Civil Services Preparation, Current Affairs, General Studies
International Kaleidoscope
India and The World
Quick Scan
Geography (English)
Polity and International Relations (English)
Economy (English)
Readings for Mains
Readings for Prelims
Rajiv Kumar: New NITI Aayog Vice-Chairman
sinharajiv Persons in News	0
Economist Dr. Rajiv Kumar has been appointed (August 5, 2017) as the new Vice-Chairman of the government think tank NITI Aayog. Present vice-chairman Arvind Panagariya had stepped down earlier this month. The Columbia University professor will be returning to the U.S. to rejoin academia. Dr. Vinod Paul, pediatrician at AIIMS, has also been appointed as a member of the NITI Aayog.
Dr. Rajiv Kumar, who holds a DPhil in economics from Oxford and a Ph.D from Lucknow University, has served as director and chief executive of the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), and has earlier worked with the Asian Development Bank. He was also a senior fellow at the Centre for Policy Research. He has written a book titled Modi and His Challenges. In chapter 2 of the book titled "Ideals, Ideology and Influences" , he has dealt with the period before Narendra Modi became chief minister of Gujarat. This doesn't have material that is new or unknown and draws extensively on earlier books by M V Kamath and Kalindi Randeri, Andy Marino, Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, Sudesh Verma and Madhu Kishwar. Having immersed himself in these biographies, Mr Kumar gives us the core biographic details and lists 14 "principle [sic] drivers of Modi's behavior". He adds, "It will be interesting to examine if some of the traits enumerated have found their expression in Modi's administration over 12 years in Gujarat". In chapter 3, he has examined the Gujarat model. At one place he hasexpressed surprise why Modi has , for some mysterious reasons, consciously dispensed with the prime minister's economic advisory council; abolished also the national manufacturing competitiveness council; not appointed a professional economist in the PMO, as also not a media adviser; and also replaced the erstwhile planning commission with a rather sharply-pruned reincarnation in the form of NITI Aayog [sic]…There might be merit in having regular access to a variety of opinions and inputs, especially when one is on a learning curve. He has in his interviews with media emphasized the need for growth of the manufacturing sector, employment creation to take advantage of demographic dividend and skill formation as important challenges in front of Modi government.
Asia-Africa Growth Corridor: Strategic Significance
sinharajiv India and The World	0
India launched a vision document for Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) on 25 May 2017 at the African Development Bank meeting in Gujarat.The Asia-Africa Growth Corridor or AAGC is an economic cooperation agreement between the governments of India and Japan.Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Shinjo Abe first conceived the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor during their last summit in Tokyo in November 2016.
The vision document of the AAGC has been developed based on consultations from the Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS),New Delhi, the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia(ERIA), Jakarta, and Institute of Developing Economies (IDE-JETRO), Tokyo, along with Asian and African think-tanks. It aims for Indo-Japanese collaboration to develop quality infrastructure in Africa, complemented by digital connectivity, which would undertake the realization of the idea of creating free and open Indo-Pacific Region.
Priority to health, agriculture and disaster management
The AAGC will give priority to development projects in health and pharmaceuticals, agriculture and agro-processing, disaster management and skill enhancement. The connectivity aspects of the AAGC will be supplemented with quality infrastructure.
Essentially a sea corridor
Unlike OBOR which entails development of a land corridor, AAGC will essentially be a sea corridor linking Africa with India and other countries of South-East Asia and Oceania by rediscovering ancient sea-routes and creating new sea corridors that will link ports in Jamnagar (Gujarat) with Djibouti in the Gulf of Eden and similarly the ports of Mombasa and Zanzibar will be connected to ports near Madurai; Kolkata will be linked to Sittwe port in Myanmar. In fact India being the largest country in the India Ocean region does not want to allow China to incrrease its strategic influence with maritime silk route project at the cost of India's traditional presence and influence in the Indian Ocean region.
Four main components
The AAGC would consist of four main components: development and cooperation projects, quality infrastructure and institutional connectivity, capacity and skill enhancement and people-to-people partnerships. These four components as well as four elements or four pillars are complementary to promote growth and all round development in both the continents.
Fields of collaboration
According to the vision document many fields of collaboration were laid out. Digital connectivity will also support the growth of innovative technology and services between Asia and Africa. There is scope for Asia to share its experiences of growth and development with Africa, according to persons involved in the project. It consists of five remarkable aspects. These aspects are: (a) effective mobilization of financial resources; (b) their alignment with socio-economic development and development strategies of partner countries and regions; (c) application of high-quality standards in terms of compliance with international standards established to mitigate environmental and social impact; (d) provision of quality of infrastructure taking into account aspects of economic efficiency and durability, inclusiveness, safety and disaster-resilience, sustainability as well as convenience and amenities; and (e) contribution to the local society and economy
Strategic Importance
The new initiative is being seen as a move by New Delhi and Tokyo to counter Beijing's bids toexpandits geopolitical influenceinAsia and Africa, particularlythroughits One-Belt-One-Road cross-continental connectivity initiative. The vision of the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor is being developed on the four pillars–Development and Cooperation Projects, Quality Infrastructure and Institutional Connectivity, Enhancing Capacities and Skills and People-to-People Partnerships. Thus the collaboration is not related with any expansionist or military agenda but cooperation for development and partnership between the people of the regions. Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar clarified that the partners of the proposed AAGC would naturally like the initiative (Asia-Africa Growth Corridor) to be based on universally recognized international norms, good governance, rule of law, openness, transparency and equality. He further added that there must be a strong sense of local ownership that can only happen with consultative project designing, transfer of technology and encouragement of skills. This may be seen in the context of India's opposition to CPEC. India has been particularly opposing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a key component of the OBOR of China. The CPEC is proposed to pass through areas New Delhi claims to be integral parts of Jammu and Kashmir state of India and accuses Islamabad of illegally occupying. New Delhi has been accusing Beijing of infringing on sovereignty of India by joining Pakistan for the CPEC project. "Our activities must fully conform to balanced ecological and environmental protection and preservation standards."
Tokyo, unlike New Delhi, has joined the Belt-and-Road initiative of Beijing. But Japan's troubled ties with China has cast a shadow over its participation in the communist country's international connectivity initiative, which has of late been also criticized for putting the smaller participating nations at the risk of being caught in a debt-trap. In this backdrop Indi's Foreign Scretary pointed out, "No less important is ensuring of financial responsibility, so that there is no encouragement of unsustainable debts." China along it OBOR and Maritime Silk Route is known for poor project governance, environment management and creating debt burden for the participating countries. The Indo-Japanese initiative would be better in these respects creating more acceptibility among the participating countries.
Mega transport connectivity projects in India
samardeep National Affairs	0
India is situated north of the equator between 8°4′ to 37°6′ north latitude and 68°7′ to 97°25′ east longitude. It is the seventh-largest country in the world, with a total area of 3,287,263 square kilometres (1,269,219 sq mi). India measures 3,214 km (1,997 mi) from north to south and 2,933 km (1,822 mi) from east to west. It has a land frontier of 15,200 km (9,445 mi) and a coastline of 7,516.6 km (4,671 mi). Such a vast country is inhibited by about 130 crore people.
Need and Importance of transport connectivity
It is realized that India needs better transport connectivity for realizing higher growth rate- 7-8 per cent in medium term and double digit growth rate in the long run. Today the Indian economy is recognized as an emerging market with an average GDP growth of about 7 per cent and per capita GDP growth of 4.5 per cent in last some years, making it one of the fastest growing big economies of the world. As the economic activities are expanding and the aspirations of people are rising, movement and migration of the Indian population from one region to the other region is increasing both in terms of inter- state and inter- district movement and migration. The recent studies best on big data reveal that every year about 9 million people migrate in India from one place to the other place. As India is pursuing industrialization programmes, especially, make in India, it needs to have better connectivity for the movement of inputs and labour force. The logistics need would increase far more in the coming times as India would try to increase the share of manufacturing sector in its GDP. It is also important to have good transport infrastructure to attract foreign investment. The share of trade in India's GDP has also increased post liberalization to about 53 per cent, double that of China. India's share in global trade is about 1. Per cent, but it is expected to increase faster in the coming days. Therefore India not only needs to develop its ports, but also connect them with rail-road.
There are three big connectivity projects underway in India.
Bharatmala
Bharatmala is an ambitious road and highways project of Government of India, with an envisaged investment of Rs10 trillion—the largest ever outlay for a government road construction scheme. The ambitious ₹10-lakh-crore umbrella programme for roads, Bharatmala, will subsume all existing highway projects including the flagship National Highways Development Project (NHDP), launched by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government in 1998.
The project will start from Gujarat and Rajasthan, move to Punjab and then cover the entire string of Himalayan states – Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand – and then portions of borders of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar alongside Terai, and move to West Bengal , Sikkim, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, and right up to the Indo-Myanmar border in Manipur and Mizoram. Special emphasis will be given on providing connectivity to far-flung rural areas including the tribal and backward areas.
According to government officials working out the details of the scheme, the total road length to be developed as expressways under Bharatmala will be around 51,000 km. In the first phase 29,000 km will be developed with an outlay of Rs5.5 trillion. The project would need an investment of around ₹500 billion (US$7.8 billion).
The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has prepared a draft Cabinet note on the Rs. 2.6 lakh crore (US$41 billion) Bharat Mala project that envisages construction of 25,000 km of roads along India's borders, coastal areas, ports, religious and tourist places as well as over 100 district headquarters.
Phase 1 – The total length of road to be constructed under Bharatmala Pariyojana Phase-I is 24,800 Km new stretches along with 10,000 km remaining under NHDP.
As of 2017, 30 km/day construction is going on in highway sector. So, Phase-I may complete by 2022, compared to 19 years it took to upgrade almost same length of National Highways under NHDP.
Sagrmala
Sagar Mala project is a strategic and customer-oriented initiative of the Government of India to modernize India's Ports so that port-led development can be augmented and coastlines can be developed to contribute in India's growth. It looks towards "transforming the existing Ports into modern world class Ports and integrate the development of the Ports, the Industrial clusters and hinterland and efficient evacuation systems through road, rail, inland and coastal waterways resulting in Ports becoming the drivers of economic activity in coastal areas.
