Mains Based Current Affairs

07/12/18 to 03/01/19

1. Witness Protection Scheme

Editorial Analysis:

In a major development, the witness protection programme is finally in place. The Supreme Court has approved the Centre’s draft witness protection scheme and has asked

all the states to implement it till Parliament comes out with a legislation. The court has also made some changes in the scheme.

The Supreme Court has asked States to implement a scheme framed by the Centre to protect witnesses in criminal trials from threat, intimidation and undue influence. However, it is important to note that this is pending legislation by Parliament.

Further, it is important to note that given the abysmal rate of convictions in the country, it is inexcusable that it took so long.

The Need to Protect Witnesses:

The need to protect witnesses has been emphasised by Law Commission reports and

court judgments for years. It is important to note that witnesses turning hostile is a major reason for most

acquittals. In the current system, there is little incentive for witnesses to turn up in court and

testify against criminals. Besides threats to their lives, they experience hostility and harassment while attending courts.

Further, the tardy judicial process seldom takes into account the distance they have travelled or the time they have lost in attending court, only to be told they have to return another day.

As Justice A.K. Sikri points out, the condition of witnesses in the Indian legal system is “pathetic”, as it takes them for granted. It is gratifying that the court has played a proactive role in getting the Centre and the States to come up with a concrete proposal.

Experts point out that the Centre deserves credit for coming forward to suggest that its draft witness protection scheme be introduced by judicial mandate instead of waiting for formal legislation.

A Closer Look:

The draft witness protection scheme has been finalised in consultation with the National

Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD).

The scheme envisages that there should be safeguards that witnesses and accused do not come face to face during investigation or trial and adequate security measures should be there for the safety of the witnesses.

It broadly classifies witnesses in need of protection into three types based on the threat assessment.

It has three categories of witnesses based on the threat perception: 1) Category ‘A’: Where the threat extends to life of witness or his family members

and their normal way of living is affected for a substantial period, during investigation/trial or even thereafter.

2) Category ‘B’: Where the threat extends to safety, reputation or property of the witness or his family members, only during the investigation process or trial.

3) Category ‘C’: Where the threat is moderate and extends to harassment or intimidation of the witness or his family member’s, reputation or property, during the investigation process.

Further, basic features such as in camera trial, proximate physical protection and

anonymising of testimony and references to witnesses in the records are not difficult to implement.

Experts point out that the real test will be the advanced forms of identity protection: giving witnesses a new identity, address and even ‘parentage’, with matching documents.

The scheme is to be funded by budgetary support from State governments and donations. This is at variance with the Law Commission’s recommendation in 2006 that the Centre and the States share the cost equally.

The SC has asked all states and Union Territories to set up vulnerable Witness Deposition Complexes, as required by the Scheme, by the end of 2019. These rooms will be equipped with facilities to prevent the accused and witness coming face to face.

The expenses for the programme will be met from a Witness Protection Fund to be established by states and Union Territories.

As per the scheme, police escort will be provided to witnesses who are threatened and, if needed, they would be relocated to a safe house. The scheme also says mails and phone calls of the witnesses would be monitored to trace the person threatening them. It said a separate witness protection fund will be created in each state to meet the expenses incurred under the scheme.

In 2003, Justice V Malimath Committee on criminal justice system had recommended enacting a separate witness protection law and in 2006, the Law Commission of India, in its 198th report, provided for a draft witness protection law.

Besides, countries such as USA, United Kingdom, China, Italy, Canada, Hong Kong and Ireland have witness protection scheme.

Significance of the scheme:

The witnesses, being eyes and ears of justice, play an important role in bringing perpetrators of crime to justice.

The scheme is the first attempt at the national-level to holistically provide for the protection of the witnesses, which will go a long way in eliminating secondary victimization.

This scheme attempts at ensuring that witnesses receive appropriate and adequate protection.

It also strengthens the criminal justice system in the country and will consequently enhance national security scenario.

Victims and witnesses of serious crimes are particularly at risk when the perpetrator is powerful, influential, or rich and the victims or witnesses belong to a socially or economically marginalised community.

Girls and women who report sexual violence are often even more vulnerable and face extreme pressure or direct threats from the accused.

Concluding Remarks:

Experts point out that all this needs to be done without undermining their professional and property rights and educational qualifications.

The introduction of the scheme marks a leap forward. Until now, there have been ad hoc steps such as those outlined for concealing the identity of witnesses in anti-terrorism and child-centric laws. A few dedicated courtrooms for vulnerable witnesses, mostly child victims, are also functional.

However, expanding such facilities and implementing a comprehensive and credible witness protection programme will pose logistical and financial challenges. It will be well worth the effort, as the scheme could help strengthen India’s tottering criminal justice system.

2. NSCN (K) faction asks Centre to revive ceasefire

Context

A breakaway faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Khaplang), led by Khango Konyak, has decided to revoke its decision of unilaterally abrogating the ceasefire agreement with the Union government with immediate effect.

Greater Nagalim

A “Greater Nagalim” comprising “all contiguous Naga-inhabited areas”, along with Nagaland. That included several districts of Assam, Arunachal and Manipur, as also a large tract of Myanmar. The map of “Greater Nagalim” has about 1,20,000 sq km, while the state of Nagaland consists of 16,527 sq km.

The claims have always kept Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh wary of a peace settlement

that might affect their territories. The Nagaland Assembly has endorsed the ‘Greater Nagalim’ demand — “Integration of all Naga-

inhabited contiguous areas under one administrative umbrella” — as many as five times: in December 1964, August 1970, September 1994, December 2003 and as recently as on July 27, 2015.

