Power Commission to examine the entries of Lists I and III in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and suggest redistribution of the entries,”.
    • Changes in the past led to greater centralisation: Items have moved from the state list to the concurrent list and from the concurrent list to the union list.
    • Such limited movements have reflected greater centralisation, such as in 1976.
    •  N K Singh, Chairman of 15th Finance Commission has also often made this point, in addition to scrutiny of Article 282.

    Conclusion

    For the sake of better governance, it’s not an issue that should be ducked and the basic structure doctrine doesn’t stand in the way.

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

  • Hate speech: SC seeks response from govt.

    The Supreme Court has asked the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the police to respond to petitions that people accused of delivering hate speeches at a religious conference in Haridwar have not been arrested yet.

    What is ‘Hate Speech’?

    • There is no specific legal definition of ‘hate speech’.
    • The Law Commission of India, in its 267th Report, says: “Hate speech generally is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief and the like 

    • Thus, hate speech is any word written or spoken, signs, visible representations within the hearing or sight of a person with the intention to cause fear or alarm, or incitement to violence.”
    • In general, hate speech is considered a limitation on free speech that seeks to prevent or bar speech that exposes a person or a group or section of society to hate, violence, ridicule or indignity.

    How is it treated in Indian law?

    • Provisions in law criminalize speeches, writings, actions, signs and representations that foment violence and spread disharmony between communities and groups and these are understood to refer to ‘hate speech’.
    • Sections 153A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code are generally taken to be the main penal provisions that deal with inflammatory speeches and expressions that seek to punish ‘hate speech’.

    [I] Section 153A:

    • Promotion of enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony’, is an offence punishable with three years’ imprisonment.

    [II] Section 505:

    505(1): Statements conducing to public mischief

    • The statement, publication, report or rumour that is penalized under Section 505(1) should be one that promotes mutiny by the armed forces, or causes such fear or alarm that people are induced to commit an offence against the state or public tranquility.
    • This attracts a jail term of up to three years.

    505(2): It is an offence to make statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes.

    505(3): Same offence will attract up to a five-year jail term if it takes place in a place of worship, or in any assembly engaged in religious worship or religious ceremonies.

    What has the Law Commission proposed?

    The Law Commission has proposed that separate offences be added to the IPC to criminalize hate speech quite specifically instead of being subsumed in the existing sections concerning inflammatory acts and speeches.

    [A] Inserting two sections

    • It has proposed that two new sections, Section 153C and Section 505A, be added.

    Section 153C

    It is an offence if anyone-

    • Uses gravely threatening words, spoken or written or signs or visible representations, with the intention to cause fear or alarm OR
    • Advocates hatred that causes incitement to violence, on grounds of religion, race, caste or community, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, place of birth, residence, language, disability or tribe

    Section 505A

    • It proposes to criminalize words, or display of writing or signs that are gravely threatening or derogatory, within the hearing or sight of a person, causing fear or alarm or, with intent to provoke the use of unlawful violence against that person or another”.

    [B] Imprisonment

    • Section 153C: two-year jail term for this and/or a fine of â‚č5,000 or both
    • Section 505A: prison term of up to one year and/or a fine up to â‚č5,000

    Other committees’ recommendations

    • Similar proposals to add sections to the IPC to punish acts and statements that promote racial discrimination or amount to hate speech have been made by the M.P. Bezbaruah Committee and the T.K. Viswanathan Committee.
    • At present, the Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws, which is considering more comprehensive changes to criminal law, is examining the issue of having specific provisions to tackle hate speech.

    Why regulate hate speech?

    • Creates social divide: Individuals believe in stereotypes that are ingrained in their minds and these stereotypes lead them to believe that a class or group of persons are inferior to them and as such cannot have the same rights as them.
    • Threat to peaceful co-existence: The stubbornness to stick to a particular ideology without caring for the right to co-exist peacefully adds further fuel to the fire of hate speech.

    Issues in regulating hate speech

    • Powers to State: Almost every regulation of speech, no matter how well-intentioned, increases the power of the state.
    • Hate speeches are Political: The issue is fundamentally political and we should not pretend that fine legal distinctions will solve the issue.
    • Legal complications: An over-reliance on legal instruments to solve fundamentally social and political problems often backfires.

