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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • Sedition Law: Section 124A of the IPC

    Law Minister has informed the Parliament that there is no proposal to scrap sedition from the IPC despite severe remarks by the Supreme Court about the chilling effect of the “colonial law” which suppresses the freedoms of ordinary people.

    What does Section 124A of the IPC say?

    • The section deals with the offence of sedition, a term that covers speech or writing, or any form of visible representation, which brings the government into hatred or contempt, or excites disaffection towards the government, or attempts to do so.
    • It is punishable with three years in prison or a life term.
    • “Disaffection”, it says, includes disloyalty and feelings of enmity.
    • However, it also says expressing disapproval of government measures or actions, with a view to getting them changed by lawful means, without promoting hatred or disaffection or contempt towards the government will not come under this section.

    What is its origin?

    • Colonial past: Sedition was introduced in the penal code in 1870, a decade after the Indian Penal Code came into force.
    • It was a colonial law directed against strong criticism of the British administration.
    • Putting curb on Freedom fighters: Its most famous victims included Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi.
    • Gandhiji called it “the prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen”.

     

    Is it constitutionally valid?

    • Violative of FRs: Two high courts had found it unconstitutional after Independence, as it violated the freedom of speech and expression.
    • Reasonable restrictions: The Constitution was amended to include ‘public order’ as one of the ‘reasonable restrictions’ on which free speech could be abridged by law.
    • Kedar Nath Case: Thereafter, the Supreme Court, in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962) upheld its validity.

    Why the controversy now?

    • Frequent use: In recent times, the resort to this section is seen as disturbingly frequent.
    • Curbing dissent: Activists, cartoonists and intellectuals have been arrested under this section, drawing criticism from liberals that it is being used to suppress dissent and silence critics.
    • Misuse for propaganda: Authorities and the police who invoke this section defend the measure as a necessary step to prevent public disorder and anti-national activities.
    • Irrelevance: Many of them have also been detained under the National Security Act and UAPA.

    What is being debated about it?

    • Liberals and rights activists have been demanding the scrapping of Section 124A.
    • It is argued that the provision is “overbroad”, i.e., it defines the offence in wide terms threatening the liberty of citizens.
    • The Law Commission has also called for a reconsideration of the section.
    • It has pointed that Britain abolished it more than a decade ago and raised the question of whether a provision introduced by the British to put down the freedom struggle should continue to be law in India.
    • Some argue that a presumption of constitutionality does not apply to pre-constitutional laws as those laws have been made by foreign legislature or bodies.

    What has the apex court observed?

    • Justice D.Y. Chandrachud had flagged the indiscriminate use of the sedition law against people who aired their grievances about the government’s COVID management.
    • People have been charged even for seeking help to gain medical access, equipment, drugs and oxygen cylinders, especially during the second wave of the pandemic.
    • Justice U.U. Lalit, in his recent judgment, quashed a sedition case against a person for his alleged remarks about the PM and the Union Government.

    Way forward

    • The time is long past when the mere criticism of governments was sufficient to constitute sedition.
    • The right to utter honest and reasonable criticism is a source of strength to a community rather than a weakness, the CJI has recorded.

    Try answering this PYQ:

    Q.With reference to Rowlatt Satyagraha, which of the following statements is/are correct?

    1. The Rowlatt Act was based on the recommendations of the ‘Sedition Committee’.
    2. In Rowlatt Satyagraha, Gandhiji tried to utilize the Home Rule League.
    3. Demonstrations against the arrival of Simon Commission coincided with Rowlatt Satyagraha.

    Select the correct answer using the code given below:

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 1 and 2 only

    (c) 2 and 3 only

    (d) 1, 2 and 3

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”atorf1wdl4″ question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

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

  • Governor’s Role in State Universities

    A controversy has erupted in Kerala over the reappointment of a person as the Vice-Chancellor of Kannur University, with Governor saying he approved the decision against his “better judgment” as Chancellor.

    Role of Governors in State Universities

    • In most cases, the Governor of the state is the ex-officio chancellor of the universities in that state.
    • Its powers and functions as the Chancellor are laid out in the statutes that govern the universities under a particular state government.
    • Their role in appointing the Vice-Chancellors has often triggered disputes with the political executive.