The programme aims to promote port-led development in the country by harnessing India's 7,500-km long coastline, 14,500-km of potentially navigable waterways and strategic location on key international maritime trade routes.
On 25 March 2015 Cabinet gave approval for this project to develop 12 ports of India and also 1208 Islands. The project was launched by Ministry of Shipping (the nodal ministry for this initiative) in Bangalore, Karnataka on 31 July 2015.
A National Sagarmala Apex Committee (NSAC), composed of the Minister in charge of Shipping, with Cabinet Ministers from stakeholder Ministries and Chief Ministers / Ministers incharge of ports of maritime states as members, will provide policy direction and guidance for the initiative's implementation, shall approve the overall National Perspective Plan (NPP) and review the progress of implementation of these plans.
36 projects have been proposed by the Andhra Pradesh government for Sagarmala. Indian coastline will be developed as Coastal Economic Regions (CER).
The Sagarmala Development Company was given the nod for incorporation by Indian Cabinet on 20th July 2016 with an initial authorized share capital of Rs 1000 Crore and subscribed share capital of Rs 90 Crore, to give a push to port-led development. The Sagarmala National Perspective Plan was released on 14-April-2016 with details on Project Plan and Implementation.
The proposed Ports under Sagarmala include six megaports
New Port Location
Present Status
Sagar Island
Approval obtained for setting up Major See Port Sagar Port at Sagar Island. DPR prepared.Viability being re-examined in view of announcement of new port Tajpur Port at Tajpur by State Govt. of West Bengal.
Paradip Outer Harbour
DPR under preparation.
Sirkhazi
Techno Economic Feasibility Report(TEFR) prepared.
Enayam
In principle approval obtained for setting up Major Port at Enayam. DPR under preparation.
Belikeri
Techno Economic Feasibility Report (TEFR) prepared.
Vadhavan
Under Sagarmala Programme, 415 projects, at an estimated investment of approximately Rs.7.98500 lakh crore (US$120 billion), have been identified across port modernization & new port development, port connectivity enhancement, port-linked industrialization and coastal community development for phase wise implementation over the period 2015 to 2035. As per the approved implementation plan of Sagarmala Programme, these projects are to be taken up by the relevant Central Ministries/Agencies and State Governments preferably through private/PPP mode. The details are as below.
Project Theme
No. of Projects
Project Cost (Rs. Cr)
Port Modernisation
Connectivity Enhancement
Port-Linked Industrialisation
Coastal Community Development
Golden Quadrilateral
Golden Quadrilateral is the largest highway project in India and the fifth longest in the world, started by NDA Government led by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. It is the first phase of the National Highways Development Project (NHDP), and consists of building 5,846 km (3,633 mi) four/six lane express highways at a cost of Rs.600 billion (US$9.4 billion). The project was launched in 2001 by Atal Bihari Vajpayee under the NDA government, and was completed in 2012. Although the planning for the project was completed in 1999 but the construction work officially started in 2001. Though it was estimated to be completed by 2006, it actually became operational in January 2012. The Golden Quadrilateral project included construction of new express highways, including renovation and extension of the existing highways to four or six lanes.
The Golden Quadrilateral is a highway network connecting many of the major industrial, agricultural and cultural centres of India. A quadrilateral of sorts is formed by connecting Chennai, Kolkata, Delhi and Mumbai, and hence its name. Other metropolises also connected by the network are Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Bhubaneswar, Jaipur, Kanpur, Pune, Surat, Nellore, Vijayawada and Vishakapatnam. It is the largest highway project completed in India. It is the fifth longest highway project in the world. The overall length of the Golden quadrilateral is 5,846km. The Golden Quadrilateral passes through 13 states of India. The Golden Quadrilateral constitutes only the national highways of the country and not state highways and rural-urban roadways. The project was estimated to cost INR600bn but was one such project which was completed at about half of the estimated costs at INR308.58bn. Benefits for the country
The GQ project is managed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) under the Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways. The Mumbai-Pune Expressway, the first controlled-access toll road to be built in India is a part of the GQ Project. This project came in 1999 and initiated in 2001 by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. It was projected to connect four metropolitan cities of India: Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata. The project consisted of constructing four and six-lane express highways. The project was planned to be completed by 2006 but due to delays (like land acquisition, awarding contracts, zoning challenges, and funding problems) it got completed in 2012.
One of achievements of the previous NDA government is the 5846-km Golden Quadrilateral (GQ) highway. It is designated as one of the longest highways in the world. It is basically a network of highways that connect the four major metropolitan cities of the country in four directions – Delhi (North), Chennai (South), Kolkata (East) and Mumbai (West) – thereby forming a quadrilateral, and hence the name Golden Quadrilateral.
Major cities covered under Golden Quadrilateral highway
The Golden Quadrilateral provides efficient transportation links between major cities of India, like New Delhi; Jaipur, Udaipur, Ajmer (Rajasthan); Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar (Gujarat); Mathura, Varanasi, Agra, Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh); Mumbai and Pune (Maharashtra); Bangalore (Karnataka); Visakhapatnam (Andhra Pradesh); Chennai (Tamil Nadu); Bhubaneswar (Orissa) Kolkata (West Bengal) etc.
The four sections of the Golden Quadrilateral
Section I: This covers National Highway 2 (NH2) from Delhi to Kolkata. Total stretch is 1454 km. States covered are Delhi, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal. Major cities include Delhi, Mathura, Faridabad, Agra, Allahabad, Firozabad, Kanpur and Varanasi.
Section II: This covers NH6 from Kolkata to Chennai, NH60 (Kharagpur to Balasore) and NH5 (Balasore to Chennai). Total stretch is 1684km. States include West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Tamil Nadu.
Section III: Total stretch is 1,290km. It covers parts of NH4 (Mumbai to Bangalore), NH7 (Bangalore to Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu) and NH46 (Krishnagiri to nearby Chennai). States include Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.
Section IV: Covering parts of NH 8 (Delhi to Kishangarh), NH 79A (Ajmer bypass), NH 79 (Nasirabad to Chittaurgarh) and NH 76 (Chittaurgarh to Udaipur), the stretch is 1,419km. States include Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and New Delhi. Major cities connected are Delhi, Ajmer, Udaipur, Gurgaon, Jaipur, Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Surat and Mumbai. Major highlights of the Golden Quadrilateral
There are many benefits of this megaproject. It provides faster transport networks between major cities and ports Provides connectivity to major agricultural, industrial, and cultural centres of India Provides smoother movement of goods and people within the country Enables industrial development and job creation in smaller towns through access to varied markets Farmers are able to transport their produce to major cities and towns for sale and export, and there is less wastage and spoils. More economic growth through construction and indirect demand for steel, cement, and other construction materials Giving an impetus to truck transport
The completed Golden Quadrilateral passes through 13 states:
1. Andhra Pradesh – 1,014 km (630 mi)
2. Uttar Pradesh – 756 km (470 mi)
3. Rajasthan – 725 km (450 mi)
4. Karnataka – 623 km (387 mi)
5. Maharashtra – 487 km (303 mi)
6. Gujarat – 485 km (301 mi)
7. Odisha – 440 km (270 mi)
8. West Bengal – 406 km (252 mi)
9. Tamil Nadu – 342 km (213 mi)
10. Bihar – 204 km (127 mi)
11. Jharkhand – 192 km (119 mi)
12. Haryana – 152 km (94 mi)
13. Delhi – 25 km (16 mi)
Total – 5,846 km (3,633 mi)
The maga infrastructure projects are built at a great cost and lot of time and energy is involved. In such a case their maintenance requires constant monitoring and the responsibility needs to be clearly delineated. While working on such mega projects vested interests not only indulge in corruption, but also honest officers are threatened. Their security is very important. Economic feasibility, social impact assessment, environmental impact assessment, acquisition of land, compensation and rehabilitation etc. are persistent problems. One of the bad memories of murder of an honest officer Satyendra Dubey in GQ implementation still haunts. In August 2003, Jharkhand-based project director Satyendra Dubey, in a letter to the Prime Minister, outlined a list of malafide actions in a segment of a highway in Bihar. Dubey's claims included that big contractors had inside information from NHAI officials, that the contractors for this stretch were not executing the project themselves (as stipulated in the contract) but subcontracting the work to small builders who lacked technical expertise and that no follow-up was performed after awarding advances. Dubey's name was leaked by the PMO to the NHAI, and he was transferred against his wishes to Gaya, Bihar, where he was murdered on 27 November. The NHAI eventually admitted that Dubey's charges were substantiated, and implemented "radical reforms" in selection and contract procedures.
Rural Development by Providing Urban Amenities to Rural Areas (PURA)
sengar National Affairs	0
According to the 2011 census of India, 68.84% of Indians (around 833.1 million people) live in 640,867 different villages. The size of these villages varies considerably. 236,004 Indian villages have a population of fewer than 500, while 3,976 villages have a population of 10,000 plus. The National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) study on Housing Conditions and Amenities in India, 2008-09, reveals that just 18% households in rural India have access to basic amenities such as drinking water and electricity. Further, the social groups – STs (75%), SCs (76%) and OBCs (69%) – in rural areas don't have sanitation facility in their households. Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64% of the rural households. In urban areas, only 22% of the households were deprived of bathrooms. Further, nearly 65% rural households had no latrine facility as against 11% for their urban counterparts. The government survey highlights that only 30% of rural population had access to safe drinking water and 55% depend on tube well or hand pumps to meet their drinking water requirements. In fact, 15% of rural people were still looking for dependable source of water. The incidence of poverty is another aggregate which reflects the prevailing conditions of poor livelihood scenario and lack of basic amenities in the rural areas. The SCs/STs, who constitute the bottom layer of the pyramid, remain backward in economic and social development and vulnerable to various forms of discrimination including in areas such as education, healthcare and social security measures.