    Way ahead

    • Subjects like hate speeches become a complex issue to deal with, in a country like India which is very diverse, as it was very difficult to differentiate between free and hate speech.
    • There are many factors that should be considered while restraining speeches like strong opinions, offensive comments towards certain communities, the effect on values like dignity, liberty and equality.
    • We all have to work together and communicate efficiently for our country to be a healthy place to live in.

     

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

  • Assam-Meghalaya Border Dispute

    Union Home Minister is expected to seal the final agreement to end the dispute in six areas of the Assam-Meghalaya boundary ahead of Meghalaya’s 50th Statehood Day celebration on January 21.

    Can you recall the chronology of reorganization of the entire North-East region?

    Assam- Meghalaya Boundary Dispute

    • Assam has had a boundary dispute with Mizoram for decades and several rounds of talks have been held since 1994-95 to solve the issue.
    • Till 1972, Mizoram was a part of Assam and acquired full statehood in 1987.
    • The 164.6 km-long border between the States runs along with Cachar, Hailakandi and Karimganj districts in Assam and Kolasib, Mamit and Aizawl districts in Mizoram.
    • There are several border areas where violence have been reported.

    Roots of the dispute

    • In the Northeast’s complex boundary equations, showdowns between Assam and Mizoram residents are less frequent than they are.
    • The boundary between present-day Assam and Mizoram, 165 km long today, dates back to the colonial era when Mizoram was known as Lushai Hills, a district of Assam.
    • The dispute stems from a notification of 1875 that differentiated Lushai Hills from the plains of Cachar, and another of 1933 that demarcates a boundary between Lushai Hills and Manipur.
    • Mizoram believes the boundary should be demarcated on the basis of the 1875 notification, which is derived from the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation (BEFR) Act, 1873.
    • Mizo leaders have argued in the past argued against the demarcation notified in 1933 because Mizo society was not consulted.

    Other boundary disputes in North-East

    The states of the Northeast were largely carved out of Assam, which has border disputes with several states.

    During British rule, Assam included present-day Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya besides Mizoram, which became separate state one by one. Today, Assam has boundary problems with each of them.

    • Nagaland shares a 500-km boundary with Assam.
    • In two major incidents of violence in 1979 and 1985, at least 100 persons were killed. The boundary dispute is now in the Supreme Court
    • On the Assam-Arunachal Pradesh boundary (over 800 km), clashes were first reported in 1992, according to the same research paper.
    • Since then, there have been several accusations of illegal encroachment from both sides, and intermittent clashes. This boundary issue is being heard by the Supreme Court.
    • The 884-km Assam-Meghalaya boundary, too, witnesses flare-ups frequently. As per Meghalaya government statements, today there are 12 areas of dispute between the two states.

     

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

  • Need to recast the selection process of the ECs

    Context

    The attendance of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and his Election Commissioner (EC) colleagues at an “informal” meeting with the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister has brought renewed focus on the independence and impartiality of the Election Commission of India (ECI).

    Need for changes in the appointment process

    • The changes in the appointment process for ECs can strengthen ECI’s independence, neutrality and transparency. 
    • The appointment of ECs falls within the purview of Article 324(2) of the Constitution, which establishes the institution.
    • Article 324(2) contains a ‘subject to’ clause which provides that both the number and tenure of the ECs shall be “subject to provisions of any law made in that behalf by Parliament, be made by the President.”
    • Apart from enacting a law in 1989 enlarging the number of ECs from one to three, Parliament has so far not enacted any changes to the appointment process.
    • In 1975 itself, the Justice Tarkunde Committee recommended that ECs be appointed on the advice of a Committee comprising the Prime Minister, Lok Sabha Opposition Leader and the Chief Justice.
    • This was reiterated by the Dinesh Goswami Committee in 1990 and the Law Commission in 2015.
    • The 4th Report (2007) of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission additionally recommended that the Law Minister and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha be included in such a Collegium.
    • Violation of Article 14 and 324: Three Writ Petitions, with one pending since 2015, are urging the Supreme Court to declare that the current practice of appointment of ECs by the Centre violates Article 14, Article 324(2), and Democracy as a basic feature of the Constitution.
    • Precedent does exist in the case of Rojer Mathew v South Indian Bank Ltd, to argue against the Executive being the sole appointer for a quasi-judicial body.
    • The Supreme Court had recognised that “Election Commission is not only responsible for conducting free and fair elections but it also renders a quasi-judicial function between the various political parties including the ruling government and other parties.”
    • In such circumstances, the executive cannot be a sole participant in the appointment of members of Election Commission as it gives unfettered discretion to the ruling party.

