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

Subject: Polity

  • Andhra Pradesh government repealed laws on 3 capitals

    The Andhra Pradesh Assembly unanimously passed a Bill to repeal two laws that were cleared last year to set up three different state capitals.

    Three Capitals Act

    • The law was titled Andhra Pradesh Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Act, 2020.
    • The incumbent govt had decided to reverse the previous government’s decision to have an ambitious world-class capital city at Amaravati, which is located between Vijayawada and Guntur.
    • Thus, it was decided that Amaravati was to be the Legislative capital, Visakhapatnam the Executive capital, and Kurnool the Judicial capital.

    Why was it repealed?

    • Over a hundred petitions challenging the government’s move have been filed before the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
    • Farmers of Amaravati, who let the government acquire their lands, wanted them to stick to the previous plan and build a world-class capital city in the same location.

    Will Andhra Pradesh have only one capital now?

    • It is not clear if the government will stick to Amaravati as the sole capital.
    • Throughout his address, the CM stressed the need for decentralization for the equitable development of all regions.

    What are the other examples of multiple capital cities?

    • Among Indian states, Maharashtra has two capitals– Mumbai and Nagpur (which hold the winter session of the state assembly).
    • Himachal Pradesh has capitals at Shimla and Dharamshala (winter).
    • The former state of Jammu & Kashmir had Srinagar and Jammu (winter) as capitals.

    Must read

    Three capitals for Andhra Pradesh — its logic and the questions it raises

     

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

  • Global State of Democracy Report, 2021

    The number of countries moving towards authoritarianism in 2020 was higher than that of countries going in the other direction, towards democracy, a/c to the Global State of Democracy (GSD) Report, 2021.

    Note: The Global Democracy Index is released by the Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU). One may get confused over this two.

    About GSD Report

    • The GSD report is released by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International-IDEA).
    • The International-IDEA, is an inter-governmental organization supporting democracy, is chaired by Australia and includes India as a member-state.
    • The report aims to influence the global debate and analyses current trends and challenges to democracy, exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic.
    • It offers specific policy recommendations to spark new and innovative thinking for policymakers, governments and civil society organizations supporting democracy.

    GSD framework

    Highlights of the report

    • The US and three members of the European Union (EU) [Hungary, Poland and Slovenia] have also seen concerning democratic declines.
    • The pandemic has prolonged this existing negative trend into a five-year stretch, the longest such period since the start of the third wave of democratization in the 1970s.
    • Democratically elected Governments, including established democracies, are increasingly adopting authoritarian tactics.
    • This democratic backsliding has often enjoyed significant popular support.

    India’s performance

    • The report highlighted the case of Brazil and India as “some of the most worrying examples of backsliding.
    • India is the backsliding democracy with the most democratic violations during the pandemic.
    • Violations include- Harassment, arrests and prosecution of human rights defenders, activists, journalists, students, academics and others critical of the government or its policies; internet obstructions etc.

    Resilient democracies

    • The report pointed out that many democracies had proved to be resilient to the pandemic.
    • Despite pandemic restrictions on campaigning and media, the electoral component of democracy has shown remarkable resilience.
    • Countries around the world learned to hold elections in exceedingly difficult conditions and they rapidly activated special voting arrangements to allow citizens to continue exercising their democratic rights.

    Democracy is good. I say this because other systems are worse.

    –  Jawaharlal Nehru

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

  • Why are Judicial Transfers riddled by controversies?

    The transfer of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee from the Madras High Court to the Meghalaya High Court has given rise to a controversy over the question of whether judicial transfers are made only for administrative reasons or have any element of ‘punishment’ behind them.

    Transfer of judges and the Constitution

    • Article 222 of the Constitution provides for the transfer of High Court judges, including the Chief Justice.
    • It says the President, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, may transfer a judge from one High Court to any other High Court.
    • It also provides for a compensatory allowance to the transferred judge.
    • This means that the executive could transfer a judge, but only after consulting the Chief Justice of India.
    • From time to time, there have been proposals that one-third of the composition of every High Court should have judges from other States.

    What is the Supreme Court’s view on the issue?

    Union of India vs. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth (1977)

    • The Supreme Court rejected the idea that High Court judges can be transferred only with their consent.
    • It reasoned that the transfer of power can be exercised only in public interest.
    • It held that the President is under an obligation to consult the CJI, which meant that all relevant facts must be placed before the CJI.
    • It ruled CJI had the right and duty to elicit and ascertain further facts from the judge concerned or others.