    A disputed case

    • In Kerala’s case, the Governor’s official portal asserts that while as Governor he functions with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.
    • While acting as Chancellor he acts independently of the Council of Ministers and takes his own decisions on all University matters.
    • In marked contrast, the website of Rajasthan’s Raj Bhawan states that the “Governor appoints the Vice-Chancellor on the advice/ in consultation with the State Government”.

    What about Central Universities?

    • Under the Central Universities Act, 2009, and other statutes, the President of India shall be the Visitor of a central university.
    • With their role limited to presiding over convocations, Chancellors in central universities are titular heads, who are appointed by the President in his capacity as Visitor.
    • The VCs too are appointed by the Visitor from panels of names picked by search and selection committees formed by the Union government.
    • The Act adds that the President, as Visitor, shall have the right to authorize inspections of academic and non-academic aspects of the universities and also to institute inquiries.

     

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

  • Suspension of MPs for entire Winter Session is worrying

    Context

    Twelve members of the Rajya Sabha were suspended for their alleged involvement in the grave disorder in the House on the last day of the previous session.

    What do Rajya Sabha’s rules of procedure say about the suspension of a member?

    • Rule 256 of Rajya Sabha’s rules of procedure provides for the suspension of a member who disregards the authority of the chair or abuses the rules of the council by persistently and willfully obstructing the business of the House.
    • Persistent and willful obstruction of the business of the House is the crux of the offence.
    • What is the maximum period of suspension? Suspension can be for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session.
    • This would mean that if the member is suspended on the last day of the session, the period of suspension will be only a day.
    • So, even if a government would like to suspend such a member for a longer period. it would not be possible under the present rule.
    • Unless the House itself revokes the suspension nothing can be done about it.
    • The decision of the House is final.
    • Every legislature has the power to suspend its members if they cause disorder and obstruct the business of the House.
    • But the rule of suspension is rarely invoked in parliaments in mature democracies.

    Whether the existing rules permit such a course of action?

    • Rule 256 says that the chairman may, if he deems it necessary, name a member who either disregards the authority of the chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and willfully obstructing the business of the House.
    • Sub Rule 2 of this rule is of very great importance in the context of the main question, namely, whether a member can be suspended in the next session for creating disorder in the previous session.
    • No adjournment is allowed: It clearly says no adjournment is allowed, which means the matter of suspension cannot be adjourned to a later period.
    • It needs to be decided then and there.
    • A member who abuses the rules of the House by persistently and willfully obstructing its business needs to be punished swiftly.
    • No adjournment is allowed at all.

    The powers of the House to regulate its internal matters

    • It can be said that the rule under which the members were suspended does not actually permit it.
    • Absolute power to interpret rule: The House is supreme in these matters and the chair has absolute powers to interpret the rules.
    • The judiciary has time and again clarified that the House has absolute powers to regulate its internal matters.
    • Suspension of a member is such a matter.
    • The judiciary will intervene only when a patently unconstitutional act is done by the House.

    Conclusion

    The solution to disruptions does not lie in suspension. That is the lesson we should learn from past experience.

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

  • In news: Law Commission of India

    The Government has informed the Supreme Court that the appointment of Chairperson and Members of the 22nd Law Commission of India is under consideration.

    Why in news?

    • The setting up of the 22nd Law Commission was constituted by the Government on February 21, 2020.
    • However, no progress has been made in the appointments till date.
    • The Government invoked the ‘doctrine of separation of power’, which says that one arm of governance should not encroach into that of another.

    Issues over appointment

    • The last chairman of the law commission was retired Supreme Court judge, Justice B.S. Chauhan, who completed his tenure on 31 August 2018.
    • Subsequently, the Commission has not been reconstituted.
    • In February 2020, the Government of India announced its intention to reconstitute the Commission with no visible progress.

    About Law Commission

    • Law Commission of India is a currently-defunct executive body established by an order of the Government of India.
    • The Commission’s function is to research and advise the GoI on legal reform, and is composed of legal experts, and headed by a retired judge.
    • The commission is established for a fixed tenure and works as an advisory body to the Ministry of Law and Justice.
    • The last chairman of the Commission retired in August 2018, and since then, it has not been reconstituted.

    Colonial Background

    • The first Law Commission was established during colonial rule in India, by the East India Company under the Charter Act of 1833.
    • It was then presided by Lord Macaulay.
    • After that, three more Commissions were established in pre-independent India.

    Post-Independence functioning

    • The first Law Commission of independent India was established in 1955 for a three-year term.
    • Since then, twenty-one more Commissions have been established.