Villages remained out of focus in the past
Indian villages lagged behind in basic amenities and economic development because the urban areas, industrial and commercial activities got priority. Agriculture, the main occupation in rural areas, recorded fluctuating growth and income of farmers and agricultural labours also fluctuated with intense or weak monsoon. After India gained its independence, a plethora of welfare schemes and activities were initiated for rural development in successive five year plans. But these proved inadequate and rural areas lagged behind urban areas. Consequently, rural people migrated to urban areas in search of livelihood opportunities, modern amenities and services for decent living.
There are wide gaps in the availability of physical and social infrastructure between rural and urban areas. To address these issues, the President of India A.P.J. Abdul Kalam highlighted a vision of transformation of rural India by launching a large-scale mission for Provision of Urban Amenities in Rural Areas (PURA). The vision of PURA states that transformation of India to a 'developed' country can only be realised if we launch a mega mission for empowering the rural people. This can be possible by creation of Physical, electronic and knowledge connectivities leading to economic connectivity in villages. Such a model of establishing a circular connectivity among the rural village complexes will accelerate rural development process by empowerment.
PURA is an important Initiative for providing basic amenities and connectivity to Rural areas
Provision of Urban Amenities to Rural Areas (PURA) is a strategy for rural development in India. This concept was given by former president Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and discussed in his book Target 3 Billion which he co-authored with Srijan Pal Singh. The genesis of PURA concept can be traced to the work done by Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute in the early 1990s on Taluka energy self-sufficiency. It was shown in the study that energy self-sufficient talukas can be a new development model for rural India in terms of creation of jobs and better amenities to its population. The mission envisages holistic and accelerated development of compact areas around a potential growth centre in a Gram Panchayat (or a group of Gram Panchayats) through Public Private Partnership (PPP) framework for providing livelihood opportunities and urban amenities to improve the quality of life in rural areas
Creating economic opportunities through better connectivity
PURA proposes that urban infrastructure and services be provided in rural hubs to create economic opportunities outside of cities. Physical connectivity by providing roads, electronic connectivity by providing communication network, and knowledge connectivity by establishing professional and Technical institutions will have to be done in an integrated way so that economic connectivity will emanate. The Indian central government has been running pilot PURA programs in several states since 2004.
On the eve of India's 54th Republic Day, in 2003, Dr. Kalam addressed the nation explaining them his vision for a new India. He visualised providing four elements of connectivity: physical connectivity, electronic connectivity, knowledge connectivity leading to economic connectivity of rural areas and where there would be a lesser urban-rural divide. PURA was envisaged as a self-sustainable and viable model of service delivery to be managed through an implementation framework between the different stakeholders involved, namely local people, public authorities and the private sector. The Government support would be in the form of finding the right type of management structure to develop and maintain rural infrastructure, empowering the management structure and providing initial economic support. Subsequently, the Prime Minister of India also announced implementation of a PURA scheme in his Independence Day speech on 15 August 2003.
Re-launch of PURA provide drinking water and connectivity
To make the basic amenities like good roads and drinking water accessible to people even in remote villages, The Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), Government of India has re-launched the scheme Provision of Urban Amenities in Rural Areas (PURA) as a Central Government scheme during the remaining period of the eleventh five-year plan.
MoRD, with support from Department of Economic Affairs and the Asian Development Bank (which provided the technical assistance), intends to implement the PURA scheme under a Public Private Partnership (PPP) between Local executive bodies like the Gram Panchayat(s) and private sector partners. The vision of the scheme in particular is providing dual benefits like rural infrastructure development coupled with economic re-generation activities; it is the first attempt of the government in this direction of delivering basic amenities and infrastructure through this model to people in remote rural areas. All the efforts are directed to obtain dual benefits, provide a different framework for the efficient implementation of rural infrastructure development schemes and benefit from the private sector efficiencies in the management of assets and delivery of services.
Strategies and planning
The Mission & Vision of PURA is to bring together the experience & expertise of both public & private players to achieve the objectives which are proposed to be achieved under the framework of PPP between Gram Panchayats and private sector partner. Core funding shall be sourced from the Central Sector scheme of PURA and complemented by additional support through convergence of different Central Government schemes. The private sector shall also bring on board its share of investment besides operational expertise. Seven pilot projects were implemented during the 10th Five Year Plan in Basmath (Maharashtra), Bharthana (Uttar Pradesh), Gohpur (Assam), Kujanga (Orissa), Motipur (Bihar), Rayadurg (Andhra Pradesh) and Shahpura (Rajasthan). An evaluation study of these pilot projects was carried out by National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD) which identified the necessity of community and private sector participation as essential factors and the need for factoring infrastructure development with lead economic activities and livelihoods creation, requirement of project site selection on the basis of growth potential and need for convergence with other schemes of the government.
Based on the findings of the evaluation study by NIRD, Comments, Feedback received from different stakeholders like various Ministries/Departments, feedback received during consultations with private sector representatives and officials of State Governments, and the recommendations of the consulting team of Asian Development Bank), the scheme of PURA was restructured for implementation on pilot basis during 11th Five Year Plan as a Central Sector scheme. It was envisaged to be implemented gradually in the whole of India.It was suggested to carry out proper research a about financial and operational abilities to select private Partner selected, identify a Gram Panchayat, a cluster of geographically contiguous Gram Panchayats for a population of about 25,000– 40,000 and the project area and sub-projects to cover each of the Panchayats within the cluster along with economic activities suitable to the cluster.
The essence of the PURA scheme is to have the best of both the worlds Private & Public, The leveraging of public funds with private capital and management expertise for creation and maintenance of rural infrastructure. Funding for the various projects taken up under the PURA scheme depending on the priority, relevance to the objectives of the government may come from four sources: MoRD schemes, non-MoRD schemes, private financing and Capital Grant under PURA.As
Current status of PURA
PURA did not yield any remarkable result till 2012. Since then it was supposed to be effectively implemented. The Rural ministry planned to reform PURA – to facilitate creation of urban infrastructure in around 2,000 new towns identified by the 2011 decadal Census. But still things did not progress much with regard to allocation of resources and implementation of programmes. A major impetus was given to the PURA scheme in 2015. In an ambitious bid to transform rural areas to economically, socially and physically sustainable spaces, the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi approved on September 16, 2015 the Shyama Prasad Mukherji Rurban Mission (SPMRM) with an outlay of Rs. 5142.08 crores. The Mission aims at development of rural growth clusters which have latent potential for growth, in all States and UTs, which would trigger overall development in the region. These clusters would be developed by provisioning of economic activities, developing skills & local entrepreneurship and providing infrastructure amenities. The Rurban Mission will thus develop a cluster of Smart Villages.
For the selection of clusters, the Ministry of Rural Development is adopting a scientific process of cluster selection which involves an objective analysis at the District, Sub District and Village level, of the demography, economy, tourism and pilgrimage significance and transportation corridor impact. While the Ministry, following this analysis, would provide a suggestive list of sub districts to the State, the State Governments would then select the clusters following a set of indicated principles included in the Framework for Implementation.
The mission aims to create 300 such Rurban growth clusters over the next 3 years, across the country. The funding for Rurban Clusters will be through various schemes of the Government converged into the cluster. The SPMRM will provide an additional funding support of upto 30 percent of the project cost per cluster as Critical Gap Funding (CGF) as Central Share to enable development of such Rurban clusters.
Main highlights of the RURBAN Mission
To ensure an optimum level of development, fourteen components have been suggested as desirable for the cluster, which would include; Skill development training linked to economic activities, Agro Processing/Agri Services/Storage and Warehousing, Digital Literacy, Sanitation, Provision of piped water supply, Solid and liquid waste management, Village streets and drains, Street lights, Fully equipped mobile health unit, Upgrading school /higher education facilities, Inter-village road connectivity, Citizen Service Centres- for electronic delivery of citizen centric services/e-gram connectivity, Public transport., LPG gas connections.
The States would prepare Integrated Cluster Action Plans for Rurban Clusters, which would be comprehensive plan documents detailing out the strategy for the cluster, desired outcomes for the cluster under the mission, along with the resources to be converged under various Central Sector, Centrally Sponsored and State Sector schemes, and the Critical Gap Funding (CGF) required for the cluster.
In addition to the Critical Gap Funding, proactive steps have been taken to ensure the success of the mission with adequate budget provisions for supporting the State Government towards project development, capacity building and other institutional arrangements at the state level.
The Mission envisages institutional arrangements both at the State and Center to ensure smooth implementation of the Mission. The Mission also has an Innovation budget towards facilitating research, development and capacity building.
The scheme through development of rurban growth clusters aimed at catalyzing overall regional growth, would thus simultaneously benefit the rural as well as urban areas of the country, by achieving twin objectives of strengthening rural areas and de burdening the urban areas hence leading to balanced regional development and growth of the country.
These clusters would be well delineated areas with planned layouts prepared following the planning norms (as laid down in the State Town and Country Planning Acts/similar Central or State statutes as may be applicable), which would be duly notified by the State/UTs. These plans would be finally integrated with the District Plans/Master Plans as the case may be.
The State Governments would identify the clusters in accordance with the Framework for Implementation prepared by the Ministry of Rural Development. The clusters will be geographically contiguous Gram Panchayats with a population of about 25000 to 50000 in plain and coastal areas and a population of 5000 to 15000 in desert, hilly or tribal areas. There would be a separate approach for selection of clusters in Tribal and Non-Tribal Districts. As far as practicable, clusters of village would follow administrative convergence units of Gram Panchayats.
Allocation for Rural Development programmes in Budget 2017-18.
Allocation for rural sector for Fiscal Year 2018 is Rs 1,87,200 cr, which is a record, and represents an increase of 24%.
Allocation under MNREGA increased from Rs 38,500 crore to Rs 48,000 crore.
Participation of women in MNREGA has increased to 55%.
Mahila Shakti Kendra at village level for rural women empowerment will be initiated in this financial year.
100% village electrification will be achieved by May 1,2018.
For Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gram Jyoti Yojana rural electrification programme, the allocation has been raised by 43% to Rs4,814 crore for 2017-18 from a year ago.
1,00,00,000 houses by 2019 for houseless and those living in kaccha houses.
Cabinet approves extension of tenure of loans under Credit Linked Subsidy Scheme of Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana from 15 to 20 years.
Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana+ allocation raised from Rs 15,000 crore to Rs 23,000 crore.
Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna roads work accelrated to 133 kn roads per day in 2016-17 against 73 km per day during 2011-14.
Open defecation free+ villages are now being given priority for pipe to water supply.
The budget provided an additional Rs20,000 crore for the long-term irrigation fund under National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (Nabard). Jaitley also announced the creation of a micro-irrigation fund with a corpus of Rs5,000 crore under Nabard.
For imparting new skills to the people in the rural areas, mason training will be provided to 5 lakh persons by 2022, with an immediate target of training at least 20,000 persons by 2017-18.
Agriculture and Farmer's welfare in the budget 2017-18
Allocation for Agriculture and Farmers' welfare is Rs 35,984 crore.
Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana' to be implemented in mission mode. 28.5 lakh hectares will be brought under irrigation.
Implementation of 89 irrigation projects under AIBP, which are languishing for a long time, will be fast tracked.
A dedicated Long Term Irrigation Fund will be created in NABARD with an initial corpus of about Rs 20,000 crore.
Programme for sustainable management of ground water resources with an estimated cost of Rs 6,000 crore will be implemented through multilateral funding.
5 lakh farm ponds and dug wells in rain fed areas and 10 lakh compost pits for production of organic manure will be taken up under MGNREGA.
Soil Health Card scheme will cover all 14 crore farm holdings by March 2017.
2,000 model retail outlets of Fertilizer companies will be provided with soil and seed testing facilities during the next three years.
Promote organic farming through 'Parmparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana' and 'Organic Value Chain Development in North East Region'.
Unified Agricultural Marketing ePlatform to provide a common e- market platform for wholesale markets ? Allocation under Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana increased to Rs. 19,000 crore. Will connect remaining 65,000 eligible habitations by 2019.
To reduce the burden of loan repayment on farmers, a provision of Rs 15,000 crore has been made in the BE 2016-17 towards interest subvention.
Allocation under Prime Minister Fasal Bima Yojana Rs 5,500 crore.
Rs 850 crore for four dairying projects – 'Pashudhan Sanjivani', 'Nakul Swasthya Patra', 'E-Pashudhan Haat' and National Genomic Centre for indigenous breeds.
Right to Privacy a Fundamental Right, Says Supreme Court in Unanimous Verdict
css National Affairs	0
A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court has ruled that Indians enjoy a fundamental right to privacy, that it is intrinsic to life and liberty and thus comes under Article 21 of the Indian constitution.
On August 24, 2017 the bench, led by Chief Justice J.S. Khehar, pronounced a unanimous judgement even if the judges had slightly different arguments as to how privacy is intrinsic to right to life and liberty.
The bench comprised Chief Justice Khehar and Justices J. Chelameswar, S.A. Bobde, R.K. Agrawal, Rohinton Nariman, A.M. Sapre, D.Y. Chandrachud, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and S. Abdul Nazeer.
In its 547-page judgment that declares privacy to be a fundamental right, the Supreme Court has overruled verdicts given in the M.P. Sharma case in 1958 and the Kharak Singh case in 1961, both of which said that the right to privacy is not protected under the Indian constitution.
The judgment includes within it six separate judgments from different judges, though the conclusion is unanimous. The Wire has broken the main judgment into its constituent parts to make it easier to see what the different judges said. (see below)
The judgment also included a two-page final order, which states that MP Sharma and Kharak Singh are overruled, and the right to privacy is fundamental.
The lead judgment of 265 pages, authored by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and co-signed by Chief Justice Khehar and Justices Nazeer and Agrawal states the following clear conclusions:
Conclusions of Justices J.S. Khehar, R.K. Agrawal, D.Y. Chandrachud, S. Abdul Nazeer
The judgment in M P Sharma holds essentially that in the absence of a provision similar to the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, the right to privacy cannot be read into the provisions of Article 20 (3) of the Indian Constitution. The judgment does not specifically adjudicate on whether a right to privacy would arise from any of the other provisions of the rights guaranteed by Part III including Article 21 and Article 19. The observation that privacy is not a right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution is not reflective of the correct position. M P Sharma is overruled to the extent to which it indicates to the contrary.
Kharak Singh has correctly held that the content of the expression 'life' under Article 21 means not merely the right to a person's "animal existence" and that the expression 'personal liberty' is a guarantee against invasion into the sanctity of a person's home or an intrusion into personal security. Kharak Singh also correctly laid down that the dignity of the individual must lend content to the meaning of 'personal liberty'. The first part of the decision in Kharak Singh which invalidated domiciliary visits at night on the ground that they violated ordered liberty is an implicit recognition of the right to privacy. The second part of the decision, however, which holds that the right to privacy is not a guaranteed right under our Constitution, is not reflective of the correct position. Similarly, Kharak Singh's reliance upon the decision of the majority in Gopalan is not reflective of the correct position in view of the decisions in Cooper and in Maneka. Kharak Singh to the extent that it holds that the right to privacy is not protected under the Indian Constitution is overruled.
(A) Life and personal liberty are inalienable rights. These are rights which are inseparable from a dignified human existence. The dignity of the individual, equality between human beings and the quest for liberty are the foundational pillars of the Indian Constitution;
(B) Life and personal liberty are not creations of the Constitution. These rights are recognised by the Constitution as inhering in each individual as an intrinsic and inseparable part of the human element which dwells within;
(C) Privacy is a constitutionally protected right which emerges primarily from the guarantee of life and personal liberty in Article 21 of the Constitution. Elements of privacy also arise in varying contexts from the other facets of freedom and dignity recognised and guaranteed by the fundamental rights contained in Part III;
(D) Judicial recognition of the existence of a constitutional right of privacy is not an exercise in the nature of amending the Constitution nor is the Court embarking on a constitutional function of that nature which is entrusted to Parliament;
(E) Privacy is the constitutional core of human dignity. Privacy has both a normative and descriptive function. At a normative level privacy sub-serves those eternal values upon which the guarantees of life, liberty and freedom are founded. At a descriptive level, privacy postulates a bundle of entitlements and interests which lie at the foundation of ordered liberty;
(F)Privacy includes at its core the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, the home and sexual orientation. Privacy also connotes a right to be left alone. Privacy safeguards individual autonomy and recognises the ability of the individual to control vital aspects of his or her life. Personal choices governing a way of life are intrinsic to privacy. Privacy protects heterogeneity and recognises the plurality and diversity of our culture. While the legitimate expectation of privacy may vary from the intimate zone to the private zone and from the private to the public arenas, it is important to underscore that privacy is not lost or surrendered merely because the individual is in a public place. Privacy attaches to the person since it is an essential facet of the dignity of the human being;
(G) This Court has not embarked upon an exhaustive enumeration or a catalogue of entitlements or interests comprised in the right to privacy. The Constitution must evolve with the felt necessities of time to meet the challenges thrown up in a democratic order governed by the rule of law. The meaning of the Constitution cannot be frozen on the perspectives present when it was adopted. Technological change has given rise to concerns which were not present seven decades ago and the rapid growth of technology may render obsolescent many notions of the present. Hence the interpretation of the Constitution must be resilient and flexible to allow future generations to adapt its content bearing in mind its basic or essential features;
(H) Like other rights which form part of the fundamental freedoms protected by Part III, including the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, privacy is not an absolute right. A law which encroaches upon privacy will have to withstand the touchstone of permissible restrictions on fundamental rights. In the context of Article 21 an invasion of privacy must be justified on the basis of a law which stipulates a procedure which is fair, just and reasonable. The law must also be valid with reference to the encroachment on life and personal liberty under Article 21. An invasion of life or personal liberty must meet the three-fold requirement of (i) legality, which postulates the existence of law; (ii) need, defined in terms of a legitimate state aim; and (iii) proportionality which ensures a rational nexus between the objects and the means adopted to achieve them; and
(I) Privacy has both positive and negative content. The negative content restrains the state from committing an intrusion upon the life and personal liberty of a citizen. Its positive content imposes an obligation on the state to take all necessary measures to protect the privacy of the individual.
Decisions rendered by this Court subsequent to Kharak Singh, upholding the right to privacy would be read subject to the above principles.
Informational privacy is a facet of the right to privacy. The dangers to privacy in an age of information can originate not only from the state but from non-state actors as well. We commend to the Union Government the need to examine and put into place a robust regime for data protection. The creation of such a regime requires a careful and sensitive balance between individual interests and legitimate concerns of the state. The legitimate aims of the state would include for instance protecting national security, preventing and investigating crime, encouraging innovation and the spread of knowledge, and preventing the dissipation of social welfare benefits. These are matters of policy to be considered by the Union government while designing a carefully structured regime for the protection of the data. Since the Union government has informed the Court that it has constituted a Committee chaired by Hon'ble Shri Justice B N Srikrishna, former Judge of this Court, for that purpose, the matter shall be dealt with appropriately by the Union government having due regard to what has been set out in this judgment.
The reference is answered in the above terms.
Triple Talaq unconstitutional-ruled SC
Will there be any sane and educated Muslim or non-Muslim who will not like the judgment of the Supreme Court against the age old ritual of instant talaq making women totally helpless against whimsical and insane evocation of this provision by male counterparts. It is very reinsuring that India has one voice on this verdict- they have hailed it together irrespective of political differences.
A five-judge constitutional bench by a 3:2 majority ruled (August 22, 2017) that the practice of divorce through triple talaq among Muslims is "void", "illegal" and "unconstitutional". The majority verdict said any practice including triple talaq which is against the tenets of Quran in unacceptable. The three judges also said the practice of divorce through triple talaq is manifestly arbitrary and violative of the Constitution and must be struck down.
However the dissenting judges said that muslim personal law is a matter of faith, so there should not be any interference with them. Chief Justice JS Kehar and Justice Abdul Nazeer said the practice of triple talaq "may be sinful" but the court can't interfere in personal laws, which enjoy the status of fundamental rights under the Constitution. They said, "The Supreme Court of India today set aside the practice of talaq-e-biddat, or triple talaq, by a majority of 3:2. Chief Justice JS Kehar and Justice Abdul Nazeer said the practice of triple talaq "may be sinful" but the court can't interfere in personal laws, which enjoy the status of fundamental rights under the Constitution. Here's what they said:
"…We are satisfied, that this is a case which presents a situation where this Court should exercise its discretion to issue appropriate directions under Article 142 of the Constitution. We therefore hereby direct, the Union of India to consider appropriate legislation, particularly with reference to 'talaq-e-biddat'.