NSCN

Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland, was formed in 1980 to advance the Naga cause for sovereignty.

This organisation has operations in the Naga inhabited regions of India & Myanmar, with easy cross border access.

This group has had major splits. Issac-Muivah faction (NSCN – IM) is currently involved in peace talks with the Indian government, while the Kaplang faction with its major operations in Myanmar is designated as a terror outfit by India.

The group first split into the NSCN (Isak-Muivah) and NSCN (Khaplang) in 1988. The NSCN (K) then split in 2010 into a faction led by Khole and Kitovi Zhimomi.

Details of the issue

The NSCN(K) had signed a ceasefire with the Centre in 2001 but unilaterally abrogated it in March 2015 when the then chairman of the group, S.S. Khaplang, was alive

The NSCN-IM has been engaged with peace talks with the interlocutor of the central

government since 1997, when it announced a ceasefire agreement after a bloody

insurgency movement, which started in Nagaland soon after the country’s

Independence.

Subsequently, the Centre signed a Framework Agreement with the NSCN (IM) on

August 3, 2015.

The Union government has also started separate talks with working committees of

six Naga nationalist political groups since 2017. The chairman and general secretary of the NSCN(K) faction, Konyak and Isak Sumi, said

in a joint statement that the outfit resolved to revoke the unilateral decision after holding wide consultations with NGOs and civil society groups of Nagaland in the past one month.

The statement said that the appeal made by various organisations and the “positive response” by the Government of India were also factors that led to its decision.

The NSCN(K) expects the Centre to respond positively by honouring its decision to revive the ceasefire in the interest of peace in Nagaland and the Naga people in general, the statement said.

3. Farmers Distress or Agrarian Distress

Larger Background:

What is in the news?

Recently, mass farmer protests have erupted across the country over the past few months from Maharashtra to Bengal, with the October march in Delhi leading to violent clashes with the police.

The issue of Farmers distress has been on top of the agenda for political parties in the Assembly elections.

Editorial Analysis:

A Look at the Problem:

Apart from the headline-grabbing protests, data show evidence of farm distress. National Crime Records Bureau statistics show more than 3 lakh farmers have killed themselves in the last two decades.

Indebtedness was cited as the reason for more than 55% of farmers’ suicides in 2015. Maharashtra, which saw the highest number of farmers’ suicides, has 57% of its farm families in debt.

NSSO data show more than half of all farmers are in debt, with each household owing an average of Rs. 47,000.

In States like Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, where levels of indebtedness are around 90%, the average debt of a household hovers around Rs. 1 lakh.

Almost 70% of agricultural households spend more than they earn and almost a quarter of all farmers live below the poverty line.

Census data for 2011 show the number of cultivators who own land have been overtaken by landless agricultural workers for the first time.

It is important to note that many of these 144 million workers earn less than Rs. 150 a day working in the fields, and the failure to generate jobs in other parts of the economy gives them few options.

Reasons Attributed:

Further, long-term issues include the increasing fragmentation of land — average plot sizes are barely more than one hectare — a lack of post-production infrastructure, marketing mechanisms and supply chains.

Also, the last two years have actually seen record farm output in most major crops, but the resultant glut has led to crashing prices. At the same time, input costs have spiked, with diesel prices surging 26% this year and fertilizer costs shooting up more than 15%.

It is also important to note that Demonetisation was a blow to many in the rural cash economy. The move affected farmers’ ability to buy seeds and fertilizers, pay off loans and hire farm labour, according to an initial Agriculture Ministry report to a parliamentary panel in the month of November 2018.

The Ministry later withdrew its report, however, farmers groups say the long-term impact of the note ban lingers.

What the government is currently doing:

The M.S. Swaminathan Commission had recommended that the minimum support prices for 23 major crops be set at 1.5 times the cost of production, and the government claims it has fulfilled its promises to do so.

However, the government’s calculation of the cost of production only includes actual paid-out costs and the imputed cost of family labour, while the Commission’s formula also included the imputed cost of capital and the rent on the land.

Moreover, it is important to note that the government only procures wheat, rice and a limited amount of pulses and oilseeds at MSP rates, benefiting only a fraction of farmers. Further, while loan waivers are a popular poll promise and have been implemented in some States, small farmers without access to institutional credit are often left out.

3.1 Farmers need more than loan waivers Context:

During the recent assembly elections, farm loan waivers became a populist way of appeasing the voters and the new governments in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh have announced massive farm loan waivers.

Last year, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu announced waivers as a stop-gap measure to address agrarian distress. Andhra Pradesh, Odisha and Haryana are likely to announce similar sops ahead of elections.

Such populist measures alone cannot be a permanent solution to mounting agrarian distress which is an outcome of structural problems in the agriculture sector.

Post the economic reforms of 1991, Indian agriculture has been facing multiple crises. The rising pressure of population and fragmentation of land holdings, failure to shift the workforce away from agriculture, rising input costs, poor logistics etc. have adversely affected small and marginal farmers.

Why do farmers want more?

Rising input costs, fluctuation in prices, drop in income and increasing cases of indebtedness among small and marginal farmers has resulted in a spate of farmers committing suicides over the years.

The current market system imposes a doubly squeeze on a large number of small and marginal farmers as they are suffering from high input costs and low income.

Some experts believe it is the responsibility of the government to waive farm loans, but insist that it can only be a “stopgap” arrangement.

They argue that until the structural problems related to production, weather related disasters, price, credit and market are addressed, loan waivers are to be used as an instrument for offering temporary relief to distressed farmers.

What is the stand of the government?

NITI Aayog has pointed out that writing off loans is not a lasting solution to the problem of agrarian distress as this step only helps a small number of farmers.