    Major reforms undertaken

    • The First Law Commission under Macaulay Itsuggested various enactments to the British Government, most of which were passed and enacted and are still in force in India.
    • These include the Indian Penal Code (first submitted in 1837 but enacted in 1860 and still in force), Criminal Procedure Code (enacted in 1898, repealed and succeeded by the Criminal Procedure Code of 1973), etc.
    • Thereafter three more Law Commissions were established which made a number of other recommendations the Indian Evidence Act (1872) and Indian Contract Act (1872), etc. being some of the significant ones.

    Role in legal reforms

    The Law Commission has been a key to law reform in India.

    • Its role has been both advisory and critical of the government’s policies
    • In a number of decisions, the Supreme Court has referred to the work done by the commission and followed its recommendations.
    • The Commission seeks to simplify procedures to curb delays and improve standards of justice.
    • It also strives to promote an accountable and citizen-friendly government that is transparent and ensures the people’s right to information.

     

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

  • In news: Two principles of Justice

    This newscard is an excerpt of the original article published in TH.

    Note: This article is of extreme theoretical nature. But it leaves scope for many vague questions for prelims as well as mains where most of us go clueless.

    Two principles of Justice

    • The concept, so-called, of “two principles of justice”, is synonymous with the name of John Rawls, a highly influential American liberal political philosopher of the last century.
    • The concept of two principles forms an encapsulation of the core principles of:
    • Freedom and equality embodied in the constitutions of any contemporary liberal democratic society
    • As such, they have acquired pre-eminence in a wide range of academic disciplines and in the arena of public policymaking.

    What are the two principles?

    • The first of Rawls’ two principles says that every citizen has the same claim to a scheme of equal basic liberties, which must also be compatible with those of every other citizen.
    • It enumerates an extensive list of basic civil and political rights, including a person’s freedom of conscience, expression and association; the right to a basic income; and the right to exercise the franchise.
    • Their resonance with the practical world of politics needs no emphasis; consider the chapter on fundamental rights in any constitution.
    • The second of Rawls’ two principles grapples with the underlying inequalities of social and economic institutions.

    How can these be reasonably justified to free and equal citizens?

    • In order to be morally defensible, the institutions must satisfy two conditions.
    1. First, they must guarantee fair equality of opportunities for competition to positions of public office and employment.
    2. Second, social and economic inequalities must be arranged in a manner that they work to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society.
    • This latter postulate is Rawls’ famous “difference principle”.

    Significance of this principle

    • The political significance of Rawls’ two principles of justice obtains equally in the relative weight and primacy he assigns to their different components.
    • Between them, the first principle is accorded absolute priority over the second.
    • That is to say, the primacy of the equal basic liberties of citizens is non-negotiable in a democratic society.
    • The entitlement of each to the various liberties is as critical as they are universal and non-discriminatory.
    • Within the second principle, the first part takes precedence over the second.
    • In other words, public institutions could not appear legitimate in the eyes of citizens unless everybody could reasonably expect to enjoy the fruits of fair equality of opportunities.

     

    Try this question from CSP 2020:

    Q. One common agreement between Gandhism and Marxism is

    (a) The final goal of a stateless society

    (b) Class struggle

    (c) Abolition of private property

    (d) Economic determinism

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”yuea3fd1vc” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

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

  • Unresolved constitutional cases

    Context

    As 2021 draws to a close, a look at the Supreme Court of India’s docket reveals a host of highly significant constitutional cases that were long-pending when the year began, and are now simply a year older without any sign of resolution around the corner.

    How delay in judicial process matters differently for the State and individual?

    • While the violation of rights — whether through executive or legislative action — is relatively costless for the state, it is the individual, or individuals, who pay the price.
    • Making the Constitution effective: Consequently, a Constitution is entirely ineffective if a rights-violating status quo is allowed to exist and perpetuate for months, or even years, before it is finally resolved.
    • This point, of course, is not limited to the violation of rights, but extends to all significant constitutional questions that arise in the course of controversial state action.
    • Missing the accountability: Issues around the federal structure, elections, and many others, all involve questions of power and accountability, and the longer that courts take to resolve such cases, the more we move from a realm of accountability to a realm of impunity.
    • The longer such cases are left hanging without a decision, the greater the damage that is inflicted upon our constitutional democracy’s commitment to the rule of law.

