Whatsapp 93125-11015 For Details
Underlining that the “world is in a state of crisis”, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told leaders of developing countries Thursday that “your voice is India’s voice” and “your priorities are India’s priorities”.
Addressing leaders at the Voice of Global South Summit, the Prime Minister spelt out the challenges: “We have turned the page on another difficult year that saw war, conflict, terrorism and geopolitical tensions; rising food, fertiliser and fuel prices; climate change-driven natural disasters; and, lasting economic impact of the Covid pandemic.”
It is clear the world is in a state of crisis. It is difficult to predict how long this state of instability will last,” he said at the inaugural session of the two-day virtual summit organised by India.
The Global South includes the developing and the less developed countries of the world, and India invited more than 120 countries to the summit.
The idea behind the summit is that India will work to ensure that inputs generated from partner countries in the Voice of Global South Summit deliberations will be pushed forward at the G20 summit which will be hosted by India later this year.
India’s ongoing Presidency of the G20, officials said, provides a special and strong opportunity for countries whose voice often goes unheard.
Making a pitch for the Global South to play a role in shaping the world order, the Prime Minister said, “We, the Global South, have the largest stakes in the future. Three-fourths of humanity lives in our countries.
We should also have an equivalent voice. Hence, as the eight-decade-old model of global governance slowly changes, we should try to shape the emerging order.
Leaders of several countries including Bangladesh, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Guyana, Mozambique, Mongolia and Senegal were among those who attended the leaders’ session.
Govt & Politics
High Court: CAPF personnel entitled to the old pension scheme (Page no. 8)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
The Delhi High Court directed the Centre Wednesday to grant the benefit of the old pension scheme (OPS) under the CCS Pension Rules 1972 to all personnel of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF).
The court was hearing a batch of 82 pleas seeking quashing of orders denying the benefit of the scheme to certain paramilitary personnel.
A division bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna in its decision of January 11, while directing the Centre to issue necessary orders, said, “A mandamus by way of direction is accordingly issued to the respondents to issue an Order to CAPFs mentioned above to implement the Notification dated 22.12.2003 as well as OM dated 17.02.2020 in essence noted above.
It is made clear that the Notification dated 22.12.2003 as well as OM dated 17.02.2020 granting the benefit of Old Pension Scheme shall be applicable in rem. Meaning thereby, Old Pension Scheme shall not only be applicable in the case of petitioners herein but all the personnel of CAPFs at large. Accordingly, necessary orders be issued within eight weeks.”
The petitioners in the case were appointed after January 1, 2004, who contended that on December 22, 2003, the Centre issued a notification for implementation of the new pension scheme with effect from January 1, 2004.
They claimed that the benefits of the OPS was extended to only those personnel whose recruitment process was completed by December 31, 2003 but joined the force after January 1, 2004.
They claimed to have applied in 2002-03 and 2003-04 for various posts in the paramilitary forces like Indo Tibetan Border Police, Central Reserve Police Force etc.
However, given that this benefit was not extended to the personnel of the armed forces, a quite many of them took the plea that since their recruitment/ selection process commenced prior to Notification dated 22.12.2003, they shall be covered under the OPS, though the respondents have treated them as a member of NPS.
The petitioners claimed that they made several representations on this issue before the competent authority of their respective Force, however, their prayer for grant of benefit of OPS was turned down.
The HC perused the December 22, 2003 notification holding that it categorically mentions, “The system would be mandatory for all new recruits to the central Government service from 1st of January 2004 (except the armed forces in the first stage).
Express network
Clean Ganga report 26% of STPs in UP not complying with ministry’s standards (Page no. 9)
(GS Paper 3, Conservation)
Of the 111 operational sewage treatment plants (STPs) in Uttar Pradesh, 29 were not complying with the effluent discharge standards fixed by the Union Environment Ministry, shows a report available with the National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG), the apex body that implements the government’s ambitious Namami Gange scheme.
The monthly progress report for Uttar Pradesh for the period September-October 2022 shows that these 29 non-complying STPs accounted for 15 per cent (532.18 million litre per day or MLD) of the total sewage treatment capacity (3,663.4 MLD) in the state and were located along the main stem of river Ganga and its tributaries. This is significant in view of the gap in sewage treatment capacity in the state.
As per the report, there were 119 STPs with a sewage treatment capacity of 3,663.4 MLD against the estimated sewage generation of 5,500 MLD in the state—leaving a sewage treatment capacity gap of 1,836.6 MLD.
However, of the 119 STPs in the state, only 111 were operational, shows the report. The report shows that out of the 111 operational STPs in the state, 29 were found “non-complying” with effluent discharge standards notified by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change for STPs on October 13, 2017.