    S.P. Gupta vs. President of India, 1981 (First Judges Case)

    • It considered the validity of the transfer Judges as well as a circular from the Law Ministry.
    • The Ministry had put that additional judge in all High Courts may be asked for their consent to be appointed as permanent judges in any other High Court, and to name three preferences.
    • The Minister’s reasoning was that such transfers would promote national integration and help avoid parochial tendencies bred by caste, kinship and other local links and affiliations.
    • The majority ruled that consultation with the CJI did not mean ‘concurrence’ with respect to appointments.

    SCARA Vs Union of India, 1993 (Second Judges Case)  

    • In effect, it emphasized the primacy of the executive in the matter of appointments and transfers.
    • However, this position was overruled in the ‘Second Judges Case’ (1993).
    • The opinion of the CJI, formed after taking into account the views of senior-most judges, was to have primacy.
    • Since then, appointments are being made by the Collegium.

    Current procedure for transfers

    • As one of the points made by the ‘Second Judges Case’ was that the opinion of the CJI ought to mean the views of a plurality of judges, the concept of a ‘Collegium of Judges’ came into being.
    • In the collegium era, the proposal for transferring a High Court judge, including a Chief Justice, should be initiated by the Chief Justice of India, “whose opinion in this regard is determinative”.
    • The consent of the judge is not required.
    • All transfers are to be made in public interest, i.e. for promoting better administration of justice throughout the country.
    • For transferring a judge other than the Chief Justice, the CJI should take the views of the CJ of the court concerned, as well as the CJ of the court to which the transfer is taking place.
    • The CJI should also take into account the views of one or more Supreme Court judges who are in a position to offer their views.
    • In the case of transfer of a Chief Justice, only the views of one or more knowledgeable Supreme Court judges need to be taken into account.

    Provision for Written Recommendation

    • The views should all be expressed in writing, and they should be considered by the CJI and four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, which means, the full Collegium of five.
    • The recommendation is sent to the Union Law Minister who should submit the relevant papers to the Prime Minister.
    • The PM then advises the President on approving the transfer.

    What makes transfers controversial?

    • Punitive intent: Transfer orders become controversial when the Bar or sections of the public feel that there is a punitive element behind the decision to move a judge from one High Court to another.
    • No disclosure of reasons: As a matter of practice, the Supreme Court and the government do not disclose the reason for a transfer.
    • Adverse opinions behind: For, if the reason is because of some adverse opinion on a judge’s functioning, disclosure would impinge on the judge’s performance and independence in the court to which he is transferred.

     

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

  • Process for Repealing a Law

    PM after repealing the farm laws has said that the process of repealing the laws — which are currently stayed by the Supreme Court — will take place in the upcoming Winter Session of Parliament.

    Repealing a Law

    • Repealing a law is one of the ways to nullify a law.
    • A law is reversed when Parliament thinks there is no longer a need for the law to exist.
    • Legislation can also have a “sunset” clause, a particular date after which they cease to exist.
    • For example, the anti-terror legislation Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act 1987, commonly known as TADA, had a sunset clause, and was allowed to lapse in 1995.
    • For laws that do not have a sunset clause, Parliament has to pass another legislation to repeal the law.

    (Sunset Clause: A law shall cease to have effect after a specific date, unless further legislative action is taken to extend the law.)

    How can the government repeal a law?

    • Article 245 of the Constitution gives Parliament the power to make laws for the whole or any part of India, and state legislatures the power to make laws for the state.
    • Parliament draws its power to repeal a law from the same provision.
    • A law can be repealed either in its entirety, in part, or even just to the extent that it is in contravention of other laws.

    What is the process for repealing a law?

    • Laws can be repealed in two ways — either through an ordinance, or through legislation.
    • In case an ordinance is used, it would need to be replaced by a law passed by Parliament within six months.
    • If the ordinance lapses because it is not approved by Parliament, the repealed law can be revived.
    • The government can also bring legislation to repeal the farm laws.
    • It will have to be passed by both Houses of Parliament, and receive the President’s assent before it comes into effect.

    Legislations required

    • All three farm laws can be repealed through a single legislation.
    • Usually, Bills titled Repealing and Amendment are introduced for this purpose.