    Significant cases that are unresolved

    [a] Challenge to the dilution of Article 370

    • There is the constitutional challenge to the Presidential Orders of August 5, 2019, that effectively diluted Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, and bifurcated the State of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories, controlled by the Centre.
    • It raises the question of whether the Centre can take advantage of an Article 356 situation in a State — a time when no elected government and Assembly is in existence — to make permanent and irreversible alterations in the very structure of the State itself.
    •  Implications for federal structure: The answer will have important ramifications not just for Jammu and Kashmir but for the entire federal structure:
    • India has a long history of the abuse of Article 356 to “get rid of” inconvenient State governments, and a further expansion of the power already enjoyed by the Centre will skew an already tilted federal scheme even further.
    • Power of the Parliament to alter convert State into UT: The case also raises the question of whether, under the Constitution, the Union Legislature has the authority not simply to alter State boundaries (a power granted to it by Article 3 of the Constitution), but degrade a State into a Union Territory.
    • If it turned out that the Union Legislature does have this power, it would essentially mean that India’s federal structure is entirely at the mercy of Parliament.

    [2] Constitutional challenge to the electoral bond scheme

    • Opaque and structurally biased: The electoral bonds scheme authorises limitless, anonymous corporate donations to political parties, making election funding both entirely opaque to the people, as well as being structurally biased towards the party that is in power at the Centre.
    • Impact on integrity and right of the citizens to informed vote: In numerous central and State election cycles in the last four years, thousands of crores of rupees have been spent in anonymous political donations, thus impacting not only the integrity of the election process but also the constitutional right of citizens to an informed vote.
    • However, other than two interim orders, the Supreme Court has refused to accord a full hearing to the constitutional challenge.

    [3] Other significant cases

    • Statutory basis of the CBI: As far back as 2013, the Gauhati High Court held that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was not established under any statutory authority.
    • This verdict was immediately stayed when it was appealed to the Supreme Court, but in the intervening years, it has never been heard.
    • Challenge to the CAA: More recently, constitutional challenges to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), filed in the immediate aftermath of the legislation’s enactment, remain unheard.
    • Challenge to the UAPA: The challenges to the much-criticised Section 43(D)(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, which makes the grant of bail effectively impossible, and is responsible for the years-long incarceration of several people.
    • The challenge to Section 43(D)(5) is perhaps the case that most directly affects civil rights, as the section continues to be applied on a regular basis.

    Implications of the delay

    • Favouring one party: The Supreme Court’s inaction is not neutral, but rather, favours the beneficiaries of the status quo.
    • In other words, by not deciding, the Court is in effect deciding — in favour of one party — but without a reasoned judgment that justifies its stance.
    • Impact on accountability: Judicial evasion of this kind is also damaging for the accountability of the judiciary itself.
    • The Court’s inaction plays as significant a role on the ground as does its action, there is no judgment — and no reasoning — that the public can engage with.
    • Impact on the rule of law: For obvious reasons, this too has a serious impact on the rule of law.

    Consider the question “What are the implications of the delay in deciding the constitutionally significant cases? Suggest the way forward.”

    Conclusion

    The current CJI has been on record stressing the importance of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. One way of demonstrating that in action might be to hear — and decide — the important constitutional cases pending before the Court.

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

  • When can an individual get Statutory Bail?

    The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has approached the Supreme Court against a Bombay High Court order granting bail to an advocate and activist.

    What is the case?

    • In its bail order, the court has asked the NIA Court to decide the conditions for her release.
    • The activist was given ‘default bail’.
    • The case highlights the nuances involved in a court determining the circumstances in which statutory bail is granted or denied, even though it is generally considered “an indefeasible right”.

    What is default bail?

    • This is enshrined in Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
    • Also known as statutory bail, this is a Right to Bail that accrues when the police fail to complete investigation within a specified period in respect of a person in judicial custody.
    • When it is not possible for the police to complete an investigation in 24 hours, the police produce the suspect in court and seek orders for either police or judicial custody.

    When is the Bail granted?

    • For most offences, the police have 60 days to complete the investigation and file a final report before the court.
    • However, where the offence attracts death sentence or life imprisonment, or a jail term of not less than 10 years, the period available is 90 days.
    • In other words, a magistrate cannot authorise a person’s judicial remand beyond the 60-or 90-day limit.
    • At the end of this period, if the investigation is not complete, the court shall release the person “if he is prepared to and does furnish bail”.