"We hope and expect, that the contemplated legislation will also take into consideration advances in Muslim 'personal law' – 'Shariat', as have been corrected by legislation the world over, even by theocratic Islamic States.
When the British rulers in India provided succor to Muslims by legislation, and when remedial measures have been adopted by the Muslim world, we find no reason, for an independent India, to lag behind. Measures have been adopted for other religious denominations (see at IX – Reforms to 'personal law' in India), even in India, but not for the Muslims.
"We would therefore implore the legislature, to bestow its thoughtful consideration, to this issue of paramount importance. We would also beseech different political parties to keep their individual political gains apart, while considering the necessary measures requiring legislation.
"Till such time as legislation in the matter is considered, we are satisfied in injuncting Muslim husbands, from pronouncing 'talaq-e-biddat' as a means for severing their matrimonial relationship. The instant injunction, shall in the first instance, be operative for a period of six months. If the legislative process commences before the expiry of the period of six months, and a positive decision emerges towards redefining 'talaq-ebiddat' (three pronouncements of 'talaq', at one and the same time) – as one, or alternatively, if it is decided that the practice of 'talaq-e-biddat' be done away with altogether, the injunction would continue, till legislation is finally enacted. Failing which, the injunction shall cease to operate."
However, three other judges — Justices Kurien Joseph, Rohington Nariman and UU Lalit – disagreed with the Chief Justice. Here's what they said:
Justice Kurien Joseph: "What is bad in theology is bad in law as well"
"To freely profess, practice and propagate religion of one's choice is a Fundamental Right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.
That is subject only to the following- (1) public order, (2) health, (3) morality and (4) other provisions of Part III dealing with
Fundamental Rights. Under Article 25 (2) of the Constitution of India, the State is also granted power to make law in two contingencies notwithstanding the freedom granted under Article 25(1).
"Article 25 (2) states that "nothing in this Article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law- (a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice; (b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus."
"Except to the above extent, the freedom of religion under the Constitution of India is absolute and on this point, I am in full agreement with the learned Chief Justice. However, on the statement that triple talaq is an integral part of the religious practice, I respectfully disagree.
"Merely because a practice has continued for long, that by itself cannot make it valid if it has been expressly declared to be impermissible. The whole purpose of the 1937 Act was to declare Shariat as the rule of decision and to discontinue anti-Shariat
practices with respect to subjects enumerated in Section 2 which include talaq. Therefore, in any case, after the introduction of the
1937 Act, no practice against the tenets of Quran is permissible.
"Hence, there cannot be any Constitutional protection to such a practice and thus, my disagreement with the learned Chief Justice for the constitutional protection given to triple talaq. I also have serious doubts as to whether, even under Article 142, the exercise of a Fundamental Right can be injuncted.
"When issues of such nature come to the forefront, the discourse often takes the form of pitting religion against other constitutional rights. I believe that a reconciliation between the same is possible, but the process of harmonizing different interests is within the powers of the legislature. Of course, this power has to be exercised within the constitutional parameters without curbing the religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution of India. However, it is not for the Courts to direct for any legislation.
Fortunately, this Court has done its part in Shamim Ara. I expressly endorse and re-iterate the law declared in Shamim Ara. What is held to be bad in the Holy Quran cannot be good in Shariat and, in that sense, what is bad in theology is bad in law as well.
Justices Rohington Nariman and UU Lalit
"Given the fact that Triple Talaq is instant and irrevocable, it is obvious that any attempt at reconciliation between the husband and wife by two arbiters from their families, which is essential to save the marital tie, cannot ever take place. Also, as understood by the Privy Council in Rashid Ahmad (supra), such Triple Talaq is valid even if it is not for any reasonable cause, which view of the law no longer holds good after Shamim Ara (supra).
"This being the case, it is clear that this form of Talaq is manifestly arbitrary in the sense that the marital tie can be broken capriciously and whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it. This form of Talaq must, therefore, be held to be violative of the fundamental right contained under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
"In our opinion, therefore, the 1937 Act, insofar as it seeks to recognize and enforce Triple Talaq, is within the meaning of the expression "laws in force" in Article 13(1) and must be struck down as being void to the extent that it recognizes and enforces Triple Talaq. Since we have declared Section 2 of the 1937 Act to be void to the extent indicated above on the narrower ground of it being manifestly arbitrary, we do not find the need to go into the ground of discrimination in these cases, as was argued by the learned Attorney General and those supporting him."
The Supreme Court, in its judgment declaring instant triple talaq as unconstitutional, has cited laws from 19 countries including Pakistan and Egypt which have abolished the practice. The judgment has drawn upon the book "Muslim Law in India and Abroad" by Tahir Mahmood and Saif Mahmood and has categorised countries that have done away with 'talaq-e-biddat' as Arab States, Southeast Asian States, and Subcontinental States. The Arab states that have laws against instant triple talaq include Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. The southeast Asian countries that have abolished instant triple talaq include Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines. India's neighbours Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka also have enacted legislations against the practice.
The ruling and opposition parties both praised the judgment and said that it will stop injustice against women. SC urged all political parties to make legislation possible in this regard to remove this unjust provision in the personal law without being prejudiced by electoral considerations. The issue has been treated as complex because two prime considerations were involved in it- injustice against women as well as religious freedom and faith. It seems that religious faith and its independence was used by a section as pretext of continuity of this unjust practice for fear of major interference in the Muslim personal law once it is allowed. The Congress party opposed any change in the past for fear of losing its vote bank, where the Bhartiya Janata Party which is otherwise opposed to freedom to intercommunity marriage (calling it love jihad) or Valentine's Day Celebrations in the name of cultural distortion or which supports moral policing, raised this issue for winning minority Muslims who are less rigid and also making the ardent believers inconvenient. This verdict marks a great transformation in the attitude that the entire stake holders feel that a landmark judgment has been delivered that would make the life of helpless Muslim women to have a dignified and stable married life. The SC has given a verdict which marks a great difference from what political parties did for their own reason. The reason that guided the SC in making this verdict is stopping injustice to women and their subjugation in the name of an old practice and faith. It clearly said that it is neither supported by scriptures nor modern ideals of justice.
Farmers' suicide in India in the era of liberalisation and globalization
Agriculture is the largest private sector activity in India contributing 14 per cent to GDP and employing 52 per cent of the work force. India embraced the new economic policy in 1991 in response to its balance of payments crisis. The new economic policy was based on the principles of liberalization, privatization and globalization. But all the policies primarily addressed the problems of the industrial and commercial sector along with services sector. Agriculture was not a priority while it was also facing various challenges such as low production and productivity, skewed cropping pattern, lack of inputs and infrastructure including assured irrigation, lack of credit and extension services, distorted pricing and subsidy policy, low farm gate prices, disintegrated and rigid market and lack of warehouse facilities etc. It is due to these factors, while the cost of cultivation was rising, farmers' income stagnated or declined, pushing the farmers into indebtedness and frustration leading to suicides.
The Central Government informed the Supreme Court on May 2, 2017 that despite a multi-pronged approach to improve income and social security of farmers, over 12,000 suicides were reported in the agricultural sector every year since 2013. Some estimates put the death of farmers to the tune of 200,000 since the adoption of the new economic policy. In fact the new economic policy was not against the farmers as such, but the development and reforms paradigms were dominated by the lead sectors such as services and the manufacturing sector.
A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justices D Y Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul heard the government's steps taken to ameliorate the condition of those associated with farming and the counter view by petitioner NGO 'Citizen Resources and Action Initiative'. At the end, it said, "Today, we find it hard to intervene in the case. All the steps that need to be taken is squarely in the executive's domain, what should be the minimum support price for agricultural produce as well as crop insurance."
However, it took exception to the Centre's stand that the Niti Aayog had been requested to put forth a strategy to address the issue of farmers' suicide. The bench said, "You (the Centre) are giving everything to Niti Aayog. How much can it handle?"
Additional solicitor general P S Narasimha said, "The government is addressing the low income of farmers. Agrarian distress is manifest from a large number of farmers living below the poverty line and unfortunate incidents of suicides can be addressed by enabling farmers to increase their income. With this understanding, the government is aiming to double farmers' income by the year 2022."
The bench gave the Centre four weeks to file response to data placed by the NGO's counsel Colin Gonsalves, who argued that the much-hyped PM Fasal Bima Yojana had not reached even 20% of small and marginal farmers as the Centre had parked thousands of crores of rupees with private insurance companies. He also requested the court to direct the Centre to subsidise agricultural work.
The debate on farmers' suicide often takes polarized views. There is big group in the middle class which believes that farmers contribute less to the government kitty, but they get many subsidies and benefits. Although some commentators and researchers believe that farmers are the most distressed group in the country as their suicide rates are higher than that of others, based on their analysis of National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data. However , other researchers have claimed—based on demographic surveys—that farmers are not the most suicide-prone group in the country, and that those who do commit suicide need counselling rather than economic palliatives. Thisdebate may take us anywhere depending on sample, source of data and motives of our research. But farmers, of which 75 per cent are small and marginal farmers, are the less blessed and today farming in India is not considered remunerative and prestigious occupation. Does anybody want his son to be a farmer?
Earlier, NCRB used to provide data on farmer suicides, without specifying whether this included agricultural labourers or just cultivators. Most analysts assumed that the farmer suicide data referred only to cultivators and used population figures of cultivators to arrive at the suicide rates. However, in 2014, NCRB began publishing statistics for both agricultural labourers and farmer-cultivators, and it showed that they had so far been including suicides by both groups in their classification of farmer suicides. The old estimates had overestimated farm suicides because of the faulty assumption, it now turned out.