    Way forward

    • Establishing a multi-institutional, bipartisan committee for fair and transparent selection of ECs can enhance the perceived and actual independence of ECI.
    • Such a procedure is already followed with regard to other Constitutional and Statutory Authorities such as the Chief Information Commissioner, Lokpal, Vigilance Commissioner, and the Director of the Central Bureau of Intelligence.

    Consider the question “What is the procedure for the appointment of Election Commissioners? What are the issues with this procedure? Suggest the way forward.”

    Conclusion

    ECI’s constitutional responsibilities require a fair and transparent appointment process that is beyond reproach, which will reaffirm our faith in this vital pillar of our polity.

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

  • Suspension of MLA is worse than expulsion: SC

    The Supreme Court has said that suspension from the Legislative Assembly for a year is “worse” than expulsion, as it affects the Right of a constituency to remain represented in the House.

    What is the case?

    • Few MLAs from Maharashtra have challenged their one-year suspension from the Legislative Assembly for allegedly misbehaving with the presiding officer.

    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.

     

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

  • Election Campaign Funding by Political Parties

    With several Assembly elections coming up, the issue of campaigning is back on the track. Campaign funding reforms are one of the biggest issues in electoral reforms worldwide.

    Why in news?

    • Elections are fought with huge funds nowadays.
    • Estimates vary, but a candidate may spend in crores in just one constituency.
    • This vital issue is neglected by voters in the noise of campaigns, leaders, celebrities, and media coverage.

    Caps on Election Expenditure

    The Election Commission of India (ECI) imposes limits on campaign expenditure incurred by a candidate and not political parties.

    The ceiling on poll expenditure varies across States:

    (a) Bigger states

    • With candidates in Assembly Elections in bigger states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu now allowed to spend up to 40L (from â‚č30.8 lakhs as against â‚č28 lakhs earlier.)
    • For a candidate contesting a Lok Sabha Poll in these States, the revised ceiling on poll expenditure is now 90lakh (â‚č77 lakhs earlier).

    (b) Smaller states

    • While the enhanced ceiling for a Lok Sabha candidate is now 75Lakh (Earlier â‚č59.4 lakhs) those contesting an Assembly can spend up to 28 Lakh( earlier â‚č22 lakhs.)
    • Goa, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and a few Union Territories (AGMUT states) based on the size of their constituencies and population, have a lower ceiling on poll expenditure.

    How are such ceilings made?

    • Such changes are made by amending the Conduct of Elections Rules.
    • The last time the expenditure ceiling was enhanced was in 2014 just ahead of the Lok Sabha polls.

    What happens when expenditure exceeds the limit?

    • Contesting candidates are required to file a mandatory true account of election expenses with the EC.
    • An incorrect account or expenditure beyond the ceiling can attract disqualification for up to three years as per Section 10A of The Representation of the People Act, 1951.

    What doesn’t account to Election expenditure?

    • The expenditure incurred by leaders of a political party on account of travel by air or by any other means of transport for propagating programme of the political party is not considered to be the election expenditure.
    • Any expenditure which is done for service of the Government and discharge of official duty is also not considered to be election expenditure.

    Why is this issue important for the voter?

    • Voters vote for candidates, political parties and leaders so that they deliver benefits to the citizens.
    • If election funds are obtained from other sources, the Governments in power are obliged to the funders more than the voters.
    • The government may take decisions that benefit the donors rather than the voters.
    • Even if a rich candidate funds his own election, the focus is on recovering the investment made rather on public service.