According to the NITI Aayog the number of farmers, especially the small and marginal who avail themselves of institutional loans, are very few and this is the reason that even after spending huge sums of money on loan waivers not even half the farmers are benefiting.

In some of the States, not even 25% of farmers get loans from institutional sources. A NITI Aayog study has established that the farmers use the waiver to reduce household

debt and it only helps in sustaining the distressed family with no measurable improvement in agricultural productivity. Thus the core problems plaguing agriculture are not addressed

Way Forward

As an interim measure, farmers need to be freed of their abuse by middlemen and money lenders by reforming the rent seeking, anti-farmer commission agent system.

The interlocking of the credit and the output markets is a major factor for the crises of indebtedness.

The system of making payments through the commission agent needs to be dismantled to break the credit-crop nexus.

As a permanent solution to agrarian distress, the government should provide agro-processing industry a policy push to pull rural people out of agriculture.

In the long run, there’s an urgent need for integration of agriculture with the industry, and that too with the involvement of the local manpower in such a manner that surpluses should be invested locally.

The subsidies and tax benefits given to the corporate sector should be given to rural entrepreneurs who are willing to setup food processing and agro-processing firms that will process local raw materials and employ rural manpower. The transformation is achievable if primary producers are integrated with both manufacturing and marketing activities for reaping the surpluses generated by them.

3.2 A Brief Note on Agriculture Export Policy, 2018

The Government has come out with a policy to double farmers’ income by 2022. Exports of agricultural products would play a pivotal role in achieving this goal. In order to

provide an impetus to agricultural exports, the Government has come out with a comprehensive “Agriculture Export Policy” aimed at doubling the agricultural exports and integrating Indian farmers and agricultural products with the global value chains.

The Agriculture Export Policy has the following vision:

“Harness export potential of Indian agriculture, through suitable policy instruments, to make India global power in agriculture and raise farmers’ income.”

Objectives: Objectives of the Agriculture Export Policy are as under: To double agricultural exports from present ~US$ 30+ Billion to ~US$ 60+ Billion by 2022 and

reach US$ 100 Billion in the next few years thereafter, with a stable trade policy regime. To diversify our export basket, destinations and boost high value and value added agricultural

exports including focus on perishables. To promote novel, indigenous, organic, ethnic, traditional and non-traditional Agri products

exports. To provide an institutional mechanism for pursuing market access, tackling barriers and deal

with sanitary and phyto-sanitary issues. To strive to double India’s share in world agri exports by integrating with global value chain at

the earliest. Enable farmers to get benefit of export opportunities in overseas market.

Certain policy solutions which lie ahead:

A government panel aiming to double farmers’ income by 2022 has come up with a 13-volume report, but its final set of policy recommendations is still pending with the Agriculture Ministry.

It is expected to focus on ways to ensure sustainability of production, monetisation of farmers’ produce, re-strengthening of extension services and recognising agriculture as an enterprise and enabling it to operate as such by addressing structural weaknesses.

In the month of December 2018, the Cabinet approved an agriculture export policy, lifting restrictions on organic and processed food, which it hopes will double farm exports by 2022 and widen the market for domestic produce.

It is important to note that farmers groups are urging political parties to support two private member Bills introduced in the last session of Parliament for guaranteed implementation of MSP and a comprehensive loan waiver and debt reduction scheme.

However, they have also come out with a wider charter of demands, which deals with input costs, social security, farm workers employment, land rights, irrigation, agro-ecology, crop insurance and contract farming.

4. Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 & Centre amends rules for minorities from three nations

News: The Union Home Ministry has notified amendments to the Citizenship Rules, 2009, to include a separate column in the citizenship form for applicants belonging to six minority communities from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.

Upcoming Changes:

Under the amendments, a separate entry in the form will ask the applicant whether they belong to one of the minority communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan as in Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, Sikhs and Christians.

The changes have been made by the centre under Section 18 of the Citizenship Act, 1955.

Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016

The Bill amends the Citizenship Act, 1955 to make illegal migrants who are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, eligible for citizenship.

Under the Act, one of the requirements for citizenship by naturalisation is that the applicant must have resided in India during the last 12 months, and for 11 of the previous 14 years.

The Bill relaxes this 11 year requirement to six years for persons belonging to the same six religions and three countries.

The Bill provides that the registration of Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders may be cancelled if they violate any law.

Key Issues:

The Bill provides that illegal migrants belonging to specified minority communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan will not be treated as illegal migrants under the Act, making them eligible for Indian citizenship.

These minority communities are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians. This implies that illegal migrants from these countries who are Muslims, other minorities who do not belong to the above groups (e.g. Jews or Atheists) will not be eligible for citizenship.

The question is whether this provision violates the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution because it provides differential treatment to illegal migrants on the basis of their religion.

Article 14 guarantees equality to all persons, citizens and foreigners. It only permits laws to differentiate between groups of people if the rationale for doing so serves a reasonable purpose.

The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill does not explain the rationale behind differentiating between illegal migrants on the basis of the religion they belong to.

The Bill allows cancellation of OCI registration for violation of any law. This is a wide ground that may cover a range of violations, including minor offences (eg. parking in a no parking zone).

Key Features Definition of illegal migrants The Citizenship Act, 1955 prohibits illegal migrants from acquiring Indian citizenship. The Bill

amends the Act to provide that the following minority groups will not be treated as illegal migrants: Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. However, to get this benefit, they must have also been exempted from the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 by the central government.