    How does the provision vary for special laws?

    The extension of time is not automatic but requires a judicial order.

    • Ordinary law (IPC/CrPC): The 60- or 90-day limit is only for ordinary penal law.
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act: In NDPS Act, the period is 180 days. However, in cases involving substances in commercial quantity, the period may be extended up to one year.
    • Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act: In UAPA, the default limit is 90 days only. The court may grant an extension of another 90 days, if it is satisfied that the progress made in the investigation and giving reasons to keep the accused in further custody.

    What are the laid-down principles on this aspect?

    • A matter of Right: Default or statutory bail is an indefeasible right’, regardless of the nature of the crime liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
    • Stipulated period calculation: The stipulated period within which the charge sheet has to be filed begins from the day the accused is remanded for the first time. It includes days undergone in both police and judicial custody, but not days spent in house-arrest.
    • Voluntary: There is no automatic bail.

    Try this similar PYQ from CSP 2021:

    Q. With reference to India, consider the following statements:

    1. When a prisoner makes a sufficient case, parole cannot be out denied to such prisoner because it becomes a matter of his/her right.
    2. State Governments have their own Prisoners Release on Parole Rules.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”r8o9gfqh8r” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

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

  • How MPs’ Questions are allowed, disallowed

    Over the last few sessions of Parliament, MPs mainly from the Opposition have often alleged that their questions have been intentionally disallowed.

    What are the categories of Questions?

    (1) Starred Question

    • The member desires an oral answer from the minister.
    • Such a question is distinguished by the MP with an asterisk.
    • The answer can also be followed by supplementary questions from members.

    (2) Unstarred Question

    • The MP seeks a written answer, which is deemed to be laid on the table of the House by the concerned minister.

    (3) Short Notice Question

    • These are on an urgent matter of public importance, and an oral answer is sought.
    • A notice of less than 10 days is prescribed as the minimum period for asking such a question.

    (4) Question to a Private Member

    • A question can be addressed to a private member under Rule 40 of Lok Sabha’s Rules of Procedure, or under Rule 48 of Rajya Sabha’s Rules.
    • Such question deals with a subject relating to some Bill, resolution or other matter for which that member is responsible.

    When are the questions asked?

    Ans. Question Hour

    • In both Houses, the first hour of every sitting is usually devoted to asking and answering of questions, and this is referred to as the ‘Question Hour’.
    • The total number of questions for any day is limited to 175.
    • These includes 15 questions for oral answers, questions postponed from one list to another for written answers, and 15 questions pertaining to states under President’s Rule.

    How are questions admitted?

    • In both Houses, elected members enjoy the right to seek information from various ministries and departments in the form of questions.
    • The Rajya Sabha Chairman or the Lok Sabha Speaker has the authority to decide whether a question or a part is or is not admissible under the norms of the House, and disallow any question or a part.
    • Usually, MPs’ questions form a long list, which then go through a rigorous process of clearance.
    • Once a question that fulfils the conditions of admissibility is received, the Secretariat sends it to the ministry concerned.
    • Once the facts are received from the ministry, the question is further examined for admissibility.
    • A final list of questions is circulated to ministers, on the basis of which they frame their answers.

    Answering the Questions

    • For answering the questions, ministries and departments have been divided into five groups (I to V) that have been allotted Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays respectively.
    • The grouping has been done in such a way that each minister has one fixed day in the week for answering questions in Rajya Sabha and another fixed day for answering questions in Lok Sabha.

    What kind of questions can be asked?

    (A) Rajya Sabha

    • The question shall be pointed, specific and confined to one issue only
    • It shall not bring in any name or statement not strictly necessary to make the question intelligible
    • If it contains a statement the member shall make himself responsible for the accuracy of the statement
    • It shall not contain arguments, inferences, ironical expressions, imputations, epithets or defamatory statements

    (B) Lok Sabha

    Questions that are not admitted include:

    • Those that are repetitive or have been answered previously and
    • Matters that are pending for judgment before any court of law or under consideration before a Parliamentary Committee

     

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

  • The politics-policy disconnect in India

    Context

    Decision-making on virtually all governance issues is disconnected from politics and the mobilisation of public opinion.