    Situation in India on Election Funding

    • Transparency in funding is absent after the introduction of Electoral Bonds.
    • Now citizens cannot know who is funding the political parties.

    Way forward

    There is also much to learn from international experience. Broadly there are three classes of remedies.

    • First is to make all election funding completely transparent so that voters know who is funding whom.
    • Second is to prevent private interests from unduly influencing elections or Governments. This is done by a set of rules on limiting funding.
    • Third is to try and have a more level playing field so that good politicians, candidates and parties with less funds also stand a chance of competing in elections.

     

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

  • Back in news: Central Vista Project

    The redevelopment of central vista avenue in New Delhi, where the Republic Day parade is scheduled to be held, has been delayed by a couple of days due to heavy rainfall.

    Central Vista Project

    • The project aims to renovate and redevelop 86 acres of land in Lutyens’s Delhi.
    • In this, the landmark structures of the government, including Parliament House, Rashtrapati Bhavan, India Gate, North Block and South Block, etc. stand.
    • This dream project of redeveloping the nation’s administrative heart was announced by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs back in September 13, 2019.

    This project has three main parts:

    1. New parliament building
    2. New secretariat complex to bring all the central govt ministries in one place
    3. Development of the Rajghat and the area around it
    • This project will involve demolition of some non-heritage buildings in the area, and construction of new buildings in place of them.

    Why need this Project?

    The most significant aspect of the project is the construction of a new parliament building.  There are several reasons for needing a new building.

    • Due to increased population, which has almost quadrupled since independence, there is a need to increase the number of Lok Sabha constituencies through delimitation.
    • Similarly, the central hall of the parliament, used to hold joint sessions, actually does not have enough seats for the MPs of both houses.
    • During joint sessions, temporary chairs are placed on the aisles so that all the members can sit.
    • This is certainly not a dignified scene for the parliament of the largest democracy in the world.
    • The infrastructure of the parliament was also antiqued, as they were added at various times as and when required.

    Due to these reasons, a pressing need was felt to construct a new parliament building.

    Significance of the project

    • Modernising parliament’s facilities: The new Parliament building will be India’s first purpose-designed parliament, equipped with state-of-the-art infrastructure to meet all needs of an expanded parliament.
    • Improving productivity and efficiency: All ministries of the government will be consolidated in one place and will be served by highly energy-efficient and sustainable infrastructure.
    • Strengthening cultural and recreational facilities: The National Museum will be relocated and conceptualized to present the rich heritage and achievements of the nation.
    • Providing modern and secure infrastructure: A modern, secure, and appropriately equipped executive enclave is proposed to house executive offices and facilities.
    • Providing residential facilities for the PM: Modern and secure residential facilities for the vice president and the PM are proposed to the north of North Block and south of South Block respectively.
    • Cultural significance: The overall objective of works planned on the Central Vista is to ensure environmental sustainability, restore the vista’s architectural character, protect its heritage buildings, expand and improve public space, and to extend its axis.

     

    Also read about the

    New Parliament Building

    Back2Basics: Making of New Delhi

    • The Central Vista was designed by Edwin Lutyens and Herbert Baker, to house the capital of British India.
    • The top of the Raisina Hill and adjacent hills in the area was flattened to create space for the buildings.
    • At his coronation as Emperor of India on December 12, 1911, Britain’s King George V had announced the transfer of the seat of the Government from Calcutta to the ancient Capital of Delhi.
    • Thereafter, a 20-year-long project to build modern New Delhi was spearheaded by architects Edwin Lutyens and Herbert Baker.
    • They built Parliament House, Rashtrapati Bhavan, North and South Blocks, Rajpath, India Gate, National Archives and the princes’ houses around India Gate.
    • Thus, New Delhi was unveiled in 1931.

     

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

  • Mullaperiyar Dam Issue

    The Supreme Court has told Tamil Nadu and Kerala that it was not there to “administer the dam” when a supervisory committee was already in place to examine the issue of safety of the Mullaperiyar Dam and the management of its water level.

    Do you know?

    The Mullaperiyar dam is located in Kerala on the river Periyar but is operated and maintained by the neighbouring state of Tamil Nadu.