Citizenship by naturalisation The 1955 Act allows a person to apply for citizenship by naturalisation if he meets certain

qualifications. One of these is that the person must have resided in India or served the central government for a certain period of time: (i) for the 12 months immediately preceding the application for citizenship, and (ii) for 11 of the 14 years preceding the 12-month period. For people belonging to the same six religions and three countries, the Bill relaxes the 11-year requirement to six years.

Cancellation of registration of Overseas Citizen of India cardholder The 1955 Act provides that the central government may cancel registration of OCIs on certain

grounds, including: (i) if the OCI had registered through fraud, or (ii) if within five years of registration, the OCI was sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more. The Bill adds one more ground for cancelling registration, that is, if the OCI has violated any law in the country.

4.1 Allow ‘minorities’ into India, Meghalaya HC tells Centre

Context

The Meghalaya High Court has asked the Centre to bring in a law to let people of religious and ethnic minority communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan be given citizenship without any cut-off year or any questions asked.

Allowing a writ petition by Amon Rana, an Army recruit who was denied domicile certificate by the Meghalaya government, Justice Sen said that the Centre should have a law allowing Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, Christians, Khasis, Jaintias and Garos from neighbouring countries to live in India “with full dignity without making any cut-off year and be given citizenship without any question or production of any document”.

He also found fault with the NRC process in Assam. “The present NRC process in my view is defective as many foreigners became Indians and original Indians were left out, which is sad,” he said.

Background

The present government had introduced the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016, in Parliament which seeks to amend the Citizenship Act, 1955, and provide citizenship to migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, who are of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsis or Christian extraction. Several parties and organisations in the Northeast are protesting against this Bill.

National Register of Citizens

It is a register containing the list of bona fide (genuine/real) Indian citizens. Those failing to enlist their names in the register would be deemed, illegal migrants. The first list was made in 1951, covering the whole of India, as per the census of that year. Currently, the list has been updated for the first time, and only in Assam Officially, the NRC process will address the issue of illegal migrants, specifically from

Bangladesh. The National Register of Citizens was first published in 1951 to record citizens, their houses and

holdings. Updating the NRC to root out foreigners was a demand during the Assam Agitation (1979-1985).

There have been several waves of migration to Assam from Bangladesh, but the biggest was in March 1971 when the Pakistan army crackdown forced many to flee to India.

The Assam Accord of 1985 that ended the six-year anti-foreigners’ agitation decided upon the midnight of March 24, 1971 as the cut-off date.

4.2 Getting citizenship could become easier for some

What’s in news?

Experts point out that the winter session of Parliament may see the government push for the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill of 2016.

The proposed law, which amends the original Citizenship Act of 1955, mandates that Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan will not be treated as illegal immigrants despite having entered India without valid documents.

They will not face deportation as illegal immigrants under the Passport (Entry into India) Act of 1920 and the Foreigners Act of 1946.

Further, illegal immigrants from these six communities from these countries are assured a smooth sail to citizenship over Muslims.

Editorial Analysis:

Why did the Act come into existence?

It is important to note that the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill of 2016, which was

introduced in Parliament on July 15, 2016, explains that many persons of Indian origin including persons belonging to the six “minority communities” from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh have been unsuccessfully applying for citizenship under the Citizenship Act of 1955 but are unable to produce proof of their Indian origin.

Hence, as a consequence, they are forced to apply for citizenship by naturalisation which prescribes 12 years’ residency as qualification.

A Critical View

Critics say the Bill violates the basic tenets of the Constitution. They assert that by distinguishing illegal immigrants on the basis of religion, the proposed law

goes against the fundamental right to equality under Article 14. Further, the protection of Article 14 applies equally to both citizens and foreigners. Second, the Bill would hamper what the Assam National Register of Citizens seeks to achieve

in the State. The NRC does not distinguish on the basis of faith unlike the 2016 Bill.

Concluding Remarks:

The Bill is seen by many as an effort by the central government to fulfil their 2014 electoral promise of making India a safe haven for Hindus persecuted in the three foreign nations.

However, the proposed move has drawn flak from the BJP’s coalition partner, the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), which has threatened to break ties with the BJP if the Bill is passed.

The AGP believes that the Bill is a threat to the cultural and linguistic identity of the people of Assam.

The Bill, if passed as law, would be challenged in the Supreme Court on the grounds of Article 14 and as a move to disturb the NRC process.

5. HC quashes Centre’s ban on oxytocin manufacture

Context

The Delhi High Court on Friday quashed the Centre’s decision to ban the manufacture and sale of oxytocin, a drug which induces labour and controls bleeding during child birth, by private firms.

Background

The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has restricted the manufacture of Oxytocin formulations for domestic use to public sector only. Coupled with this, it has also banned the import of Oxytocin and its formulations

Only Karnataka Antibiotics & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (KAPL), a public sector company, will manufacture this drug for domestic use. It will supply the drug to registered hospitals and clinics in public and private sector directly.

But KAPL has no previous expertise.

Why there was a ban on oxytocin?

The drug is misused in the dairy industry where livestock is injected with Oxytocin to make them release milk at a time convenient to farmers and boost milk production.

Oxytocin is also used to increase the size of vegetables such as pumpkins, watermelons, eggplants, gourds, and cucumbers.

Views of the Delhi High Court

The Govt. did not adequately weigh in the danger to the users of oxytocin, nor consider the deleterious effect to the public generally and women particularly, of possible restricted supply if manufacture is confined to one unit, to the pregnant women and young mothers, of a potentially life-saving drug.

The Centre’s decision to allow only a single, state-run entity — with no prior experience in manufacturing oxytocin — to make and sell the drug, was “fraught with potential adverse consequences.

