DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS ANALYSIS

08 JUNE 2022

1 – Delimitation Commission releases final order for Jammu and Kashmir: 

GS II

Election related issues

• Relevance:
• The Delimitation Commission’s finalisation of constituencies will pave the way for Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir’s UT.
• This will empower residents in the Valley to use their constitutional right to vote, fostering a democratic climate in the region.
• This will also aid in the speedier integration of the J&K area with the rest of India, furthering the ideal of ‘Ek Bharat, Akhand Bharat.’
• What does the term “delimitation” mean?
• The act or process of determining the borders or limits of territorial constituencies of a country in order to represent demographic fluctuations is known as delimitation.
• Delimitation serves what purpose?
• To ensure that all segments of a population are equally represented.
• Geographical areas are split fairly so that no political party has an electoral advantage over another.
• To follow the principle of “One Vote, One Value.”
• What is the delimitation procedure?
• Under Article 82, Parliament enacts a Delimitation Act after each Census.
• States are divided into territorial constituencies according to the Delimitation Act every Census under Article 170.
• After the Act takes effect, the Union government creates a Delimitation Commission.
• The first delimitation exercise was done by the President (with the help of the Election Commission) in 1950-51.
• The Delimitation Commission Act was passed in 1952.
• Delimitation commissions were formed four times under the Acts of 1952, 1962, 1972, and 2002: in 1952, 1963, 1973, and 2002.
• There was no delimitation after the 1981 and 1991 Censuses.
• Delimitation Commission:
• The Delimitation Commission, which works with the Election Commission of India, is appointed by the President of India.
• Composition:
• Former Justice of the Supreme Court
• Electoral Commissioner
• Each state’s election commissioners
• Functions:
• To determine the number of constituencies and their boundaries in order to make all constituency’ populations almost equal.
• Seats set aside for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes should be located in areas where their populations are significant.
• When there is a disagreement among Commission members, the majority opinion prevails.
• The Delimitation Commission in India is a strong body whose decisions are legally binding and cannot be disputed in court.
• Situation with Delimitation:
• 499 of the 543 Parliamentary seats were defined for the first time in the 2009 general election.
• Save in J&K, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Jharkhand, Manipur, and Nagaland, the National Capital Region of Delhi, the Union Territory of Puducherry, and all other states except J&K, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Jharkhand, Manipur, and Nagaland were affected.
• Challenges in Delimitation:
• States that are worried about population management could get more members in Parliament. Southern states that supported for family planning ran the danger of losing seats.
• The delimitation was completed in 2008 based on the 2001 census, however the total number of seats in the Assemblies and Parliament remained unchanged from the 1971 Census.
• The constitution also limits the number of Lok Shaba and Rajya Sabha seats to a maximum of 550 and 250 seats, respectively, and rising populations are represented by a single lawmaker.
• The following procedure should be followed:
• To address concerns, a national consensus exercise should be launched before 2026.
• The Finance Commission’s population weighting could be cut to ten percent or perhaps five percent.
• Steps to Follow:
• Although the limit on the number of seats in the Lok Sabha and Assemblies was supposed to be repealed after the 2001 Census, another amendment postponed it until 2026.
• This was justified by the fact that the country would have reached a stable population growth rate by 2026.
• Source – The Indian Express

2 – Constitutional Validity of the Sedition Act:

GS III

Internal Security related issues

• Relevance:
• Since India has been an independent nation for over seven decades, there has been a growing demand from various sections of society to repeal or amend the provisions of Section 124 IPC, which were enacted during the British Colonial Government to suppress nationalist voices in the face of rising opposition to the Colonial Government.
• Over the previous few decades, there have also been worries about the government’s abuse of authority in pressing sedition charges against anyone who has an opposing viewpoint against the state apparatus.
• The Sedition Act’s History:
• In 17th century England, sedition laws were enacted because MPs believed that only positive government opinions should exist because negative views were destructive to the government and monarchy.
• The statute was drafted in 1837 by British historian and politician Thomas Macaulay, but when the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was adopted in 1860, it was inexplicably removed.
• Sedition is now a criminal under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
• Sedition Law of Today:
• 124A of the IPC:
• It defines sedition as “any individual who, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visual representation, or otherwise, incites or attempts to instigate hatred or contempt for the government constituted by law in India.”
• All feelings of antagonism and disloyalty are included in disaffection. Under this section, comments that do not provoke or attempt to incite anger, derision, or disdain are not considered offensive.
• Sedition is a charge that is not punishable by a fine. The penalty under Section 124A can range from three years to life in prison, plus a fine.
• It is illegal for someone accused under this act to work for the government.
• They are unable to travel without their passports and are required to appear in court if they are summoned.
• The Sedition Law’s Importance:
• Reasonable Constraints:
• The Indian constitution provides that suitable restrictions (under Article 19(2)) on this right might be imposed at any time to ensure that it is practised responsibly and equally by all citizens.
• The government uses the Sedition Act to combat anti-national, separatist, and terrorist elements.
• Maintaining State Stability: It helps to keep the elected government safe from violent and unlawful overthrow attempts. The existence of a legally established government is a requirement for the state’s stability.
• Problems with Sedition Law:
• Colonial administrators used the statute of sedition to arrest dissidents of British policies.
• Liberation warriors including as Lokmanya Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Bhagat Singh, and others were convicted of “seditious” speeches, writings, and activities while under British administration.
• As a result, the sedition statute’s broad use dates back to the colonial period.
• Sedition should not be incorporated in the Constitution, according to the Constituent Assembly.
• Members were concerned that it would limit freedom of expression and speech.
• They suggested that the sedition legislation may be used to limit people’s constitutionally guaranteed right to demonstrate.
• The Supreme Court limited the concept of sedition in the 1962 case of Kedar Nath Singh vs. State of Bihar to “acts involving the intention or tendency to cause uproar, disturbance of law and order, or incitement to violence.”
• As a result, accusing academics, attorneys, social activists, and students of sedition is a violation of the Supreme Court’s mission.
• Repressing Democratic Values: Due to its callous and intentional use of the sedition act, India is increasingly being referred to as an elected autocracy.
• Recent events include:
• After many sedition FIRs were filed against them for allegedly tweeting and circulating false news, the Supreme Court (SC) spared a political leader and six leading journalists from jail in February 2021.
• The Supreme Court emphasised the necessity of defining the limits of sedition while defending two Telugu (language) press outlets from intimidation by the Andhra Pradesh government in June 2021.
• In July 2021, a petition was filed with the Supreme Court, demanding that the Sedition Law be revisited.
• “A statute criminalising expression based on unconstitutionally vague definitions of ‘disaffection toward Government,’ etc. is an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right to free expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1)(a) and causes constitutionally impermissible ‘Chilling Effect,'” the court concluded.
• Steps to Follow:
• Anti-national, separatist, and terrorist elements can be prosecuted under Section 124A of the IPC. Dissent and criticism of the government, on the other hand, are important ingredients for a dynamic public debate in a healthy democracy. They should not be made with the intention of inciting opposition.
• Higher courts should utilise their supervisory powers to teach magistrates and police officers on constitutional free speech guarantees.
• The definition of sedition should be narrowed to include only issues relating to India’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.
• Civil society must take the lead in raising awareness about the arbitrary application of Sedition law.
• India is the world’s largest democracy, and democracy necessitates freedom of speech and expression. Sedition should not be used to describe any words or ideas that are in opposition to the existing government’s policy.
• The term’sedition’ is extremely sophisticated and should only be used sparingly. It’s like having a cannon that shouldn’t be used to fire a mouse, but cannons are needed in the arsenal, mostly as a deterrent and occasionally for firing.
• Source – The Hindu

3 – Reforms needed in WHO:

GS II

International Organizations

• Relevance:
• These statistics contradict with the Government of India’s official figures, which show that only 4.81 lakh individuals died of COVID 19 by the end of 2021.
• However, in the past, there have been issues made about the WHO’s operational management and information dissemination.
• There have also been concerns expressed regarding the WHO’s handling of the pandemic in the early months, with certain countries, such as the United States, alleging that the WHO under Chinese control reduced the outbreak’s impact.
• As a result, one of the most essential topics for the exam is WHO reform.
• About WHO:
• The World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations’ specialised health organisation, was founded in 1948.
• Geneva, Switzerland is the company’s headquarters.
• The Organization has 194 Member States, 150 Country Offices, and six Regional Offices.
• It is an intergovernmental organisation that works with its member states, usually through their ministries of health.
• The WHO sets the research agenda, establishes norms and standards, articulates evidence-based policy alternatives, provides technical help to countries, and monitors and assesses global health trends.
• It first opened its doors on April 7, 1948, which is today known as World Health Day.
• India and the World Health Organization:
• India became a member of the World Health Organization on January 12, 1948.
• The regional office for South East Asia is located in New Delhi.
• Smallpox: India accounted for nearly 65 percent of all smallpox cases worldwide in 1967. The fact that 26,225 patients died paints a gloomy picture of the difficult battle that lies ahead.
• The Intensified Smallpox Eradication Programme was launched by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1967.
• The Indian government and the World Health Organization collaborated to eradicate smallpox in 1977. (WHO).
• The WHO’s issues include:
• The World Health Organization’s functions have been brought into sharp focus by the COVID-19 epidemic.
• Since the outbreak, the organisation has been at the centre of various discussions.
• It has been charged with ‘dereliction of duty,’ including collaborating with the Chinese government in the early cover-up of the outbreak, delaying the declaration of the pandemic as a public health emergency, and failing to coordinate a swift worldwide response.
• The WHO’s ability to coordinate global public health activities has diminished in recent decades as a result of the expanding number of multilateral health programmes, public-private partnerships, non-governmental organisations, and other organisations. Although the expanded number of parties in global health governance was intended to promote efficiency, the system has proven unsuccessful due to a lack of coordination and unclear agendas among the many actors.
• Furthermore, the WHO’s ability to define healthcare priorities is hampered by declining budgetary contributions from both member countries and private entities.
• WHO’s credibility as a premier UN organisation has eroded for a variety of reasons, demanding a reassessment of its structure, scope, and priorities.
• During the COVID outbreak, data sharing was a major issue.
• For information regarding the outbreak, the organisation only relied on Chinese official statistics and ignored information from other sources, resulting in early mischaracterizations of the virus’s severity.
• Second, as with its predecessor, the current pandemic emphasises the importance of IHR (2005). For example, China’s handling of the outbreak raises questions regarding its compliance with the IHR (2005).
• This, in turn, alluded to the IHR’s lack of enforcement measures, which means that countries with disproportionate political and economic power within the organisation typically fail to meet their duties.
• Third, despite signing the IHR, the current outbreak shows that many countries, both developed and developing, lack national health capacities to deal with infectious diseases (2005).
• Furthermore, it reveals WHO’s lack of visionary leadership.
• Transnational firms and pharmaceutical companies frequently influence the organization’s decisions on low-cost global health solutions.
• Member nations, particularly the organization’s key supporters, have demonstrated a lack of political will and vision in adopting serious reforms.
• How can WHO changes be implemented, and how can India be more involved?
• The pandemic of COVID-19 has offered the WHO with a unique chance to reform and reinforce its position as the UN’s chief authority.
• In the current circumstances, India is ideally positioned to include and reform the WHO’s normative framework to include perspectives from the global south.
• The goal is to make the organization’s activities significantly more transparent, accountable, and representative of the requirements of developing and least developed countries.
• At the G20 Virtual Summit on March 26, 2020, Prime Minister Modi pushed for WHO reform and emphasised the need to revive multilateralism to deal with the pandemic’s devastating effects.
• While the United States’ withholding of WHO payments is a major setback for the organisation, it also provides chances for other countries, such as India, to step up.
• Once India obtains the chairperson of the WHO’s executive board in the coming months, it will be able to propose important governance reforms and set new goals in the domains of healthcare, services, R&D, and innovation.
• India’s goals in this area are revealed by the establishment of a COVID-19 emergency fund for SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) members.
• Furthermore, the “WHO India Country Cooperation Strategy 2019–2023” is completely consistent with the WHO’s 13th General Programme of Work, the Sustainable Development Goals, and the WHO South-East Asia Region’s eight core goals, which were all recently accepted.
• Because of the congruence of priorities, India will be able to act as a “shareholder” with a significant stake in the organization’s success.
• New Delhi, on the other hand, would need to increase inter-ministerial coordination, particularly between the ministries of external affairs and health and family welfare (MoHFW).
• A greater understanding of the technical problems in the organisation is also required in order to influence the health agenda at the WHA meeting.
• India’s proactive and ongoing (reciprocal) engagement inside the WHO, both as an individual and as part of a coalition of like-minded parties, would undoubtedly be critical.
• Surprisingly, the ancient Indian philosophical concept of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” (The world is one family) gives credence to New Delhi as a critical anchor in global health cooperation and public goods contribution.
• WHO has recently taken certain steps to increase its efficiency:
• To examine the worldwide reaction to a Coronavirus pandemic, the World Health Organization formed the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response (IPPR).
• The following are some key points:
• Former New Zealand President Helen Clark and former Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf are co-chairs of the IPPR, according to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
• The IPPR is a follow-up to the 73rd World Health Assembly’s Landmark Resolution on Covid-19, which was adopted in May 2020.
• On July 7, 2020, President Trump formally announced his plan to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). President Joe Biden, on the other hand, announced his desire to return in January 2021 shortly after taking office and signed an executive order to that effect.
• A WHO mission visited China in February 2021 to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 virus, which was allegedly discovered at the Wuhan Virology Institute. The results will be made public in mid-March.
• WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus welcomed Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s commitment to vaccination equity and sharing COVID-19 vaccinations with over 60 countries around the world on February 26, 2021, and hoped that more countries would follow his lead.
• Source – The Indian Express