As per the environment ministry’s standards, the pH value, which measures how acidic/basic water is, should be 6.5-9.0; BOD (Biochemical oxygen demand), which is a test to identify biological decomposable substances, should be less than 20mg/l; the TSS (Total Suspended Solids), which are the waterborne particles that exceed 2 microns in size, should be less than 50mg/l; and Fecal Coliform (FC) should be less than 1000 MPN (most probable number)/100 ml.
Out of the 29 non-complying STPs, seven were under Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam (Rural), while 22 were under the state’s urban development department and other agencies, shows the report, shared by the Uttar Pradesh government to the NMCG on November 21, 2022.
The seven non-complying STPs of UPJN-Rural accounted for a combined sewage treatment capacity of 188.5 MLD and were located along the main stem of river Ganga and its tributaries in different districts, including Kanpur, Hapur, Mathura and Bulandshahr.
Editorial page
Wages of Distress (Page no. 14)
(GS Paper 3, Economy)
The latest estimates of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) released by the National Statistical Office (NSO) suggest that the Indian economy grew by 6.3 per cent in the last quarter compared to last year, with full-year growth expected to be around 7 per cent.
This forms the basis of the government’s claims that India may be the fastest-growing economy in the world. But then annual growth rates are notoriously deceptive given the choice of base year.
More so when the economy has seen a sharp slowdown in growth rates since 2016-17, followed by the pandemic. Any euphoria based on year-on-year growth rates is not just deceptive but also hides the reality of an impending economic crisis.
The same national accounts data shows that average income in India is lower in 2021-22 compared to the pre-pandemic year of 2018-19 with per-capita income declining at 0.25 per cent per annum.
Take the case of farmers, the largest occupational group. In February 2016, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that farmers’ incomes will be doubled by 2022.
The reality is that farmers’ income declined by 1.5 per cent per year between 2016-17 and 2020-21. In 2021-22 data, one only hopes that it at least remains at the level it was five years ago.
The second largest group is casual workers. Based on the monthly data from the labour bureau, real wages in non-agricultural occupations between September 2017-2022 declined by 0.9 per cent per annum whereas it remained almost stagnant for agricultural occupations with real wages rising by 0.1 per cent per year.
Together, cultivators and rural wage labourers account for 78 per cent of all rural workers; their share in the economy is 53 per cent. In other words, almost four-fifths of rural workers have not seen any increase in their incomes in the last five years.
But it is not just the rural households and the poor that have seen a decline in incomes. Better-protected regular workers in urban areas have not fared better.
Employment-Unemployment Surveys of the National Statistical Office (NSO) and the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) suggest that real earnings of regular workers have declined across categories, male and female, rural and urban.
Between 2011-12 and 2017-18, earnings of rural regular workers declined by 0.3 per cent per annum while it declined at a faster pace of 1.7 per cent per annum in urban areas.
Ideas page
The matter about the mind (Page no. 15)
(GS Paper 2, Health)
In December 2022, the 5th Global Mental Health Summit, cosponsored by over half a dozen organisations engaged with mental health, was held in Chennai to discuss mental health in the context of human rights, ethics and justice.
Highlighting the importance of mental health, it gave a call for action against the continued neglect by society at large and the governments at central and state levels, in particular.
In 2015, the GOI carried out a National Mental Health Survey — 2015-16 to assess the prevalence of mental health in the country.
The report showed mental disorders at 10.6 per cent among above 18-year-olds, 16 per cent among the productive age group of 30-49 year olds — and lifetime morbidity affecting 150 million people with one per cent reporting high suicidal risk.
Even so, the human resources and treatment facilities are woefully low. Madhya Pradesh, for example, has 0.05 psychiatrist per lakh population and treatment gap in India is about 80 per cent.
Against an estimated need of over Rs 93,000 crore investment to address this huge morbidity, the Union government in 2019 earmarked a budgetary allocation of Rs 600 crore, of which 93 per cent was for tertiary institutions such as NIMHANS, and the psychiatry departments of medical colleges, leaving just Rs 40 crore for the District Mental Health Programme and other community-based initiatives. Only a measly Rs 2.91 crore of this pitiable amount of Rs 40 crore was spent.
For policy makers, mental health is a low priority. Such poor policy attention is often ascribed to indifference among bureaucrats and politicians.
This is not the whole truth. In an acutely underfunded sector facing overwhelming demands for funding, those with the capacity to shout the loudest get attended to. Mental health is singularly handicapped in this regard as its lobbying power is the weakest.
But a more important reason is the substantial “know do” and “how to” gaps in mental health. The rights-based National Mental Health Policy of 2014 and the Mental Health Act of 2017 decisively made a shift in policy by asking for the mentally ill to be treated on par with those suffering from physical ailments and be treated with dignity. However, there is still a lack of clarity on how the financial and physical resources are to be found and by when.