     

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

  • 25 years of Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA)

    The Ministry of Tribal Affairs has celebrated the 25th year of the inauguration of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996 (PESA)’ as a part of Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav.

    What is PESA?

    • The PESA is a law enacted by the govt. for ensuring self-governance through traditional Gram Sabhas for people living in the Scheduled Areas of India.
    • Scheduled Areas are areas identified by the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India.

    What are Scheduled Areas?

    • “Scheduled Areas” mean the Scheduled Areas as referred to in Clause (1) of Article 244 of the Constitution.
    • They are found in ten states of India which have predominant population of tribal communities.
    • At present, Scheduled Areas have been declared in the States of AP (including Telangana), Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, MP, Maharashtra, Odisha and Rajasthan.

    Powers granted to Gram Sabha/Panchayats

    • Land acquisition: To be consulted on matters of land acquisition and resettlement.
    • Mining licencing: Grant prospecting license for mining lease for minor minerals and concessions for such activities.
    • Water Bodies: Planning and management of minor water bodies.
    • Regulation of Liquor: The power to enforce prohibition or to regulate or restrict the sale and consumption of any intoxicant.
    • Minor Forest Produces: The ownership of MFPs
    • Land reforms: The power to prevent alienation of land and to restore any unlawfully alienated land of a scheduled tribe.
    • Village Markets: The power to manage village markets.
    • Money Lending: The power to exercise control over money lending to scheduled tribes.

    Role of Governor in Implementation of PESA

    (1) Report as sought by the President:

    • As per para 3 of the Fifth Schedule, the Governor therein is required to make a report to the President regarding the administration of the Scheduled Areas.
    • The Attorney General had advised the Home Ministry that the role of the governor in sending this report is discretionary.

    (2) Applicability of certain laws:

    • An even more significant role of the Governor in scheduled areas arises out of the powers inherent in sub-para (1) of Para 5 of the Fifth Schedule.
    • Governor may direct that any particular Act of Parliament or of the Legislature of the State shall not apply to a Scheduled Area or any part thereof in the State or shall apply to a Scheduled Area.

    (3) Modification of laws:

    • The regulation-making powers of the Area is bound neither by the advice of the Tribes Advisory Council or the assent of the President.
    • The provision lays down the responsibility on the Governor to ensure that laws that are contrary to the interests of Scheduled Areas may be suitably modified.

    Why was PESA enacted?

    • Filling the constitutional vacuum: These Areas were not covered by the 73rd Constitutional Amendment or Panchayati Raj Act of the Indian Constitution as provided in Part IX of the Constitution.
    • Self-governance: PESA sought to enable the Panchayats at appropriate levels and Gram Sabhas to implement a system of self-governance.
    • Customary regulation: It includes a number of issues such as customary resources, minor forest produce, minor minerals, minor water bodies, selection of beneficiaries, sanction of projects, and control over local institutions.

    Significance of PESA

    • Tribal autonomy: PESA was seen as a panacea for many of these vulnerabilities where the tribal communities in such Scheduled Areas were to decide by themselves the pace and priorities of their development.
    • Tribal way of development: PESA was viewed as a positive development for tribal communities in Scheduled Areas that had earlier suffered tremendously from engagement with modern development processes.
    • Sustainable access to forests: The loss of access to forest, land, and other community resources had increased their vulnerability.
    • Easing of tribal distress: Rampant land acquisition and displacement due to development projects had led to large-scale distress in tribal communities living in Scheduled Areas.

    Issues with PESA

    • Dilution of the role of Tribal Advisory Councils: PESA mandates Tribal Advisory Councils to oversee tribal affairs and also gives extrajudicial, extra-constitutional powers to the Governors.
    • Politicization: The councils, with the CM as their chairperson, have evolved into a non-assertive institution amid the machinations of upper-class politics.
    • Non-involvement: The Governors, in order to have friendly relations with the Chief Ministers, have desisted from getting involved in tribal matters.
    • Lack of coordination at Centre: Two different ministries, the Ministry of Panchayati Raj and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, have an overlapping influence and they function almost without any coordination.
    • Lack of operationalization: In most of the state the enabling rules are not in place more than eight years after the adoption of the Act suggests the reluctance to operationalize the PESA mandate.
    • Ignoring the spirit of PESA: The state legislations have omitted some of the fundamental principles without which the spirit of PESA can never be realised.
    • Ambiguous definitions: No legal definition of the terms like minor water bodies, minor minerals etc. exist in the statute books.