A reconstruction of the suicide rates by economists Deepankar Basu and Kartik Misra of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and Debarshi Das of IIT-Guwahati (2016) published in the Economic and Political Weekly showed that except for Maharashtra and Kerala, the ratio of suicide rates (or the suicide mortality rates, as the researchers describe the rates) for farm-related workers and non-farm-related workers was less than one in all states between 1995 and 2011. Basu and his co-authors used these findings to argue that farmer suicides are a regional problem, not a country-wide phenomenon.
We can easily extend this argument to another facet of farmers' suicide. The farmers who engaged in cash crops like cotton, sugarcane, tobacco and spices etc. were more prone to suicide in case they failed to repay their loans in case of crop failure.
It is held that in overall scenario farm suicide is not the driving force in overall suicides in India. But such arguments are academic exercises either to bring another facet of suicides in India or to obfuscate farmers, suicides' as a big problem. The overall trend of farm-related suicides are lower than non-farm suicide rates for the post-2011 period, but it does not reduce the gravity of the problem. All is not well. It is interesting to note that from 2015 onwards, NCRB also began publishing the reasons for farm suicides. And it shows a stark difference between farmers and non-farmers. While only a minority of suicides by non-farmers are due to economic distress, an overwhelming majority of farmers commit suicides because of economic distress, the data shows. Across states, economic factors such as poverty, bankruptcy, or farming-related issues (crop failures, inability to sell etc.) are the key drivers of farm-related suicides.
Loan waivers by the government to farmers amounted to more than Rs. 55000 crore to help save them from distress in 2008 and this year in case of UP loan waiver, the amount is again estimated to be about Rs. 40000 crore. On moral grounds the government must help farmers in distress due to crop failure in the short run by loan waivers. However, loan wavers not only put extra burden on banks, they also put pressure on state exchequer. There is also moral hazard when even those farmers who can fend for themselves, get the benefit of loan waivers and also incentive to borrow more and not to pay waiting waivers. The lasting solution would, nevertheless, depend on addressing the persistent problems of assured irrigation, drainage, marketing, finance and adopting new technologies and also creating alternative avenues of income in rural areas in food processing and non- farm economic activities. Also promoting agricultural cooperatives and self help groups can help a lot. Some people would also agree that in good harvest season farmers could be taxed and such revenue should be ploughed back for the development of rural areas and agriculture.
Polish crisis and people's protests: Will the Executive succeed in suppressing Judiciary and Democratic Convention
piyushchaubey International Current Affairs	0
The Polish crisis is brewing since 2015 and it got momentum as authoritarian politics became a global trend in the following years. Poland, an erstwhile communist country, is relatively new entrant in the European Union and in the list of democratic regimes. The present political crisis is a battle for appointing the judges in the Constitutional Tribunal of the country. Government did not follow the norms in appointing judges to the tribunal. According to polish law, judges of Constitutional Tribunal should be elected by parliament, which is governing when terms of previous judges expire. This convention was violated by the ruling party Platforma Obywatelska (PO). In October 2015 PO appointed five Constitutional Tribunal judges. These appointments included replacement of three judges whose terms were not due to expire until after first possible date of meeting of new parliament and two judges whose terms were not due to expire until after last possible date of meeting of new parliament.
Civic Platform was predicted to lose the upcoming elections. After the Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, PiS) party won the parliamentary election, it made its own appointments to the court, arguing that the previous appointments of the five judges by PO were unconstitutional. In December, PiS changed the court's decision-making power by prescribing a two-thirds majority vote and mandatory participation of at least 13 of the 15 judges on the Constitutional Tribunal.
The appointments and amendments caused domestic protests and counter-protests in late December 2015 and early January 2016; one of the most significant outcome was the creation of the Committee for the Defence of Democracy protest movement. The law changes were criticized by the European Union representatives as threatening the rule of law and the human rights of Polish citizens.
First the ruling Civic Platform Party violated the convention for appointment of judges
On October 8, 2015 the outgoing Polish Parliament (Sejm), led by Civic Platform (PO) as the main party of the governing coalition, elected five new Constitutional Tribunal judges. The judges were chosen on the basis of a law passed earlier in the summer, by the PO-controlled Sejm. At the time of the judges' election, opinion polls had shown that the Civic Platform was likely to lose the upcoming Polish parliamentary election on October 25. If the judges appointed by PO had taken their seats on the Tribunal, the result would have been that 14 out of 15 Constitutional Tribunal judges would have been selected by the Civic Platform. However, the President of Poland, Andrzej Duda, refused to swear in these judges stating that they had been chosen "in contravention of democratic principles".
After Law and Justice won absolute majority in the Polish parliamentary election
On October 25, the Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, PiS) party won an unprecedented absolute majority of seats in the Polish parliamentary election. On November 16, new Prime Minister Beata Szydło and her Cabinet took power. On November 19, 2015 the new Sejm passed an amendment to the existing law, and mandated the appointment of five new judges, set term limits for the president and vice president of the court, and stipulated term limits for two sitting judges. The president, Andrzej Duda, signed the amendment on November 20, but the law was challenged at the Constitutional Tribunal. On December 2, the Sejm elected five new judges to the 15-member tribunal, claiming it would prevent the previously appointed five from taking office; these were sworn into office by President Duda in a closed ceremony held after midnight. PiS delegates argued that the previous appointments made by PO contradicted existing law and the Polish constitution.
Constitutional Court ruling
On 3 December 2015 the Constitutional Court ruled that out of the five judges elected by PO, the election of three judges was valid, while the appointment of the other two breached the law. Again, President Duda refused to swear any of these judges into office. According to his spokesman, Duda refused to swear these three judges into office, because the number of Constitutional Court judges would then be unconstitutional.On 4 December, Law and Justice leader Jaroslaw Kaczyński, who had called the Constitutional Court "the bastion of everything in Poland that is bad" questioned the legitimacy of the Court's decision, because it was supposedly made by fewer judges than required by law. Kaczyński announced changes in the law regarding the Constitutional Court, but gave no details. On 11 January 2016, the Constitutional Court rejected a complaint by Civic Platform questioning the appointment of the five new judges by the new Parliament. Three of the Court's judges dissented, including Andrzej Rzepliński.
The problem saturated due to change of law
Although Art. 190 (5) of the Polish Constitution requires only the majority of votes for selection of judges. On 22 December 2015 the Sejm passed a law which reorganised the Constitutional Court. The new law introduced a two-thirds majority and the mandatory participation of at least 13, instead of 9, of the 15 judges.
Furthermore, pending constitutional proceedings had previously to wait in the docket for six months, or under exceptional circumstances for three months. The Court is now bound to handle the cases according to the date of receipt. Judges of the Constitutional Court can be dismissed on request of the Sejm, the President or the Department of Justice.
The bill was approved by the Polish Senate on 24 December 2015 after an overnight session, and signed by President Duda on 28 December 2015. It has been said that as a result, the decision-making capacity of the court has been "paralysed".
On 9 March 2016 the Constitutional Court ruled the amendments non-compliant with the Polish constitution. The Polish government regards this verdict as not binding, as it was not based on the rules introduced by the amendment, and refused to publish the verdict, a binding condition for its legal validity.
Reactions on law changes and public protests
Reactions were mostly expressed against the government for diluting the power of Constitutional Tribune and its judges and giving more powers to government in this regard. Jacek Kucharczyk, the director of the Institute of Public Affairs, Poland in Warsaw said that the constitutional court "was the one branch of government that they (PiS) theoretically couldn't touch and which curbed its power 10 years ago". People came out in streets to protest against this authoritative undemocratic act of the government. The Supreme Court of Poland and the Polish Lawyers Association view the amendment as a breach of Article 190 and as unconstitutional. Lech Wałęsa, former President of Poland and leader of the Solidarity movement in the 1980s, stated that the current situation might lead to a civil war and that the way in which PiS was proceeding did not amount to an "open and democratic" reform process. Wałęsa called for a referendum on the latest changes of law. "This government acts against Poland, against our achievements, freedom, democracy, not to mention the fact that it ridicules us in the world…I'm ashamed to travel abroad."
On December 12, protests organised by the Committee for the Defence of Democracy were joined by a crowd of supporters (estimated at 50,000 by the event organisers and 17,000-20,000 according to the official police report) in Warsaw. The next day pro-government supporters rallied in the capital (estimated at 80,000 by the event organisers and 40,000-45,000 based on the official police report).
Leszek Miller the leader of opposition left-wing party SLD and former Prime Minister of Poland criticised Western, especially German, media, and other critics of PiS, saying that they were "hysterical" and that there was nothing to indicate a "coup", as PiS was simply regaining power from the Civic Platform. Miller accused the chief judge of the Constitutional Court Andrzej Rzepliński of acting like a "politician of Civic Platform". Lech Wałęsa, Aleksander Kwasniewski and Bronislaw Komorowski, called on the Polish public to defend democracy, and warned that "Law and Justice plans to continue their actions, which destroy the constitutional order, paralyze the proceedings of the Constitutional Tribunal and the entire judicial system." The same week Poland's Supreme Court announced that it regards the verdicts of the Constitutional Tribunal as binding even though these decisions were not published by the Government, as "technically" required by the Polish Constitution. In response PiS spokeswoman Beata Mazurek called the Supreme Court's statement the result of "a meeting of a team of cronies who are defending the status quo of the previous governing camp."
President of the European Parliament described the political situation in Poland as dramatic, with the latest actions of the Polish government having "characteristics of a coup". Schulz explicitly refused to withdraw this appraisal after protests by the Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydło and Minister of Foreign Affairs Witold Waszczykowski. On January 10 Schulz was quoted as describing the situation in Poland as a "Putinisation" of European politics; and he was backed by Viviane Reding, who complained about attacks on the public and private media in line with "the Putin-Orbán-Kaczynski-Logic". The European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans wrote in a letter to Poland's ministers of Justice and Foreign Affairs before Christmas, that the EU's executive body "attaches great importance to preventing the emergence of situations whereby the rule of law in (a) member state could be called into question", and that he "would expect that this law is not finally adopted or at least not put into force until all questions regarding the impact of this law on the independence and the functioning of the Constitutional Tribunal have been fully and properly assessed."