A good policy has four components: A clear vision with aims, objectives and goals; the design that spells out how to achieve the vision; the quantum of resources — financial, human and infrastructural, required to implement the design; and finally, the surveillance, data, monitoring and evaluation of outcomes at concurrent and periodic intervals for course correction. The first is done.
Explained
Basic Structure of Constitution (Page no. 19)
(GS Paper 2, Constitution)
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar sparked a debate on the separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary. He criticised the Supreme Court once again, for using the doctrine of basic structure to strike down the constitutional amendment that introduced the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act.
Earlier on December 7, in his maiden speech in the Rajya Sabha, Dhankhar had called the striking down of the NJAC Act a “severe compromise” of parliamentary sovereignty and disregard of the “mandate of the people”.
The Doctrine of Basic Structure is a form of judicial review that is used to test the legality of any legislation by the courts.
The doctrine was evolved by the Supreme Court in the 1973 landmark ruling in Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala. In a 7-6 verdict, a 13-judge Constitution Bench ruled that the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution is inviolable, and could not be amended by Parliament.
If a law is found to “damage or destroy” the “basic features of the Constitution”, the Court declares it unconstitutional. The test is applied to constitutional amendments to ensure the amendment does not dilute the fundamentals of the Constitutional itself.
The test is widely regarded as a check on majoritarian impulses of the Parliament since it places substantive limits on the power to amend the Constitution.
The Kesavananda ruling was a culmination of a series of tussles between the judiciary and the executive led by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
After a reversal of key legislation including land reforms; nationalization of banks; abolition of privy purse- the Parliament brought in a constitutional amendment to give itself the power to amend any part of the Constitution and passed a law that it cannot be reviewed by the courts.
The Court had to then examine the scope of the Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution and the legality of the land reforms. The 13-judge bench gave 11 separate judgments and the doctrine was culled out as the majority opinion in the case.
The Court ruled that while Parliament has vast powers to amend the Constitution, it cannot amend certain “basic features.” On land reforms, the Court upheld the amendment that removed the fundamental right to property. The court ruled that in spirit, the amendment would not violate the “basic structure” of the Constitution.
The origins of the basic structure doctrine are found in the post-war German Constitution law which, after the Nazi regime, was amended to protect some basic laws. Jurist NanbhoyPalkhivala who appeared against the government relied on the writings of Professor Dietrich Conrad in support of the basic structure doctrine.
Who was Kesvananda Bharati, whose name is linked to landmark SC ruling (Page no. 19)
(GS Paper 2, Constitution)
On Wednesday, in his inaugural address at the 83rd All-India Presiding Officers Conference in Jaipur, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar again raised the issue of the powers of the judiciary vis-a-vis the legislature, highlighting the 2015 decision of the Supreme Court to strike down the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act.
Parliamentary sovereignty and autonomy cannot be permitted to be qualified or compromised as it is quintessential to survival of democracy.
The Vice President’s remarks slammed the Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 judgement in the Kesavananda Bharati case in which it ruled that Parliament had the authority to amend the Constitution but not its basic structure. “With due respect to the judiciary, I cannot subscribe to this (that parliament cannot amend the basic structure).
While the verdict and the basic structure doctrine are well known, less has been said about the man whose court case resulted in the Supreme Court’s landmark judgement that established the basic structure doctrine.
The Indian Express takes a look at Kesavananda Bharati and how a seer from Kerala “saved the Indian constitution.”
Born in 1940, Kesavananda Bharati took sanyas at the age of 19 and headed to the Edneer Mutt, a Hindu monastery in Kasargod, Kerala. In 1961, still only 21, he was appointed as the head of the Mutt, a position he held till his death in 2020.
A proponent of the Smartha tradition of Advaita Vedanta, at the Mutt, he was referred with his honorific title: Srimad Jagadguru Sri SriSankaracharyaThotakacharya Keshavananda Bharathi Sripadangalavaru.
The Edneer Mutt is believed to have been established by Totakacharya, one of four original disciples of Adi Shankaracharya, the man credited to have synthesised the non-dualistic philosophy of Advaita Vedanta.
Kesavananda Bharati was known to be a patron of Hindustani and Carnatic music as well as Yakshagana, a folk theatre form popular in some districts of Karnataka and the border district of Kasargod, Kerala.
Kesavananda Bharati did not have any larger, “constitutional” aims when he took the Kerala government to court in February 1970. Rather, he was challenging the 1969 Land Reforms enacted by the communist C. Achuta Menon government which had affected his Mutt. Under the reforms, the Edneer Mutt lost a large chunk of its property, which contributed to its financial woes.
Filing a writ petition in the Supreme Court, Kesavanandas Bharati argued, along with his lawyer Nani Palkhivala, that this action violated his fundamental rights – in particular, his fundamental right to religion (Article 25), freedom of religious denomination (Article 26), and right to property (Article 31).