4 – About the Collegium System:

GS II

Indian Judiciary related issues

• Relevance:
• This is significant because Justice Pardiwala is in position to succeed Justice PS Narasimha as Chief Justice of India after his retirement in May 2028.
• The government has also urged that the Judicial Appointment Process be reformated, with the executive’s role in the process being strengthened through an agency such as the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC).
• The Collegium System:
• The Collegium System is a method of appointing and removing judges that evolved as a result of Supreme Court rulings rather than an Act of Parliament or a provision of the Constitution.
• Evolution of the System:
• According to the First Judges Case, the Chief Justice of India’s (CJI) opinion on judge appointments and transfers might be denied for “cogent reasons” (1981).
• In judicial appointments, the Executive has priority over the Judiciary for the next 12 years.
• The Supreme Court established the Collegium system in the Second Judges Case (1993), holding that “consulting” required “agreement.”
• It went on to add that the decision was not taken by the CJI personally, but rather by the SC’s two most senior judges as part of an institutional decision.
• Case of the Third Judges (1998): The Collegium was increased to a five-member panel on the President’s recommendation, consisting of the Chief Justice and four of his most senior colleagues.
• The Supreme Court collegium is led by the Chief Justice and includes four other senior justices.
• The court’s Chief Justice and four other senior judges lead an HC collegium.
• An HC collegium’s recommendation for appointment does not reach the government until it has been approved by the CJI and the SC collegium.
• The government is only involved once the collegium has decided on names for the higher judiciary.
• The government’s involvement is limited to requesting a probe by the Intelligence Bureau if a lawyer is to be raised as a judge in a High Court or the Supreme Court (IB).
• The IB (Intelligence Bureau) is a well-known and established intelligence agency. It is under the control of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
• It can also object to the collegium’s decisions and seek clarifications, but if the collegium repeats the same names, the government is obligated to appoint them as judges under Constitution Bench orders.
• Procedure for Various Judicial Appointments:
• The Chief Justice of India and the other Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President of India.
• When it comes to the CJI, the departing CJI nominates his successor.
• In practise, it has been exclusively by seniority since the 1970s supersession controversy.
• For Supreme Court Justices: The CJI makes the suggestion for other SC judges.
• The CJI consults with the rest of the Collegium as well as the court’s most senior judge from the High Court, where the proposed person sits.
• The consultees must write down their thoughts, which should be filed.
• The Collegium submits its recommendation to the Law Minister, who forwards it to the Prime Minister, who tells the President.
• High Court Chief Justices are appointed in conformity with the policy of selecting Chief Justices from outside their particular states.
• The Collegium makes the decision on the elevation.
• The Chief Justice and two senior-most members of the Collegium recommend High Court judges.
• On the other hand, the outgoing Chief Justice of the High Court in question, in collaboration with two senior colleagues, is spearheading the initiative.
• After obtaining the Chief Minister’s advice, the Governor is advised to communicate the idea to the Union Law Minister.
• The Collegium System has been criticised for the following reasons:
• Transparency and opacity are lacking.
• Keep an eye out for nepotism.
• In public disputes, embarrassment.
• Several outstanding junior judges and advocates go unnoticed.
• The attempt to replace it with a ‘National Judicial Appointments Commission’ was struck down by the court in 2015 because it compromised the independence of the judiciary.
• Judges’ Appointment Provisions in the Constitution:
• The President chooses Supreme Court judges after meeting with as many Supreme Court and High Court judges as the President deems necessary, according to Article 124(2) of the Indian Constitution.
• According to Article 217 of the Indian Constitution, the President of India, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State, and, in the event of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of the High Court, appoints the Judge of a High Court.
• Steps to Follow:
• Because filling vacancies is a continuous and collaborative process including the government and the judiciary, it is impossible to set a deadline.
• However, it is past time to contemplate establishing a permanent, independent organisation to institutionalise the process while guaranteeing judicial primacy but not exclusivity while protecting the judiciary’s independence.
• It should be self-contained, varied, and professional in nature.
• Rather than deciding on the number of judges needed to fill a specified number of vacancies, the collegium must give the President with a list of potential candidates ranked by preference and other relevant factors.
• Source – The Hindu