The latest developments
Poland's president announced in the third week of July 2017 that he would veto controversial judicial reforms that would wipe out the Supreme Court's independence and allow the justice ministry to appoint judges. He seems to have to have bowed to the pressure of nationwide protests. Andrzej Duda's surprise announcement was interpreted as a rare reprimand of the ruling Law and Justice party, (PiS) with whom he normally has a close relationship. Commentators were shocked at the move, interpreting it as a major setback for PiS, which has made a big issue out of controlling Poland's independent institutions, particularly the judiciary, since it came into power in 2015, and hailing it as a victory for demonstrators. However, in his televised address (July 24) he said, "These laws must be amended." He said his rejection of the proposed bills would be criticised "probably by both sides of the political scene", but that they "would not strengthen the sense of justice in society".
The president said that he would veto the proposed measures which also included one to remove all judges of the supreme court, except those chosen by the justice minister, and another under which parliament would have been given the authority to appoint members of the National Council of the Judiciary. Explaining that his decision had resulted from lengthy consultations he had held with legal and other experts over the weekend, he said: "I have decided to send back to parliament – in which case to veto – the law on the Supreme Court, as well as the law on the National Council of the Judiciary." His declaration followed eight days of demonstrations across the country, in which hundreds of thousands of Poles have taken to the streets in the capital, Warsaw, as well as hundreds of other towns and cities, and held vigils in front of courthouses.
People of Poland went for candle vigil and street protests a day after the Polish senate had followed the lower house of parliament and voted for the reforms on July 23. Under banners emblazoned with slogans such as "Free courts" and "Freedom, equality, democracy", demonstrators pleaded with Duda – himself a lawyer – to reject the laws, claiming they marked a shift towards authoritarian rule.
Interpretation of President's announcement about veto and suspicion in motives
Investors' interpretation of President Duda's announcement as having stalled a constitutional crisis caused the Polish currency, the zloty, to rise against the euro. The proposals had also set Poland on a collision course with the European commission, which had threatened to stop Poland's voting rights if it introduced them. Donald Tusk, the European council president and a former Polish prime minister, had warned of a "black scenario that could ultimately lead to the marginalisation of Poland in Europe". There has also been criticism from Washington, with the US state department voicing its concerns. When President Trump visited Warsaw earlier this month he praised Poland's leaders for their patriotism but did not mention the judicial reforms. The legal amendments had their first parliamentary hearing on 18 July and were adopted by the lower house, followed by the upper house four days later. The only procedure preventing them from entering the statute books was the presidential signature. Duda's declaration marks the first time that he has publicly split with Jarosław Kaczyński, the head of PiS. Since his inauguration, Duda has been seen as something of a Kaczyński puppet from whom he effectively takes orders, leading to much mockery of him. Some commentators are sceptical whether his apparent assertion of his authority is authentic, or merely an attempt to take the edge off the protests.
Good Governance: Need for focusing on main priorities of great Indian dream rather than trivial and retrograde
sengar Essay	0
India is a big country passing through a defining moment in its history because of complex transitions in values, ideology and idea of India. Notwithstanding the best intents and motives of the government, unpleasant and heartbreaking things happen every now and then in one or the other part of the country. It breaks our hearts to see how encephalitis kills our children in the most brazen and brutal way (Gorakhpur) and people going to their homes through one of the most dependable means of transport, the Indian Railways lose their journey of lives midway meeting accident (Muzaffarnagar). Girls are not safe, even from higher middle class, while going to their workplace and coming back home (Chandigarh). A 10 year girl gets pregnant due to sexual exploitation by a relative and compelled to give birth to a child. A son kills his father; a husband kills his wife on trivial issues. A working girl is trampled by racing cars while going to attend her duty in a hospital in the National capital. Political activists and whistle blowers are being killed in broad daylight. Half the Lok Sabha members have criminal antecedents and intellectuals seem to be sold out- be it universities or media!
Who is responsible for making our lives a hell?
The buck stops at escape goats- the helpless link in the chain of events-now mostly bureaucrats. The mighty, especially the politicians throw the blame on each other. Who is responsible-Government or people or both? Let's stop the blame game and come to terms with serious issues encircling and troubling us because the societies which are afraid of examining themselves are condemned to degenerate. We are busy in trivial, the main concerns have lost our attention. Propaganda has come above governance and delivery. Let's courageously examine our follies and find way. The above mentioned sad events are not isolated events. If we regularly read our newspapers and watch television, it seems that there is an eerie continuity of the ugliness in our present day lives so much that we cannot ignore thing which shatter our hopes every moment. It seems that we are not reading the "Times of India" but reading "Hell Times" or watching "Hell TV."
People say government is responsible, government says people are responsible. In fact both of them have their own share in degenerating life in India. People are not benchmarking their values and virtues from family to work place and to market place- they want all for them and their family members in the shortest and fastest way and no price seems bigger to them, even moral and ethical issues to achieve their unbridled and irrational dreams.
On the other hand government has become an agglomeration of ambitious people who despite their limitations want to be in power for ever; no matter if it amounts to permanent damage to the socio-economic and politico-cultural environment of the country, shattering the collective dreams visualized as tryst with destiny. Intellectuals today have generally relinquished their responsibilities as torch bearers and turned out to be stooges of people in power. Media has turned out to be a cheap entertainer and perpetual noise maker scuttling important news and issues. I am tempted to say "all of them sold out", but I will not, because I can see that in polity, public and intellectual arenas still there are people who really love to be moral and ethical, patriotic and sensitive, no matter what price they pay. A time of introspection has come. We need to realize that it is time to set our objectives right and blame game will not serve any purpose. It is the time to dream together, sit together and take our own share of responsibilities if we fail our dreams and find collective and consensual ways to come out of the living hell we are facing every moment.
Will it ever be possible for the Prime Minister and Chief Ministers to be present in every heart shattering event for rescue? What is team India, where is team India? What is its role? Equally important question is whether we can/should absolve the government from its insensitivity, wrong priorities and above all accountability? What are the preferences and priorities of the government- main issues or trivial issues? Why things are so? Who is responsible?
Good governance means that people and institutions in power and authority deliver the services unfailingly with care, quality and speed which they are supposed to do and keep their windows open to all the stake holders to complaint if there is any slackness and a quick redress system to address the complaints. Good governance is also about right priorities and preferences given limited time and resources and plethora of constraints. Good governance requires boldness in our national ambitions as well as prioritization of goals. First, we must win the fight against poverty within the next decade. Second, we must improve moral standards in government and society to provide a strong foundation for good governance. Third, we must change the character of our politics to promote fertile ground for reforms. (Gloria Macapagal Arroyo). This cannot be achieved as long as there is corruption and lack of accountability. The issue of corruption as we have taken up now in India is only a part of corruption- ill begotten money. But this is just an important symptom of corruption, not corruption per se. The root causes of corruption are socio-political, deep seated feudal attitude and colonial legacies- all freeing the people in power in social, political and economic arena from accountability. All kinds of dereliction of duties- dereliction of duties by common man/ worker or by bureaucrat or by politicians or by intellectuals- all fall in the category of corruption. Corruption is siphoning up of development money without audit assurance. Corruption is misleading people through media, speeches, provocations, and propaganda. Corruption is business without ethics. Corruption is teaching students or treating patients without ethics and morality. Fighting corruption is not just good governance. It's self-defense. It's patriotism. (Joe Biden). Corruption is the enemy of development, and of good governance. It must be got rid of. Both the government and the people at large must come together to achieve this national objective. (Pratibha Patil).
Are we pursuing the priorities of Indian Nation?
Is killing milch cows a big problem in India? Are Muslims not fond of milk, butter and paneer? Are they stupid enough to kill milch animals and cows? Facts are different. We know India as the biggest milk producer in the world, despite minimal institutional support. Are all Muslims pro Pakistan, anti- national or terrorists? Is love Jihad is the biggest problem facing the country of youth? Is Hinduism at threat? Are Muslims beneficiary of appeasement so they dominate places of power and wealth in India? Are scheduled castes of UP are creating problems against the upper castes? Are all tribal people and their supporters extremist and anti-national? Are all civil societies and non-governmental organizations are anti-national? Are all voices which criticize an ideology or government anti-national amounting to sedition? Should everybody take government policies uncritically? Is there a proximate threat of war with Pakistan and China or are the tensions new and they have now increased far more than earlier? Is foreign policy becoming hostage to domestic electoral machination?
Main issues versus trivial issues
For quite some time it is these issues which are reigning political discourses, TV talks and even most of the newspapers. We need to think whether these issues are really the primary and priority issues confronting India or the problem of low growth, low employment, inflation, lack of schools, colleges, universities and their falling qualities, lack of hospitals, lack of infrastructure, all weather navigable roads in rural areas, railways, ports, power supply, poor arms, ammunition and equipment of defense forces, lack of research and development, poverty, disease, malnutrition, gender inequality, social and economic inequality, agricultural distress, farmers suicides, non-performing assets in the banking sector, real estate crisis, and to cap it all an inefficient administrative and judicial system, moral crisis, etc?
Consequences of wrong priorities
If trivial issues become the main issues and main issues are put under the carpet, we cannot avoid the ugliness that break our hearts every day. We are fortunate that we did not admit our children in Gorakhpur hospital or we were not travelling in the ill fated train which met with an accident in Muzaffarnagar. We are fortunate that our daughters came safe to home from their universities and work places. But can we guarantee that next time we will not be the victims when things are not in order, when system fails and when trivial issues become the main discourse of our times leaving aside the core issues, because politicians have to do successful propaganda and social engineering to win the next elections. Common people are becoming fodder to illegitimate and immoral aspirations of the ruling elite. Let's re-examine ourselves and our ways. History may seem to be mute for the time being, but it passes its judgments in due course. Let's not do things, which shame us in front of mother India when we look back after say a decade. Future generations would not pardon us if we fail in our responsibilities in making India democratic and human. The colonial deprivations get vent in our ambition of being a super power, but what kind of super power we want to be is a relevant question.
Need for setting our goals right
Setting all discourses for ideological gains and electoral gains is a big problem. Emotive and provocative issues make good electoral dividends. These make good breaking news. Palpable politicians become more amenable to corporate sector designs of profiteering and crony capitalism. It can be seen how these combinations make an immoral but win-win coalition of interest.