The risk of such a consequence can be drastic: the scarcity of the drug, or even a restricted availability can cause increase in maternal fatalities, during childbirth, impairing lives of thousands of innocent young mothers.

The Bench was not impressed with the Centre’s “far greater” reliance on the need to prohibit availability of oxytocin from what was perceived to be widespread veterinary misuse.

Correspondingly there was no scientific basis, and insufficient data to support the conclusion that the drug’s existing availability or manner of distribution posed a risk to human life.

About Oxytocin

Oxytocin has also been dubbed the love hormone, hug hormone, cuddle chemical, moral molecule, and the bliss hormone due to its effects on behaviour, including its role in sex, love, social bonding and in female reproductive biological functions.

Oxytocin is a hormone that is made in the brain, in the hypothalamus. It is transported to, and secreted by, the pituitary gland, which is located at the base of the brain.

It acts both as a hormone and as a brain neurotransmitter. The release of oxytocin by the pituitary gland acts to regulate two female reproductive

functions: Childbirth and Breast-feeding.

5.2 Right prescription (Delhi High Court quashing the ban on the retail sale and private manufacture of oxytocin)

What’s in news?

The Delhi High Court recently quashed a government ban on the retail sale and private manufacture of oxytocin.

Experts believe that this crucial development exposes the flaws in health policy-making in the country.

Editorial Analysis:

The Government ban was notified by the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in April 2018. As a matter of fact, the ban referred to a 2016 Himachal Pradesh High Court judgment, which discussed oxytocin’s misuse in dairy cattle, fruits and vegetables.

It is important to note that soon after the order was issued, health experts pointed to the absurdity of it.

The importance of Oxytocin

Oxytocin is a life-saving drug used to stem post-partum bleeding among new mothers. It is because of this fact that Oxytocin had been listed by both the World Health Organization

and the Health Ministry as an essential medicine. It is important to note that around 45,000 women die from post-partum complications in India

each year, and in 38% of the cases the reason is haemorrhaging. Further, without the easy availability of inexpensive oxytocin, efforts to stem the maternal

mortality epidemic could have suffered a costly setback. It was these worries that led to the All India Drug Action Network (AIDAN), a patient-rights

group, to challenge the order in the Delhi High Court.

Position taken by the Delhi High Court

In its judgment on December 14, 2018, which was made in response to AIDAN’s and drug manufacturers’ petitions, the Delhi High Court struck down the ban, calling it “unreasonable and arbitrary”.

The court found that the government had failed to weigh the danger the ban posed to

thousands of young mothers. What is more, it had failed to show that the drug was widely misused for veterinary purposes,

the purported reason behind the order. It is important to note that several bits of evidence cited in the judgment support this analysis. As a matter of fact, even though the Centre claims to have made 25 illegal drug seizures across

India in a three-year period, 12 of them didn’t actually find oxytocin. Among those that did, none involved licensed drug makers.

Karnataka Antibiotics & Pharmaceuticals Limited, the only authorised oxytocin producer after the ban, did not have the capability to manufacture it until mid-2017.

Concluding Remarks:

Experts have pointed out that it is mystifying as to why the Centre clamped down on

licensed manufacturers with a proven track record, while roping in a state firm with no real experience.

Critics point out that the most damning observation in the judgment is that the Centre focussed on the health of milch animals, without considering the well-being of women. This was despite the fact that all statutory bodies, including the Drugs Technical Advisory Board, had advised against a ban.

In conclusion, experts opine that this episode ought to compel policy-makers to reflect on the process that led to the ill-conceived order. Several questions must be answered.

On what basis did the Centre overrule the advice of multiple statutory bodies? What led to its acceptance of sporadic reports of the drug’s misuse, without clinching

proof? Finally, it is time for a post-mortem of how health policy is made, because that is the

only way to safeguard the right to health of Indian citizens.

6. Transgender Bill passed in Lok Sabha

Context

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2016, which aims at defining transgender people and prohibiting discrimination against them, was passed with 27 amendments in the Lok Sabha on Monday. The Bill was introduced in the House two years ago.

Evolution of the law

In February 2014, the Supreme Court passed a landmark judgement in the NALSA vs. Union of India case.

It recognised that transgender persons have fundamental rights, and paved the way for enshrining the rights of transgenders in law.

The apex court deemed that individuals had the right to the self-identification of their sexual orientation.

It also called for affirmative action for transgenders in education, primary health care and

social welfare schemes. Private Member Bill – Rights of Transgender Persons Bill, 2014, was introduced as a Private

Member’s Bill in the Rajya Sabha by Tiruchi Siva. It was unanimously passed in the Rajya Sabha but was never debated in the Lok Sabha.

Following this, government drafted its own bill, Rights of Transgender Persons Bill, in 2015 and introduced it in the Lok Sabha in 2016

The 2016 Bill identifies transgenders as being “partly female or male or a combination of female and male or neither female nor male”.

Critical Analysis:

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2018, passed by the Lok Sabha recently, has caused great alarm. Transgender and intersex activists have protested on the streets, campaigned with parliamentarians and spoken out against the Bill.

In the landmark NALSA v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court laid down that transgender and intersex persons have the constitutional right to self-identify their gender as male, female or transgender even without medical intervention.

The court held: “Each person’s self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom and no one shall be forced to undergo medical procedures, including Sex Realignment, sterilization or hormonal therapy, as a requirement for legal recognition of their gender identity”.

Hence, medical procedures should not be required as a pre-condition for any identity documents for transgender and intersex persons, nor should there be any requirement of a mental health assessment.

Requiring a person to submit proof of medical treatment or mental health assessment of their gender identity violates one’s right to dignity, the right to be free from unwanted medical treatment and the right to be free from discrimination.