     

    John Pennycuick (the architect of this dam) sold his family property in England to mobilize money to fund the project! People of the region fondly name their children under his name a remark of reverence.

    Mullaperiyar Dam

    • It is a masonry gravity dam on the Periyar River in Kerala.
    • It is located on the Cardamom Hills of the Western Ghats in Thekkady, Idukki District.
    • It was constructed between 1887 and 1895 by John Pennycuick (who was born in Pune) and also reached in an agreement to divert water eastwards to the Madras Presidency area.
    • It has a height of 53.6 m (176 ft) from the foundation, and a length of 365.7 m (1,200 ft).

    Operational issue

    • The dam is located in Kerala but is operated and maintained by Tamil Nadu.
    • The catchment area of the Mullaperiyar Dam itself lies entirely in Kerala and thus not an inter-State river.
    • In November 2014, the water level hit 142 feet for first time in 35 years.
    • The reservoir again hit the maximum limit of 142 feet in August 2018, following incessant rains in the state of Kerala.
    • Indeed, the tendency to store water to almost the full level of reservoirs is becoming a norm among water managers across States.

    The dispute: Control and safety of the dam

    • Supreme court judgment came in February 2006, has allowed Tamil Nadu to raise the level of the dam to 152 ft (46 m) after strengthening it.
    • Responding to it, the Mullaperiyar dam was declared an ‘endangered’ scheduled dam by the Kerala Government under the disputed Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2006.
    • For Tamil Nadu, the Mullaperiyar dam and the diverted Periyar waters act as a lifeline for Theni, Madurai, Sivaganga, Dindigul and Ramnad districts.
    • Tamil Nadu has insisted on exercising the unfettered colonial rights to control the dam and its waters, based on the 1886 lease agreement.

    Rule of Curve issue

    • A rule curve or rule level specifies the storage or empty space to be maintained in a reservoir during different times of the year.
    • It decides the fluctuating storage levels in a reservoir.
    • The gate opening schedule of a dam is based on the rule curve. It is part of the “core safety” mechanism in a dam.
    • The TN government often blames Kerala for delaying the finalization of the rule curve.

    Back2Basics: Periyar River

    • The Periyar is the longest river in the state of Kerala with a length of 244 km.
    • It is also known as ‘Lifeline of Kerala’ as it is one of the few perennial rivers in the state.
    • It originates from Sivagiri hills of Western Ghats and flows through the Periyar National Park.
    • The main tributaries of Periyar are Muthirapuzha, Mullayar, Cheruthoni, Perinjankutti.

     

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

  • MHA seeks more time to frame CAA rules

    The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has sought another extension from parliamentary committees to frame the rules of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019.

    What is Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019?

    • The act is sought to amend the Citizenship Act, 1955 to make Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian illegal migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, eligible for citizenship of India.
    • In other words, it intends to make it easier for non-Muslim immigrants from India’s three Muslim-majority neighbours to become citizens of India.
    • Under The Citizenship Act, 1955, one of the requirements for citizenship by naturalization is that the applicant must have resided in India during the last 12 months, as well as for 11 of the previous 14 years.
    • The amendment relaxes the second requirement from 11 years to 6 years as a specific condition for applicants belonging to these six religions, and the aforementioned three countries.
    • It exempts the members of the six communities from any criminal case under the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Passport Act, 1920 if they entered India before December 31, 2014.

    Key feature: Defining illegal migrants

    • Illegal migrants cannot become Indian citizens in accordance with the present laws.
    • Under the CAA, an illegal migrant is a foreigner who: (i) enters the country without valid travel documents like a passport and visa, or (ii) enters with valid documents, but stays beyond the permitted time period.
    • Illegal migrants may be put in jail or deported under the Foreigners Act, 1946 and The Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920.

    Exceptions

    • The Bill provides that illegal migrants who fulfil four conditions will not be treated as illegal migrants under the Act.  The conditions are:
    1. they are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis or Christians;
    2. they are from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan;
    3. they entered India on or before December 31, 2014;
    4. they are not in certain tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, or Tripura included in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, or areas under the “Inner Line” permit, i.e., Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland.