    Disconnect between politics and policy

    • The repeal of the farm laws is thus a notable instance of politics and policy coming together, although in conflict.
    • The Opposition speaking in one voice in the Parliament helped, but the heavy lifting of organising in the villages and sustaining the protests was done by the farmers’ groups.
    • This disconnect between politics and policy is not a recent development, though it manifests differently across political divides.
    • Policy-first lens and its implications: The liberal side has a policy-first lens but is unable to articulate its ideas in a manner which makes for good politics, repeatedly couching its ideas in a bureaucratic framework disconnected from political organisation.
    • Bureaucracy is downstream from politics and this approach rather than curbing the state may have instead contributed to undermining the democratic process of political accountability since the political class is, by design, not central to the policy in the first place.
    • A politics-first approach: The right, on its side, has a politics-first lens but it derives its politics largely from its social agenda instead of issues of governance.
    • The policy imperatives, if any, are ad hoc and appear to be driven by the demands of running the political apparatus instead of a clear governance agenda.
    • Despite these differences, what is common across parties is the apolitical harnessing of the state as a disburser of different kinds of economic largesse, especially just before elections, as political parties cast about for simple ideas for easy mass communication.

    Reasons for the breakdown of the process

    • Weakly institutionalised nature of state and politics: Indian politics and the state are weakly institutionalised to begin with, which leads to an all-around fuzziness in the relationship between politics and policy.
    • However, this is as much an effect as it is cause, with the direction of change towards greater deinstitutionalisation instead of the opposite.
    • Lack of consensus-building: Another contributing factor is that traditional sites of consensus-building such as media, civil society, and political parties have developed pathologies which have rendered sustained consensus-building almost impossible. 
    • Centralisation of power: The excessive centralisation of power in party platforms and the head of the government (state and national).
    • This renders the individual elected representative extraneous to governance even in their own constituency, where their function is to provide representation and oversight.

    Way forward

    • There’s too much at stake to allow such a state of affairs to continue.
    •  It is important to rescue public interest from partisanship and cut through at least some of the bad-faith crosstalk across partisan divides.
    • Cross-cutting collaboration: There are many issues which lend themselves to cross-cutting collaboration outside of ideological affiliations.
    • Need for reforms: Institutional reforms are required to create such a space but public-spirited individuals across political divides can lay the foundation for such collaboration through issue-based discipline, moderation and intellectual independence.

    Consider the question “There has been a growing disconnect in India between policy and politics. Examine the factors responsible for this. Suggest the way forward.”

    Conclusion

    We need to address the disconnect between policy and politics to make the functioning of democracy more meaningful for us.

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

  • SC pushes for National Judicial Infrastructure Corporation (NJIC)

    The Supreme Court orally said that courts cannot wait on the whims and fancies of the Government, but need a proper mechanism for funding the development of judicial infrastructure.

    National Judicial Infrastructure Corporation (NJIC)

    • The idea for such NJIC was first proposed by CJI Ramana in March this year, even before he took office.
    • It mooted the idea of an “umbrella national organization” that would take care of the need for judicial infrastructure.
    • Such a corporation would bring the uniformity and standardization required to revolutionize judicial infrastructure, said CJI.
    • Soon after he was sworn in, the CJI commenced work on the NJIC and a survey of 6,000 trial courts in various states was undertaken as part of this exercise.

    CJI recommends the composition of NJIC

    • The CJI has said that the Judiciary is least interested in retaining control of the council.
    • The composition can be of the Union Minister for Law and Justice, the Secretary, Finance, etc.
    • The States can also be represented.
    • The benefit of having a senior judge or Chief Justice on it would be that they are in the know of things.

    Why need NJIC?

    • No central agency: Presently, there is no agency to ensure use of funds allocated to augment judicial infrastructure
    • Infrastructure gap: There is a substantial gap in infrastructure and availability of basic amenities in the lower judiciary.
    • Lack of basic amenities: There is a lack of court halls, residential accommodation, and waiting room for litigants in trial courts, especially in smaller towns and rural areas.
    • Budgetary lapses: Experience shows that budgetary allocation for state judiciary often lapses since there is no independent body to supervise and execute works.

    NJIC is expected to fill this vacuum and overcome problems related to infrastructure.

    Significance of NJIC

    • The modernization of judicial infrastructure did not mean building more courts or filling up vacancies or ploughing through vacancies.
    • An efficient “judicial infrastructure” means providing equal and free access to justice.
    • This could be realized through a barrier-free and citizen-friendly environment.

     

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