The 2018 Bill in Section 6 establishes a District Screening Committee for the purpose of recognition of transgender persons.

This Screening Committee includes a chief medical officer and a psychologist/psychiatrist, which goes to show that medical and psychological tests would be required for grant of change of gender identity.

The Bill also does not allow for recognition of gender identity as male or female. It only allows for an identity certificate as ‘transgender’.

This goes against the decision of the Supreme Court, which recognised the right to self-identify oneself as male, female or transgender and would also be forcing intersex persons to get a gender identity as “transgender”.

The U.K.’s Gender Recognition Act 2004 was the first law in the world allowing people to change gender without surgery.

Since then other countries, including Argentina, Ireland and Denmark, have passed laws that allow people to ‘self-declare’ their gender, rather than seek approval from a panel of medical experts.

Surprisingly the 2018 Bill does not provide for any reservation as mandated by the SC in the NALSA judgement. It provides in Sections 10 and 14 that there would be no discrimination in education and employment, but these rights are meaningless if transgender persons are not able to get access in the first place.

The Bill in Section 19 makes it a criminal offence for anyone to compel a transgender person into begging. This has serious implications. A large number of people from the trans and intersex community are engaged in begging and sex work due to discrimination and not having any other opportunities. This provision would lead to members of the trans community being criminalised. When the criminalising of begging itself has been held to be unconstitutional by the Delhi High Court, there is no place for this offence in the 2018 Bill.

It does not accord any of the positive rights such as the rights of trans and intersex persons to inheritance of property, rights within the family such as adoption and to be free from domestic violence, rights of political participation such as the right to vote and hold public office, and the right to health to include free sex reassignment treatments.

It also does not make sexual violence against transgender and intersex persons a criminal offence. The current law on rape is gender specific and transgender persons have no recourse under criminal law for sexual assault.

7. New Triple Talaq Bill passed by Lok Sabha Context

A fresh Bill to make the practice of triple talaq among Muslims a criminal offence was introduced in the Lok Sabha and passed and it will replace an ordinance issued in September.

Under the proposed law, giving instant triple talaq will be illegal and void and will attract a jail term of three years for the husband.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2018 will supersede the 2017 Bill which passed earlier in the Lok Sabha.

Key Points:

‘Triple Talaq’ is a procedure of divorce under the Sharia Law which is a body of the Islamic law. Under this, a husband can divorce his wife by pronouncing ‘Talaq’ thrice.

In spite of protests by Muslim women and activists world-wide the procedure is still prevalent in most countries.

There are several instances where ‘triple talaq’ has enabled husbands to divorce their wives arbitrarily, devoid of any substantiation.

According to a study, 92% of Muslim women in India want oral triple talaq to go. Oral talaq or ‘triple talaq’ delivered through new media platforms like Skype, text messages,

email and WhatsApp have become an increasing cause of worry for the community. The ‘triple talaq’ has been abolished in 21 countries including Pakistan, but is still prevalent in

India. The Centre reasons that these practices are against constitutional principles such as gender

equality, secularism, international laws etc. The government also argues that when these practices are banned in Islamic theocratic

countries, the practices could have absolutely no base in religion and are only prevalent to permit the dominance of men over women.

Critical Analysis:

But the current version of the Bill is stringent and treats a civil matter as a criminal matter and includes a jail term as penalty.

This provision is not founded in the principles of natural justice and could lead to targeting of Muslim men under criminal provisions for a civil offence.

Opposition parties are seeking for further debate by setting up a Joint Parliamentary Committee and the govt does not have the numbers in the Rajya Sabha to pass the Bill on its own.

8. Delhi offers $1.4 bn aid package to Male to tackle financial crisis

Context

India declared a financial package of $1.4 billion for the Maldives. The plan was being prepared over the last month and was formally declared during the visit of President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih of Maldives to India.

Both sides also agreed to coordinate maritime policing activities in the Indian Ocean region. The package comes as Maldives is facing a debt of $3.2 billion with China. It is expected to

boost Male’s global financial standing.

Background – Maldives Crisis

Mohamed Nasheed, who became the country’s first democratically elected President in 2009 and achieved worldwide renown for highlighting the effect of global warming on the archipelago, was thrown out of power through a political coup in 2012 and was later imprisoned in 2015 on terrorism charges that his supporters say were spurious.

Abdulla Yameen became the interim President and since then drove Maldives into a constant political crisis, eroded democratic principles and openly sided with China and severely compromised India’s core interests in the region.

Yameen became the President in 2013 in a disputed election that opponents say was rigged. Since then, he has been accused of eroding democracy, cracking down on dissent and jailing opposition leaders.

In 2016, the Maldives withdrew from the UK Commonwealth after the association of former British colonies threatened to suspend it for chipping away at democratic institutions.

Nasheed was allowed to leave prison a year later to seek medical treatment abroad, and was granted asylum in Britain. He hoped to challenge Yameen in presidential elections, and was in the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo.

A political crisis in the Maldives intensified on after President Abdulla Yameen decided to disobey the Supreme Court order to release 9 political prisoners and reinstating 12 parliament members which will give the opposition control of the chamber and potentially paving the way for Yameen’s impeachment.

On 5 February 2018 President Abdulla Yameen declared a state of emergency and ordered the arrest of two judges of the Supreme Court of the Maldives, including Chief Justice of the Maldives Abdulla Saeed and Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed and former President (also his half-brother) Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

In September 2018, a general election was held, during which Ibrahim Mohamed Solih was

elected to the post of president, with 58% of the public vote. He stood as a member of a joint opposition to Yameen Abdul Gayoom’s regime, which had been condemned internationally for shutting down free speech, and violating human rights.