Ultimate responsibilities lie with the people
If people do not use their wisdom and control, promises and slogans/ jumlas are successfully used by politicians to seek their favours like "bagula bhagat" does to cajole fishes into its trap. People often ping-pong (change positions) between political parties in the hope of solace- from secularism to Hinduism, from redistributive justice to market orientation. But still their hopes are betrayed. The people, however, cannot blame systemic failure on political leaders and governments. They choose their government and in this sense they get the government that they choose or deserve. If people's morality and discretion get polluted, we have third grade leaders. If people just get swayed by impulses, whims, fancies, propaganda without using their rationality and wisdom, and if they are guided by their own vested interests and narrow categories like caste, creed, religion, race and region, problems do not have any immediate chance to get solution. We are not only observing it; we can now feel it on our skins!
Let's come out of the cobweb of trivial issues
Trivial issues seem to have come to dominate for long, because people have started liking it till something bad happens to them. Politicians, media, business and mischief mongers know it. But people are unaware that they are becoming victims. Life, however, is not a cheap laughing programme on TV. It is a serious business. Living shallow is an index of moral degradation. People, nevertheless, enjoy mocking on the men who are sensible and people who question and raise voices. Today we are not ready to accept any counter argument- one-upmanship is becoming the norm and in difference, revenge and retribution the natural consequence. The culture of debate and discussion is being despised. Many of the intellectuals have surrendered their principles for fear or greed. This is making our life hell as chances of examination and course correction are rejected for "god worship" of the people whose credentials and intentions are doubtful. But there should be no confusion. If we choose, it is we who would, needless to say, suffer. As you think, so you become. And as you sow, so you reap. Our thoughts are guide to our action. And actions determine the outcome. If the main priorities are neglected and we start focusing on the trivial issues because our leaders say so, we turn out to be herds of sheep— dumb driven cattle!
Right thinking, right action
Are we sure that we are thinking and acting in right direction? Are our priorities right? You cannot be retrograde and progressive at the same time or promote the rogue and be secure at the same time. Bereft of values and ideology, you lose all your control. You become a straw and just flow as the system takes you. It is only the chance that would decide your fate; the next day is for you to suffer and more so if you make mockery of wisdom and morality. You cannot have the cake and eat it too. You will have to sacrifice the trivial for achieving the main priorities of our country. If you start liking trouble mongers, authoritarian leaders and manipulators, the future is crystal clear to see. Do not repent on sporadic accidents. If the way we think and act does not change, such accidents would be more frequent. As you sow, so you reap. Governments will come and go but we cannot get our lost children and family members back who become victims of insanity and insensitivity of the whole system and its leaders who remain busy all the while in trivial issues or propagation of their skewed ideology. People are the last priority, votes are the first priority. Leaders today scarcely have time for governance. And when governance fails, accidents and mishaps are bound to occur time and again. It happened in the past, and the tradition continues, eluding achche din!
It's time to take a pause and think. Let's think what our priorities are and create effective pressure on the system to pursue them- question is not about right or left ideology, but about honesty and probity, integrity and accountability for both people and politicians. Indiscipline begins at the top, so said Loknayak Jayaprakash Narain and it is visible! Politicians are changing ideologies as boats, indulge in irresponsible and dirty sludge fest and do not mind playing with the idea of India- tearing apart unity in diversity! People as ever are followers, some commentators liken them with herds. Are we herds?
Naming a right
css Readings for Mains	0
(Privacy debate in India: This is one of the most thoughtful and analytical write ups on the issue of privacy in recent times. It is being presented here for the advantage of students)
With the Supreme Court set to rule on privacy, India is on the cusp of constitutional history. The nine-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice J.S. Khehar determining whether a fundamental right to privacy exists is only the 15th time in the Supreme Court's history that such a large Bench has convened. There is no escaping the enormity of this constitutional moment — these nine judges will definitively shape the evolution of our Constitution. What is at stake is nothing less than the terms of a fundamental relationship between us — citizens of a constitutional democracy — and the state.
When Aadhaar was initially challenged in 2015, the Union of India argued that we had no right to privacy. That claim does not merit a response. Now, joined by some States, it mounts the slightly better argument that a right to privacy must not be declared because it is an expansive right without clear boundaries. It also argues that there is no need to declare privacy as a separate right because the phrase 'personal liberty' in Article 21 already covers it. This article responds to these arguments by returning to the Supreme Court's own decisions and to first principles of adjudicating constitutional rights.
Tending our rights
Since the Supreme Court began defending fundamental rights in 1950, it has displayed a deep commitment to preserving the right to 'life' under Article 21. Over time, it has tended this right with great care and has declared that it guarantees a right to food, shelter, education, health and clean environment. However, the companion right in Article 21 — to 'personal liberty' — has not fared so well. By comparison, it is an anaemic and stultified right, relied on by courts only when unavoidable, and even then only in the narrowest possible terms.
Like many constitutional courts across the world, the Indian Supreme Court often recognises unenumerated rights — those which are not included in the Constitution's text — as being part of the fundamental rights that are written into the Constitution. As citizens of a democracy in whose service the Constitution and the government exist, surely we must welcome expansive rights. All constitutions, including India's, are intended to maximise citizens' freedoms and tightly restrain the government's capacity to curtail them.
In India's own constitutional history, we have seen that all rights travel the same path to being declared so fundamental that the Constitution and courts must defend them. Take a right that is much like the right to privacy in our instinctive understanding of its importance, and in its location at the very heart of 'personal liberty' in Article 21: the right against torture. Like 'privacy', the word 'torture' does not appear in Article 21. Like 'privacy', the word 'torture' is not obviously included in the narrow understanding of 'personal liberty' as protection against being restrained without good cause.
As the Supreme Court began to confront the rampant use of torture as a tool for investigating crimes, it began acknowledging the need for constitutional protections. In 1980, for example, Justice Krishna Iyer said: "We are deeply disturbed by the diabolical recurrence of police torture resulting in a terrible scare in the minds of common citizens that their lives and liberty are under a new peril…"
In 1996, in DK Basu v. State of West Bengal , the Court finally acknowledged that while torture might have been acceptable historically, it was no longer conscionable in law or morals. The court converted this recognition into a guarantee that citizens could claim against the police by giving it a name — the 'right against torture' — and declaring that it flows from Article 21's guarantee of 'personal liberty'. But it did not stop at simply declaring this right. As unprecedented forms of interrogation often aided by new technology became prevalent, it expanded the right's scope to retain its efficacy in the face of this change. In 2010, three judges ruled categorically in Selvi v. State of Karnatakathat 'torture' must include not only physical torture as most earlier cases had done, but also mental torture.
The 'freedom of speech and expression' in Article 19(1)(a) travels the same path. Even though it never uses the word, the Supreme Court was very quick in its early years to say that this right covers the press. Where early cases related to 'speech' in newspapers or magazines, the right now embraces such diverse activities as communicating digitally ( Shreya Singhal v. Union of India ) and expressing gender identities ( NALSA v. Union of India ).
The arcs of the right against torture and Article 19(1)(a) point to a fatal flaw in the claim that there is no need to declare the right to privacy since it is already a part of personal liberty. Various fundamental rights share with the right to privacy the characteristic of being specific forms of liberty. Allowing such an argument would reduce much of Part III — the heart and soul of the Constitution — to no more than an exercise in redundancy. Rather, rights are declared because they protect a value acknowledged as important and distinctive enough to merit constitutional force.
Privacy follows the same logic. It is only once the court affirms the obvious position that a fundamental right to privacy exists that we can turn to considering the legitimacy of the government's actions in infringing upon it. The Union's argument that the privacy right is incapable of definition is disingenuous. All rights, however seemingly precise, see contests about where their boundaries lie. Invariably, they all evolve and expand over time. This is an aspect of constitutional adjudication that we must embrace. Constitutions, including rights, must be capable of responding to contemporary challenges.
A range of concerns
Even standing alone, a right to privacy embraces a wide range of things — from preventing the state from watching us without cause, to affirming that we can form and choose our identities, to deciding what information about us is collected by the state using the force of the law and how that information is processed and made available to whom. Each of these facets of privacy raises different concerns and places different burdens on the state to justify intrusions. We cannot simultaneously recognise privacy's importance and also say that it ought not to be named and treated as such.
Lumping everything into 'personal liberty' flips the relationship between individuals and the state on its head. In effect, it demands that persons injured by a privacy violation establish every single time that they have a right, rather than focussing on demanding explanations from the state in court.
Naming and declaring a right has powerful consequences. In democratic orders like ours, our rights are only as strong as our capacity to assert them. Recognising the right is the first step in opening up the possibility of it trickling down into the people's consciousness. As governments and technologies become increasingly intrusive, the people of this country must be empowered to safeguard their interests. Irrespective of the outcome, these nine judges will make constitutional history. What is far more important is that they have the opportunity to empower each and every person in India with a right that lies at the very core of personal liberty.
(Ujwala Uppaluri is a graduate of NUJS Kolkata and Harvard Law School)
Economic Development and Policies
International Trade and Economy
Student's Column
पाषाण काल
प्राचीन भारत
भारतीय इतिहास
भारतीय चित्रकला
भारतीय दर्शन
भारतीय नृत्य
भारतीय संगीत
भारतीय स्थापत्य
हड़प्पा सभ्यता
The Alternative Deal between UK and EU on Brexit: Miles to Go
India-US Bilateral Defense Trade To Reach $18 Billion By Year End: Pentagon
Filmfare Awards 2019
Civil Services Prelims Solved Paper- Series B
Some Important Economic Terms
Hairstyles Men on The rise of right wing populism: Meaning, reasons and implications
Geneva Bennett on The rise of right wing populism: Meaning, reasons and implications
Sergio Blake on The rise of right wing populism: Meaning, reasons and implications
Rose Morales on The rise of right wing populism: Meaning, reasons and implications
Nasir Sayani on Sri Lanka: Ghastly Easter attacks
Civil Services Strategist
Powered and Managed by
Sahaj Takneek
© Civil Services Strategist 2020
Developed and Managed by Sahaj Takneek