    Controversy with the Act

    • Country of Origin: The Act classifies migrants based on their country of origin to include only Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
    • Other religious minorities ignored: It is unclear why illegal migrants from only six specified religious minorities have been included in the Act.
    • Defiance of purpose: India shares a border with Myanmar, which has had a history of persecution of a religious minority, the Rohingya Muslims.
    • Date of Entry: It is also unclear why there is a differential treatment of migrants based on their date of entry into India, i.e., whether they entered India before or after December 31, 2014.

    Way forward

    • India is a constitutional democracy with a basic structure that assures a secure and spacious home for all Indians.
    • Being partitioned on religious grounds, India has to undertake a balancing act for protecting the religious minorities in its neighbourhood.
    • These minorities are under constant threat of persecution and vandalism.
    • India needs to balance the civilization duties to protect those who are prosecuted in the neighbourhood.

     

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

  • The Personal Data Protection Bill conundrum

    Context

    The Joint Committee report on the Bill has failed to provide robust draft legislation ensuring the privacy of citizens.

    Background of the Personal Data Protection Bill

    •  The Puttaswamy judgment held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right.
    • The Puttaswamy judgment and the Justice B.N. Srikrishna committee report led to the Personal Data Protection Bill of 2019.
    • The Joint Committee report on the Bill has failed to provide a robust draft legislation ensuring the privacy of citizens.

    Issues with the Joint Committee report on Personal Data Protection Bill

    • Division into Government and private domains: The report has divided the digital world into two domains — government and private.
    • This division is based on the presumption that the question of right to privacy emerges only where operations and activities of private entities are concerned.
    • Exemption to government and government agencies: Clause 12 of the Bill provides exemptions for the government and government agencies and Clause 35 exempts government agencies from the entire Act itself. 
    • Clause 12, which says personal data can be processed without consent for the performance of any function of the state, is an umbrella clause that does not specify which ministries or departments will be covered.
    • The issue with the defining harm: The Bill says, “harm includes any observation or surveillance that is not reasonably expected by the data principal”.
    • This means if you install any software in your computer and the software violates the principle of privacy and data get leaked, the complaint of the data principal will not be legally tenable as the defence will be that ‘once you have installed the software, you should have reasonably expected this level of surveillance’.
    • The government can use these provisions as a means of control and surveillance.
    • The Committee has failed to provide formidable firewalls to protect the privacy of individuals and has also carved out a mechanism for government control over personal data.
    • Against the Supreme Court judgement: The provisions are ultra vires of the judgment on privacy.
    • Inclusion of non-personal data harms the economy:  By including non-personal data within the ambit of the Bill, the Joint Committee has put a huge compliance burden on the economy.
    • This will hit the MSME sector and small businesses harder as technical processes involving data-sharing are very expensive.
    • The government-constituted panel headed by S. Gopalkrishnan also opposed the idea of including non-personal data in the Bill.
    • Mandatory data localisation, it is estimated, will squeeze the economy by 0.7-1.7%.
    • Hamper the smooth cross-border flow of data: This may also invite similar measures by other sovereign countries which will hamper smooth cross-border flow of data.

    Concerns with the Data Protection Authority

    • For compliance with the provisions of the Act, a data protection authority (DPA) has to be appointed.
    • It is doubtful whether a single authority will be able to discharge so many functions in an efficient manner.
    • Concern with appointment: Unlike the Justice Srikrishna committee report which provided for a judicial overlook in the appointments of the DPA, the Bill entrusts the executive with the appointments.
    •  Although the Joint Committee report expanded the committee, the power to appoint the panelists vests with the Central government.
    • Lack of independence: Clause 86 says, “Authority should be bound by the directions of the Central Government under all cases and not just on questions of policy”.
    • This weakens its independence and gives the government excessive control.
    • Violation of federalism: There is internal data flow and the States are key stakeholders in the process.
    • Even if the proposed central authority issues directions to allow processing of data on the grounds of ‘public order’, it is important to note that ‘public order’ is an entry in the State List. 

    Consider the question “What are the issues with the provision in the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019? Suggest the way forward.” 

    Conclusion

    The report has raised more questions than it has solved. At the time of passage of the Bill, loopholes must be plugged so that India can have a robust data protection law.

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