    Related question in CS Mains:

    Q. What are the two major legal initiatives by the State since Independence addressing discrimination against Scheduled Tribes (STs)? (2017, 150W)

    Also try answering this PYQ:

    In the areas covered under the Panchayat (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996, what is the role/power of Gram Sabha?

    1. Gram Sabha has the power to prevent alienation of land in the Scheduled Areas.
    2. Gram Sabha has the ownership of minor forest produce.
    3. Recommendation of Gram Sabha is required for granting prospecting license or mining lease for any mineral in the Scheduled Areas.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) Only 1

    (b) 1 and 2 only

    (c) 2 and 3 only

    (d) 1, 2 and 3

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”4luspsapn4″ 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)

  • HC presses Centre on Uniform Civil Code

    Stating that the Uniform Civil Code “is a necessity and mandatorily required today,” the Allahabad High Court has called upon the Central Government to forthwith initiate the process for its implementation.

    What is a Uniform Civil Code?

    • A Uniform Civil Code is one that would provide for one law for the entire country, applicable to all religious communities in their personal matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption etc.
    • Article 44, one of the directive principles of the Constitution lays down that the state shall endeavour to secure a Uniform Civil Code for the citizens throughout the territory of India.
    • These, as defined in Article 37, are not justiciable (not enforceable by any court) but the principles laid down therein are fundamental in governance.

    Why need UCC?

    • UCC would provide equal status to all citizens
    • It would promote gender parity in Indian society.
    • UCC would accommodate the aspirations of the young population who imbibe liberal ideology.
    • Its implementation would thus support the national integration.

    Issues with UCC

    • There are practical difficulties due to religious and cultural diversity in India.
    • The UCC is often perceived by the minorities as an encroachment on religious freedom.
    • It is often regarded as interference of the state in personal matters of the minorities.
    • Experts often argue that the time is not ripe for Indian society to embrace such UCC.

    Greater role for State

    • Fundamental rights are enforceable in a court of law.
    • While Article 44 uses the words “state shall endeavour”, other Articles in the ‘Directive Principles’ chapter use words such as “in particular strive”; “shall in particular direct its policy”; “shall be obligation of the state” etc.
    • Article 43 mentions “state shall endeavour by suitable legislation” while the phrase “by suitable legislation” is absent in Article 44.
    • All this implies that the duty of the state is greater in other directive principles than in Article 44.

    What are more important — fundamental rights or directive principles?

    • There is no doubt that fundamental rights are more important.
    • The Supreme Court held in Minerva Mills (1980): Indian Constitution is founded on the bed-rock of the balance between Parts III (Fundamental Rights) and IV (Directive Principles).
    • To give absolute primacy to one over the other is to disturb the harmony of the Constitution.
    • Article 31C inserted by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, however, lays down that if a law is made to implement any directive principle, it cannot be challenged on the ground of being violative of the FRs under Articles 14 and 19.

    Does India not already have a uniform code in civil matters?

    • Indian laws do follow a uniform code in most civil matters – Indian Contract Act, Civil Procedure Code, Sale of Goods Act, Transfer of Property Act, Partnership Act, Evidence Act etc.
    • States, however, have made hundreds of amendments and therefore in certain matters, there is diversity even under these secular civil laws.
    • Recently, several states refused to be governed by the uniform Motor Vehicles Act, 2019.

    What about personal laws?

    • If the framers of the Constitution had intended to have a Uniform Civil Code, they would have given exclusive jurisdiction to Parliament in respect of personal laws, by including this subject in the Union List.
    • But “personal laws” are mentioned in the Concurrent List.
    • Last year, the Law Commission concluded that a Uniform Civil Code is neither feasible nor desirable.

    Is there one common personal law for any religious community governing all its members?

    • All Hindus of the country are not governed by one law, nor are all Muslims or all Christians.
    • Not only British legal traditions, even those of the Portuguese and the French remain operative in some parts.
    • In Jammu and Kashmir until August 5, 2019, local Hindu law statutes differed from central enactments.
    • The Shariat Act of 1937 was extended to J&K a few years ago but has now been repealed.