5 – Reforms needed in the GST Regime:

GS III

Indian Economy related issues

• Relevance:
• Since its adoption, there has been growing concern about the GST Regime’s difficulties.
• The GST Council has also taken the required efforts to minimise bottlenecks in the GST implementation process on a regular basis.
• Some long-standing demands, such as a reduction in the number of tax slabs under the GST scheme, remain unmet.
• What is GST, exactly?
• The GST (Products and Services Tax) is a multi-stage, destination-based indirect tax applied on each value addition of goods and services.
• Following the implementation of the Indian Constitution’s One Hundred and First Amendment, it went into force on July 1, 2017.
• It is a single tax that replaces various indirect taxes imposed by the Indian government at both the national and state levels.
• It’s a tax charged at each stage of the manufacturing process and refunded to everyone except the final consumer.
• GST is collected at the point of consumption rather than the point of origin, unlike previous taxes.
• Three levies are included in the GST. One of them is the CGST (Central GST).
• GST by state (SGST) IGST (International Goods and Services Tax) (Integrated GST)
• Who is accountable for which taxes under the GST regime?
• On interstate transactions and imported goods and services, the Centre charges the Central GST, the States charge the State GST, and the Centre charges the Integrated GST.
• Any damages will be compensated by the Parliament.
• What taxes were replaced by the GST?
• Taxes at state level:
• State-by-state VAT
• Extravagance is taxed.
• Entertainment taxes
• Purchase tax (entry tax and octroi tax)
• Gambling/lottery tax
• Among the central taxes are:
• Centrally imposed excise duty
• Surcharge on excise duty
• Customs charges an additional fee.
• Service tax Additional customs duty
• Consequences of the GST Regime:
• ATF is currently subject to a federal excise tax of 14 percent and a state sales tax of around 29 percent. India’s aviation industry is one of the world’s fastest-growing, yet it is plagued by escalating debt and bankruptcy as a result of high fuel prices and currency depreciation. Fuel consumes the majority of an airline’s budget. This must come to an end in order to avert a crisis in the aviation industry, which might have serious implications for the Indian economy.
• The property market: The GST, according to many analysts, has increased the cost of real estate in India. Real estate costs have climbed by 8%, while demand has declined by 12%.
• Currently unstable: The GST system is still in its early stages, and it is undergoing structural changes in response to administrative concerns. Frequent crises and rapid adjustments have a number of negative consequences for the economy.
• According to the constitution, the power to levy taxes is reserved for Parliament and state legislatures. The Central GST Bill 2017 states that the central government can lower the CGST rate below 20% without requesting parliament’s approval.
• Duplicate complaints have been made concerning the procedures’ intricacy, multiple registrations, invoice matching, and other difficulties.
• The manufacturing industry is affected: The tax exemption has been reduced from Rs.1.5 crore to Rs.20 lakh. The tax burden falls disproportionately on small businesses, hindering their growth and development. This is a significant setback for India’s ambitious “Make in India” initiative.
• GST-related issues: The GST Network (GSTN) is still having technical issues. This is a concern because businesses are required to utilise this portal to register, file GST returns, and so on. The GST was hurried through without any consideration of how to resolve or clarify such issues. As a result, GST reporting has become more expensive and inefficient.