China has loaned billions of dollars to countries around the Indian Ocean and beyond for infrastructure development, stoking fears of ‘debt-trap diplomacy’.

The new Maldives government of President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih has called for a review of Chinese-bankrolled projects initiated under his predecessor Abdulla Yameen.

Former president Mohamed Nasheed, now Solih’s mentor, has accused China of a land grab in the strategically placed Indian Ocean archipelago, and called a free-trade agreement (FTA) signed with Beijing under Yameen one-sided.

8.1 Restoring the balance (India- Maldives Relations)

What’s in news?

Maldivian President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih is on a three-day visit to India this month of December, 2018.

Experts opine that this development seems to have brought a tumultuous phase in India-Maldives ties to a close.

Editorial Analysis:

It is important to note that this is Mr. Solih’s first overseas visit after becoming the President of the Indian Ocean nation of 400,000 people.

Experts point out that Mr. Solih defeated Abdulla Yameen in a surprise victory in the Maldivian presidential elections in September 2018 and, since then, has recalibrated his country’s ties with India.

It is believed that while Mr. Yameen had drawn the Maldives closer to China and brutally crushed the Opposition, Mr. Solih’s victory has been a shot in the arm for those who favour strengthening democratic forces in the island nation.

Also it is important to note that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had attended the swearing-in ceremony of Mr. Solih as the President of Maldives in November, 2018.

This was Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s first visit to the Maldives as Prime Minister and the first by an Indian head of state since 2011.

Critics point out that even as Mr. Modi enthusiastically reached out to all of India’s neighbours after his election in 2014, he remained reluctant to engage with Mr. Yameen. They further point out that Prime Minister Modi’s planned visit to the Maldives, in March 2015, was cancelled as the political environment deteriorated under Mr. Yameen.

It is important to note that in a strong endorsement of Mr. Solih’s victory, Mr. Modi underscored that the recent elections in the Maldives represented the collective aspirations of the people for democracy, the rule of law and a prosperous future.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Modi made it clear that India desired “to see a stable, democratic, prosperous and peaceful Republic of Maldives”.

Points of engagement between the two countries:

Experts point out that Mr. Solih’s India visit has seen the two sides emphasise their traditionally close bond. He called India the island nation’s “closest friend” and “reaffirmed his government’s ‘India-First’ Policy”, committing to working together closely with India.

India, for its part, announced a financial assistance package of $1.4 billion for the Maldives in the form of budgetary support, currency swap agreements and concessional lines of credit.

Both India and the Maldives have agreed to ensure that they would keep other’s security interests in mind as they consolidate cooperation in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Further, they have agreed to strengthen maritime security cooperation in the IOR through coordinated patrol and aerial surveillance.

Also, in an attempt to boost trade ties, Mr. Modi “welcomed the expanding opportunities for Indian companies to invest in the Maldives”. Areas such fisheries development, tourism, transportation, connectivity, health, education, information technology, new and renewable energy and communications were earmarked for enhancing bilateral cooperation.

Perspective on China

Experts point out that it is important from India’s perspective that Mr. Solih succeeds in the Maldives. Also, under Mr. Yameen, the Maldives had veered too close to China for India’s comfort, welcoming Chinese money for major infrastructure projects and signing a controversial free trade agreement (FTA).

India’s entreaties for political moderation and closer security ties were summarily ignored. China’s role in the Maldivian economy is under the scanner today amid growing concerns about

the money the Maldives owes to China for infrastructure projects undertaken by Chinese construction companies.

These infrastructure projects include the China-Maldives Friendship Bridge, which connects Male’s eastern edge to the western corner of the island of Hulhule. It is now estimated that China’s loans to the Maldives total at least $1.3 billion, or a quarter of the island nation’s gross domestic product.

Further, faced with this crisis, the new Maldivian government is looking to India for more budgetary support to help meet its development goals and is also planning to revise the FTA with China.

Currently, the Modi government is also trying to ensure help reaches Male in time so that India regains some of its lost space in the Maldives’ foreign policy and politics.

It is important to note that the Maldives has also made it clear that while the neighbourhood will clearly be a priority for the Solih government, China will continue to play an important role as an economic partner.

Thus, experts point out that China is not going to disappear from the Maldivian foreign policy matrix and nor should India expect it to.

However, the logic of geography dictates that India’s role will be critical in determining the trajectory of political developments in the Maldives.

Concluding Remarks:

In conclusion, India’s patient handling of the Maldives crisis over the last few years has positioned it well.

Also, by coordinating its response with other like-minded regional and extra-regional players, India increased the costs for Mr. Yameen and also underscored that there are options available to the Maldives should it decide to move away from China. After a meeting of the ‘Quad’

countries in Singapore in November 2018, the U.S., for example, released a statement expressing support for the new Maldivian government.

Going forward, experts point out that the Maldives would need the support of India as its challenges remain acute.

Lastly, it is important to note that the institutional fabric of the country has been battered under Mr. Yameen’s assault even as the threat of Islamist extremism has grown in potency.

It is believed that governance will continue to be challenging as the forces which came together to bring down Mr. Yameen may not be cohesive enough in running the nation and strengthening its democratic foundations.

Finally, it is believed that India should not be deterred by temporary setbacks. Instead of perpetually viewing the dynamics from a China-centric perspective, it must keep its

eyes firmly on the long term. The more invested India is in strengthening democratic institutions in its neighbourhood, the

better returns it will get in its foreign policy.

9. Cyclone Phethai crosses the coast near Kakinada in A.P.

Context

Severe cyclonic storm Phethai, which kept the Andhra Pradesh government on the tenterhooks in the last couple of days, crossed the coast between Kakinada and Yanam on Monday afternoon.