    Various customary laws

    • Muslims of Kashmir were governed by a customary law, which in many ways was at variance with Muslim Personal Law in the rest of the country and was, in fact, closer to Hindu law.
    • Even on registration of marriage among Muslims, laws differ from place to place. It was compulsory in J&K (1981 Act), and is optional in Bengal, Bihar (both under 1876 Act), Assam (1935 Act) and Odisha (1949 Act).
    • In the Northeast, there are more than 200 tribes with their own varied customary laws.
    • The Constitution itself protects local customs in Nagaland. Similar protections are enjoyed by Meghalaya and Mizoram.
    • Even reformed Hindu law, in spite of codification, protects customary practices.

    How does the idea of a Uniform Civil Code relate to the fundamental right to religion?

    • Article 25 lays down an individual’s fundamental right to religion;
    • Article 26(b) upholds the right of each religious denomination or any section thereof to “manage its own affairs in matters of religion”;
    • Article 29 defines the right to conserve distinctive culture.
    • An individual’s freedom of religion under Article 25 is subject to “public order, health, morality” and other provisions relating to FRs, but a group’s freedom under Article 26 has not been subjected to other fundamental rights
    • In the Constituent Assembly, there was division on the issue of putting UCC in the fundamental rights chapter. The matter was settled by a vote.
    • By a 5:4 majority, the fundamental rights sub-committee headed by Sardar Patel held that the provision was outside the scope of FRs and therefore the UCC was made less important than freedom of religion.

    Minority opinion in the Constituent Assembly

    • Some members sought to immunize Muslim Personal Law from state regulation.
    • Mohammed Ismail, who thrice tried unsuccessfully to get Muslim Personal Law exempted from Article 44, said a secular state should not interfere with the personal law of people.
    • B Pocker Saheb said he had received representations against a common civil code from various organisations, including Hindu organisations.
    • Hussain Imam questioned whether there could ever be uniformity of personal laws in a diverse country like India.
    • B R Ambedkar said “no government can use its provisions in a way that would force the Muslims to revolt”.
    • Alladi Krishnaswami, who was in favour of a UCC, conceded that it would be unwise to enact UCC ignoring strong opposition from any community.
    • Gender justice was never discussed in these debates.

    How did the debate on a common code for Hindus play out?

    • In June 1948, Rajendra Prasad, President of the Constituent Assembly, warned Nehru that to introduce “basic changes” in personal law was to impose “progressive ideas” of a “microscopic minority” on the Hindu community as a whole.
    • Others opposed to reforms in Hindu law included Sardar Patel, Pattabhi Sitaramayya, M A Ayyangar, M M Malaviya and Kailash Nath Katju.
    • When the debate on the Hindu Code Bill took place in December 1949, 23 of 28 speakers opposed it.
    • On September 15, 1951, President Prasad threatened to use his powers of returning the Bill to Parliament or vetoing it. Ambedkar eventually had to resign.
    • Nehru agreed to the trifurcation of the Code into separate Acts and diluted several provisions.

     

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

  • Speaker’s powers on Anti-Defection Cases

    The All-India Presiding Officers’ Conference (AIPOC) ended with the delegates failing to reach a consensus on whether the Speaker’s powers under the anti-defection law should be limited.

    What is Anti-defection Law?

    • The Anti-Defection Law under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution punishes MPs/ MLAs for defecting from their party by taking away their membership of the legislature.
    • It gives the Speaker of the legislature the power to decide the outcome of defection proceedings.
    • It was added to the Constitution through the Fifty-Second (Amendment) Act, 1985 when Rajiv Gandhi was PM.
    • The law applies to both Parliament and state assemblies.

    Cases considered under the anti-defection law

    The law covers three scenarios with respect to shifting of political parties by an MP or an MLA.

    (1) Voluntary give-up

    • The first is when a member elected on the ticket of a political party “voluntarily gives up” membership of such a party or votes in the House against the wishes of the party.
    • Such persons lose his seat.

    (2) Independent members

    • When a legislator who has won his or her seat as an independent candidate joins a political party after the election.
    • In both these instances, the legislator loses the seat in the legislature on changing (or joining) a party.

    (3) Nominated MPs

    • In their case, the law gives them six months to join a political party, after being nominated.
    • If they join a party after such time, they stand to lose their seat in the House.

    Powers to disqualification

    • Under the anti-defection law, the power to decide the disqualification of an MP or MLA rests with the presiding officer of the legislature.
    • The law does not specify a time frame in which such a decision has to be made.
    • As a result, Speakers of legislatures have sometimes acted very quickly or have delayed the decision for years — and have been accused of political bias in both situations.