• What is the current structure of the GST system?
• The GST system was established in 2017 to streamline the tax system.
• Several state and federal accusations were absorbed.
• The revenue-neutral tax rates were established at 15.5 percent to 11.6 percent at the beginning. Due to pricing reductions in many categories, this has changed since 2017.
• There are now eight GST rates in effect. They include:
• Essential goods are exempt from taxation.
• The four important rates are 5%, 12 percent, 18 percent, and 28 percent.
• GST on top of the Compensation Tax of 28% on immoral items
• Exporters get preferential pricing on precious stones, jewellery, and supplies.
• What is the purpose of resetting?
• The GST system has been criticised from its beginning for having too many tax rates, making taxation more difficult.
• The GST regime’s rapid start and rate-setting challenges led several of these rate changes.
• The GST Council has been trying to help industry segments deal with the challenges that these developments have created. The revenue dynamics that were originally intended have been altered as a result of the frequent modifications.
• The government has signalled that the tariffs will be revisited after the system has stabilised.
• Despite consistently high monthly GST collections, revenue has fallen short of forecasts.
• The GST Council had established a Group of Ministers entrusted with: Proposing reforms such as tax slab consolidation
• Creating a roadmap for short, medium, and long-term improvements
• What are the findings of the NIPFP study?
• A paper produced by the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy proposes a three-rate structure to replace the four major interest rates.
• This framework predicts three potential rates: 8%, 15%, and 30%.
• The 18 percent rate presently earns the highest money from taxes. This tax applies to even insurance premium payments.
• Income will be lost if the 18 percent slab is reduced or combined with the 12 percent slice. Increases in either the lowest (5%) or highest (10%) rate would have to be used to offset this (28 percent ).
• The three-rate approach would protect revenue while preserving special rates and reducing the need for drastic tax increases on either end of the spectrum.
• What is the next step?
• Now that the GST is in its fifth year, the administration has chosen to change the rates.
• The 3-rate framework plan, which entails raising bullion rates, is less controversial than the one presented to the GoM. Such a move could lead to tax avoidance.
• To reduce interruptions to a minimum and gain investor confidence, two criteria are required:
• The sequence in which new tax rates go into effect
• Keeping rate changes to a minimum.
• Next month, the GST Council will meet to decide on the restructuring process.
• In addition, the GST Council must resolve data concerns raised by the NIPFP study.
• Restructuring the GST rates would be a smart move, not only to boost revenue but also to eliminate the headaches that regular rate changes bring for businesses. The government’s resolve to carry out such a big reform will be put to the test as state elections approach.
• The government should take steps to include electricity and Aviation Tribunal fuel under the GST to enable effective economic growth and development.
• It is vital to provide clarity on the procedures to be followed when submitting GST, as well as to correct existing errors and avoid future ones, for an efficient tax regime.
• Although there are several issues and limitations with the GST at the moment, it is flexible in nature because decisions and implementations are based on open debate within the GST Council.
• GST-related issues can now be responded to and resolved quickly.
• As a result, it will prove to be a long-term successful tax system.
• Source – The Indian Express