Whatsapp 93125-11015 For Details
Flagging the threat to financial viability of many countries from unsustainable debt levels, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said trust in international financial institutions has eroded “partly because they have been slow to reform themselves”.
Saying it is “not an easy task”, Modi called upon the “custodians of the leading economies and monetary systems of the world” to “bring back stability, confidence and growth to the global economy” at the first meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors under India’s G20 Presidency.
In a pre-recorded video message at the start of the two-day meeting, the Prime Minister said many countries, especially developing economies, are still coping with the after-effects of the Covid-19 pandemic, which delivered a “once-in-a-century” blow to the global economy.
He also made a reference to the rising geopolitical tensions in different parts of the world, without naming the Russia-Ukraine war directly.
We are also witnessing rising geopolitical tensions in different parts of the world. There are disruptions in global supply chains. Many societies are suffering due to rising prices.
And, food and energy security have become major concerns across the world. Even the financial viability of many countries is threatened by unsustainable debt levels.
(Associated Press reports: US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen condemned the “illegal and unjustified war against Ukraine” at a session attended by Russian officials and reiterated calls for G20 nations to do more to support Ukraine and hinder Moscow’s war effort.)
Govt & Politics
At UNGA, India abstains from the vote on Ukraine, calls for talks (Page no. 8)
(GS Paper 2, International Relations)
India has abstained in the UN General Assembly on a resolution that underscored the need to reach “comprehensive, just and lasting peace” in Ukraine, as it questioned whether the world was “anywhere near a possible solution” acceptable to both Moscow and Kyiv a year into the Ukrainian conflict.
India was among the 32 nations that abstained as the 193-member General Assembly adopted the resolution ‘Principles of the Charter of the United Nations underlying a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine’ on Thursday, put forward by Ukraine and its supporters.
The non-binding resolution, which received 141 votes in favour and seven against, underscored the “need to reach, as soon as possible, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine in line with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”
In the explanation of vote after the resolution was adopted, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Ruchira Kamboj said that as the General Assembly marks a year of the Ukrainian conflict, “it is important that we ask ourselves a few pertinent questions”.
Are we anywhere near a possible solution acceptable to both sides? Can any process that does not involve either of the two sides, ever lead to a credible and meaningful solution? Has the UN system, and particularly its principal organ, the UN Security Council, based on a 1945-world construct, not been rendered ineffective to address contemporary challenges to global peace and security.
She stressed that India continues to remain concerned over the situation in Ukraine, noting that the conflict has resulted in the loss of countless lives and misery, particularly for women, children, and the elderly, with millions becoming homeless and forced to seek shelter in neighbouring countries. Reports of attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure are also deeply concerning, she added.
Privilege of MPs for freedom of speech not unqualified: Dhankhar (Page no. 8)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
Amid a raging political controversy over the expunction of certain remarks made by Rahul Gandhi and Leader of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge in Parliament, Vice-President and Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday said the privilege of members for freedom of speech in Parliament was not “unqualified” and that MPs cannot speak based on “unverified situations” and turn Parliament into a battleground where there is “free fall of information”.
According to Article 105 of the Constitution, which deals with the powers and privileges of the two Houses and the members, “there shall be freedom of speech in Parliament” and “no member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings”.
Referring to Article 105, Dhankhar — while addressing the 61st convocation of the Indian Agricultural Research Institute — said, “I want to place before you a pain of mine.
Our parliament is the biggest temple of our democracy. There can be neither civil nor criminal proceedings against anybody who speaks in that temple of democracy.
Our Constitution makers have given that right to our MPs so that they can speak in Parliament in a fearless manner. That is a privilege but we tend to overlook one thing… that privilege is not unqualified.
Editorial
Slow path to peace (Page no. 12)
(GS Paper 3, Internal Security)
It was recently reported in this newspaper that the Union government is discussing a “proposal to withdraw the Indian Army completely from the Valley hinterland.
If approved, the Army will have presence only on the Line of Control (LoC)”. The Army could be withdrawn in a phased manner, starting with a few districts in Kashmir, with responsibility for counter-terror operations being handed over to the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and the J&K police.
An official is quoted as saying, “In a way, the decision has been taken, and it is a matter of when it will be done”. The reason for this move is the reduced levels of violence in J&K since the August 5, 2019 decisions.
The government has been claiming that normalcy is returning to Kashmir and now wishes to “make it visible” by reducing the presence of the Army in the hinterland.
There is no arguing with the logic that decreasing violence levels should lead to a reduction in the number of security forces deployed for internal security roles.
This has happened in the past. For example, between 2007 and 2009, two divisions were pulled out from counter-terror operations in J&K and reverted to their conventional role.
Two brigades were also relocated from Kashmir to strengthen the deployment along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh.
Over the years, with the improving situation in the hinterland, some Rashtriya Rifles (RR) units have also been shifted from the hinterland to the LoC in the counter-infiltration role.
Explained
Section 153A: its use and misuse (Page no. 16)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
The Supreme Court granted interim bail to Pawan Khera, chairman of the media and publicity department of the All-India Congress Committee, who had been arrested for alleged hate speech by Assam Police earlier in the day.
Multiple FIRs registered against Khera across different states mentioned offences ranging from criminal conspiracy, imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration to promoting enmity between religions.
The invocation of these laws are often criticised for restricting free speech and misusing the legal processes for political purposes.
Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) penalises “promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony”.
This is punishable with imprisonment up to three years, or with fine, or with both. The provision was enacted in 1898 and was not in the original penal code.
At the time of the amendment, promoting class hatred was a part of the English law of sedition, but was not included in the Indian law.
In the pre-Independence Rangila Rasool case, the Punjab High Court had acquitted the Hindu publisher of a tract that had made disparaging remarks about the private life of the Prophet, and had been charged under Section 153A.