    Significant role of the Speaker/Presiding Officer

    • Pandit Nehru had referred to the Speaker as “the symbol of the nation’s freedom and liberty” and emphasized that Speakers should be men of “outstanding ability and impartiality”.
    • Several judgments on the anti-defection law have been rendered by the Supreme Court.
    • A common factor that shows up in these rulings is the blatant, partisan conduct of speakers in state assemblies.

    Reasons for Speakers’ bias

    • The Speaker continues to belong to a particular political party.
    • The electoral system and conventions in India have ‘not been developed to ensure protection to the office, there are cogent reasons for Speakers to retain party membership.
    • It would be unrealistic to expect a speaker to completely abjure all party considerations while functioning.
    • There are structural issues regarding the manner of appointment of the Speaker and her tenure in office.

    Way forward

    • Parliament may seriously consider a Constitutional amendment to bring in a permanent Tribunal for dealing with defection cases.
    • It is suggested that a scheme should be brought wherein Speakers should renounce all political affiliations, membership, and activity once they have been elected.
    • We can learn from the UK model. In practice, once elected, the Speaker gives up all-partisan affiliation, as in other Parliaments of British tradition.
    • He/she remains in office until retirement, even though the majority may change and does not express any political views during debates.

    Conclusion

    • Impartiality, fairness, and autonomy in decision-making are the hallmarks of a robust institution.
    • It is the freedom from interference and pressures which provide the necessary atmosphere where one can work with an absolute commitment to the cause of neutrality as a constitutional value.

     

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

  • What is Privilege Motion?

    A chief whip of the largest party in opposition in the Rajya Sabha has moved a privilege motion against Culture Minister over the appointment of the chairperson of the National Monuments Authority.

    What is Parliamentary Privilege?

    • Parliamentary privilege refers to the right and immunity enjoyed by legislatures.
    • The legislators are granted protection against civil or criminal liability for actions done or statements made in the course of their legislative duties.
    • They are granted so that the MPs/MLAs can effectively discharge their functions.
    • The powers, privileges and immunities of either House of the Indian Parliament and of its members and committees are laid down in Article 105 of the Constitution.
    • Article 194 deals with the powers, privileges and immunities of the State Legislatures, their members and their committees.

    What is a privilege motion?

    • When any of the rights and immunities are disregarded, the offence is called a breach of privilege and is punishable under law of Parliament.
    • A notice is moved in the form of a motion by any member of either House against those being held guilty of breach of privilege.
    • Each House also claims the right to punish as contempt actions which, while not breach of any specific privilege, are offences against its authority and dignity.

    What are the rules governing privilege?

    • Rule No 222 in Chapter 20 of the Lok Sabha Rule Book and correspondingly Rule 187 in Chapter 16 of the Rajya Sabha rulebook govern privilege.
    • It says that a member may, with the consent of the Speaker or the Chairperson, raise a question involving a breach of privilege either of a member or of the House or of a committee thereof.
    • The rules however mandate that any notice should be relating to an incident of recent occurrence and should need the intervention of the House.
    • Notices have to be given before 10 am to the Speaker or the Chairperson.

    What is the role of the Speaker/Rajya Sabha Chair?

    • The Speaker/RS chairperson is the first level of scrutiny of a privilege motion.
    • The Speaker/Chair can decide on the privilege motion himself or herself or refer it to the privileges committee of Parliament.
    • If the Speaker/Chair gives consent under Rule 222, the member concerned is given an opportunity to make a short statement.

    What is the privileges committee?

    • In the Lok Sabha, the Speaker nominates a committee of privileges consisting of 15 members as per respective party strengths.
    • A report is then presented to the House for its consideration. The Speaker may permit a half-hour debate while considering the report.
    • The Speaker may then pass final orders or direct that the report be tabled before the House.
    • A resolution may then be moved relating to the breach of privilege that has to be unanimously passed.
    • In the Rajya Sabha, the deputy chairperson heads the committee of privileges, which consists of 10 members.

    Answer this PYQ in the comment box:

    Q.With reference to the Parliament of India, which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, by-laws etc. conferred by the constitution of delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation?

    (a) Committee on Government Assurances

    (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation

    (c) Rules Committee

    (d) Business Advisory Committee

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”15m1lm0qbg” 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)

  • Mumbai-Karnataka Region renamed as Kittur Karnataka

    Karnataka has renamed the Mumbai-Karnataka region, consisting of seven districts, as Kittur Karnataka.