It triggered a spell of heavy rain in East and West Godavari districts and moderate rain down south.

Cyclones in India

Cyclones are caused by atmospheric disturbances around a low-pressure area distinguished by swift and often destructive air circulation.

Approximately 5700 km out of around 7516 kms of India’s coastline, its flat coastal terrain and high population density are extremely vulnerable to cyclones

Recurrent cyclones account for a large number of deaths, loss of livelihood opportunities, loss of public and private property, and severe damage to infrastructure.

Cyclones are associated with Strong Winds, Torrential rains and inland flooding and Storm Surge.

Indian coasts are highly vulnerable to tropical cyclones and the consequent recurrent loss of life and property.

Such weather events are a part of the climate system, and their impact in the form of economic losses could well be greater going forward, as development creates more assets in coastal cities.

Cyclone Disaster Management

Prepare communities to deal with disasters in a manner that people’s lives and properties are protected, and to ultimately become resilient.

Public awareness generation will serve to empower people with knowledge about the role and responsibilities of the state.

Targeting schools, colleges and all educational institutions is a very important part of awareness.

It has to be sustained through constant updating, upgrading and mock drills. Awareness will also help in induction of the constantly evolving knowledge of science and

technology as well as research and development applications. To overcome the power cut it is important to have rooftop solar and battery storage systems as

supplementary power sources for households and corporates. Planting trees with strong root systems and pruning the canopy ahead of cyclone season could

reduce uprooting. Government should restore infrastructure and provide priority relief to the families of those

who lost their lives, and the worst-hit communities. Efficient use of technology and implementation of the Sendai framework is the need to the

hour. Collaboration with other countries in the region to strengthen the cooperation and efforts and

to make a common fund for disaster management. Construction of multipurpose cyclone shelters, access roads, saline embankments and

underground. By taking long and short term mitigation measures, the loss of life and property can be

minimized.

10. U.S. announces Syria troop pull-out

Context

The U.S. has started bringing home troops from Syria as it moves to a new phase in the campaign against Islamic State (IS), the White House said on Wednesday, claiming that the militant Islamist group’s “territorial caliphate” has been defeated.

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump declared victory against the group and made clear that he saw no further grounds for remaining in Syria.

Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)

The Islamic jihadist group is an unrecognised terror outfit based in Iraq and Syria, that made international headlines and has emerged as one of the most dangerous terror organisation like that of al Qaeda and Taliban.

It maintains a stronghold near the borders of Levant (Eastern Mediterranean), Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Cyprus, and Southern Turkey.

The main goal of ISIS is to establish a caliphate in the Sunni-dominated areas of Iraq and Syria, which can be ruled by a Caliph.

ISIS came into existence in 2004 and since then it has changed its name many times from al Qaeda in Iraq” (AQI) to Hilf al-Mutayibeen to “Islamic State of Iraq (ISI)” to “Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham” to al-Dawla to Dawla al Islamiya, among many others.

It has carried out various attacks in the past in Iraq killing thousands of civilians. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is said to be one of the top ISIS leaders.

ISIS major source of finance is through smuggling of raw materials of archaeological antiques, oil and an extortion racket and its total worth is believed to be $2bn.

ISIS takes immense pleasure in video recording of amputation and crucification videos and then uploading it on social media sites.

Analysis:

Bringing soldiers back to the U.S. was a campaign promise of Donal Trump. Earlier this year he had wanted to exit Syria, but delayed the decision amid resistance within

his cabinet. Now he claims that the physical infrastructure of the IS caliphate is destroyed and the U.S.

can leave the war against the remnants of the jihadist group to the Syrian government and its main backers, Russia and Iran.

On the face of it, there is a strategic argument in Mr. Trump’s decision. The caliphate is actually destroyed — the IS has lost 95% of the territory it once controlled and is now confined to narrow pockets on the Iraqi-Syrian border.

The U.S. would also not like to get stuck in Syria forever. It is basically Russia’s war. The U.S. is already stranded in Afghanistan (for 17 years) and Iraq (over 15 years) without a

way out. After these interventions, Presidents have been wary of deploying “boots on the ground” in

West Asia. Barack Obama had pulled back most U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Trump wants to get out of the Syrian theatre. But the ground reality is too complex and

requires Mr. Trump to be more patient and strategic in his policymaking. The U.S. has only 2,000 troops in Syria. They were not directly involved in the ground battle,

and were supporting the Syrian Democratic Forces, a rebel group led by Kurdish rebels who were in the forefront of the fight against the IS.

The U.S. support for the Kurdish rebels has irked Turkey, which sees them as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party, the rebels on the Turkish side who have been fighting Turkish troops for decades.

Turkey considers the military consolidation of Kurds as a strategic threat. In the past, Turkey had attacked Kurds in some pockets on the Syrian side, but was

prevented from launching a full-throttle attack because of the U.S. presence. When Mr. Trump pulls out American troops, he would in effect be leaving the Syrian Kurds

at the mercy of Turkish troops. A second risk factor will emerge if Turkey launches an attack on the Kurdish militants, which

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has vowed to do. The Kurds will then have to re-channel their resources to fight Turkish soldiers. This will

weaken the ground resistance against the remaining IS militants on the southern side of the border.

Mr. Trump would have done better to wait before deciding to pull out of Syria. He could have considered waiting for the conflict to de-escalate even further; also, he could have gained assurances from Turkey that it would refrain from attacking Kurdish troops.

The cost of being so abrupt is that it leaves a dangerous vacuum in north-eastern Syria.