    What is the Mumbai-Karnataka Region?

    • The erstwhile Mumbai-Karnataka region consisted of Uttara Kannada, Belagavi, Dharwad, Vijayapura, Bagalkote, Gadag and Haveri districts.

    Reasons behind renaming

    • The Karnataka government has meant to dissociate itself from any ties with the erstwhile Presidency or colonial-era nomenclature in regions that came under the newly formed state of Karnataka in 1956.
    • The renaming is also to detach itself from any ties with Maharashtra.

    Claims made by Maharashtra

    • Maharashtra has staked claim to an area of over 7,000 sq. km along its border with Karnataka.
    • It comprised 814 villages in the districts of Belagavi, Uttara Kannada, Bidar and Gulbarga, and the towns of Belagavi, Karwar and Nippani.
    • Maharashtra wants to annex all these areas.
    • The erstwhile Bombay Presidency, a multilingual province, included present-day Karnataka districts of Vijayapura, Belagavi, Dharwad and Uttara Kannada.
    • The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 made Belagavi and 10 talukas of Bombay State a part of the then Mysore State (which was renamed Karnataka in 1973).

    A case pending in the Supreme Court

    • Successive governments in Maharashtra have demanded their inclusion within the state– a claim that Karnataka contests.
    • In 2004, the Maharashtra government moved the Supreme Court for a settlement of the border dispute under Article 131(b) of the Constitution.
    • It demanded 814 villages from Karnataka on the basis of the theory of village being the unit of calculation, contiguity and enumerating linguistic population in each village.
    • The case is pending in the apex court.

     

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

  • A new jurisprudence for political prisoners

    Context

    In Thwaha Fasal vs Union of India, the Court has acted in its introspective jurisdiction and deconstructed the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) with a great sense of legal realism. This paves the way for a formidable judicial authority against blatant misuse of this law.

    Background of the case

    • In this case from Kerala, there are three accused.
    • The police registered the case and later the investigation was handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
    • During the investigation, some materials containing radical literature were found, which included a book on caste issues in India and a translation of the dissent notes written by Rosa Luxemburg to Lenin.
    • Thus, the provisions of the UAPA were invoked.
    • After initial rejection of the pleas, the trial judge granted bail to both the accused in September 2020.
    • The Supreme Court was emphatic and liberal when it said that mere association with a terrorist organisation is not sufficient to attract the offences alleged.
    • Unless and until the association and the support were “with intention of furthering the activities of a terrorist organisation”, offence under Section 38 or Section 39 is not made out, said the Court.

    Issues with UAPA

    • Section 43D(5) of the UAPA says that for many of the offences under the Act, bail should not be granted, if “on perusal of the case diary or the report (of the investigation), there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation is prima facie true”.
    • Thus, the Act prompts the Court to consider the version of the prosecution alone while deciding the question of bail.
    • Unlike the Criminal Procedure Code, the UAPA, by virtue of the proviso to Section 43D(2), permits keeping a person in prison for up to 180 days, without even filing a charge sheet.
    • Prevents examination of the facts: The statute prevents a comprehensive examination of the facts of the case on the one hand, and prolongs the trial indefinitely by keeping the accused in prison on the other.
    • Instead of presumption of innocence, the UAPA holds presumption of guilt of the accused.
    • In Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, the Court said that by virtue of Section 43D(5) of UAPA, the burden is on the accused to show that the prosecution case is not prima facie true.
    • The proposition in Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali is that the bail court should not even investigate deeply into the materials and evidence and should consider the bail plea, primarily based on the nature of allegations, for, according to the Court, Section 43D(5) prohibits a thorough and deeper examination.
    • The top court has now altered this terrible legal landscape.

    Key takeaways from the judgement

    • The text of the laws sometimes poses immense challenge to the courts by limiting the space for judicial discretion and adjudication.
    • The courts usually adopt two mutually contradictory methods in dealing with such tough provisions.
    • One is to read and apply the provision literally and mechanically which has the effect of curtailing the individual freedom as intended by the makers of the law.
    • In contrast to this approach, there could be a constitutional reading of the statute, which perceives the issues in a human rights angle and tries to mitigate the rigour of the content of the law.

    Conclusion

    The judgment should be invoked to release other political prisoners in the country who have been denied bail either due to the harshness of the law or due to the follies in understanding the law or both.