-
This channel explains daily editorial covering indian express, Hindustan Times, Livemint and Hindu. You can reach to me for any query at @saurabhGSPaper2
One Health joint plan is a combined effort of:
a)FAO and UNEP Only
b)FAO, UNEP and WHO Only
c)FAO and WHO Only
d)None of these pair is correct.
/channel/IRANDIS_FOR_UPSC/102
For IR related news of today, you can see this channel where i post only IR News.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context: We will see the issue of excommunication and relation with article 26.
But what is excommunication?
Answer:
Bombay Prevention of excommunication act defined Excommunication as the “expulsion of a person from any community of which he is a member, depriving him of rights and privileges which are legally enforceable by a suit of civil nature”.
In practical terms, excommunication means not being allowed to access a mosque belonging to the community or a burial dedicated to the community.
A member of the Dawoodi Bohra community filed a suit in 1949, saying the Act rendered certain orders passed by their leader unlawful.
The 51st leader of the community, Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb, challenged the constitutional validity of the Act, stating it violated fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution under Articles 25 (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion) and 26 (Freedom to manage religious affairs).
Statistics:
1. In India open prison was established in 1953 in UP where housed prisoners were requisition to construct a dam over the river Chandraprabha in Varanasi
2. Only 17 states have reported about the functioning of open jails in India. There are currently 69 open jails. The highest numbers are in Rajasthan with 29 jails and Maharashtra with 13 jails.
3. In Rajasthan more than 2,000 prisoners of 29 jails work as accountants, school teachers, guards and domestic help. These are the same people who serve their sentence for offences like murder, theft and trespassing.
Advantages
1. Reduces overcrowding in jails: As both the hefty as well as petty offenders are living under the same roof this causes overcrowding. Thus, separating both has reduced the crowd.
2. Allowed to find employment: the prisoners in open jail settings are allowed to find employment in and out of the prison this results boost in their confidence and give them earnings.
3. Operational cost is reduced: As they are in open prisons they do not required a lot of security and people to watch over them.
4. Self-development and socialization: they are allowed to socialized with the outside world and can contact their family so they still be a part of the society and don’t become a sociopath.
Guidelines after Common cause case
1. The requirement for the Magistrate’s approval has been replaced by an intimation to the Magistrate.
2.The medical board must communicate its decision within 48 hours (no time limit earlier).
3.Now a notary or gazetted officer can sign the living will in the presence of two witnesses instead of the Magistrate’s countersign.
4. In case the medical boards set up by the hospital refuses permission, it will now be open to the kin to approach the High Court which will form a fresh medical team.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context: Ethnic Democracy/ The article is of no use for us, just understand the meaning of Ethnic Democracy:
It is a political system that combines a structured ethnic dominance with democratic, political and civil rights for all.
Conditions that led to Ethnic Democracy:
👉The core ethnic nation constitutes a solid numerical majority.
👉The non-core population constitutes a significant minority.
👉The core ethnic nation has a commitment to democracy.
👉The core ethnic nation is an indigenous group.
👉The non-core groups are immigrant.
👉The non-core group is divided into more than one ethnic group.
/channel/IRANDIS_FOR_UPSC/100
You can read about BRI on this channel, channel operated by me only
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- Vice President said Parliament is North Star.It is a metaphor means Parliament gives direction through debates and discussion (Deliberate Democracy)
We will discuss today about Deliberative Democracy in details:
Consider the following statements with respect to “Right to Information Act”:
1.The Act recognizes Suo-moto Declaration of the information by the Public Authority.
2.Every Public authority is under Obligation to provide Information on written Request or Request by Electronic means only.
3.The definition of Public Authority would include any NGO Substantially financed by Government (Directly or indirectly or both).
Choose the Correct Code:
7. The transfer of High Court judges is judicially reviewable only if the CJI took the decision without consulting the other four judges in the Supreme Court collegium, or if the views of the Chief Justices of both High Courts [involved in the transfer] are not obtained.
8. The CJI is not entitled to act solely in his individual capacity, without consultation with other judges of the Supreme Court, in respect of materials and information conveyed by the Government for non-appointment of a judge recommended for appointment.
9. The CJI can consult any of his colleagues on the appointment of a HC judge to the Supreme Court or transfer of a puisne judge. The consultation need not be limited to colleagues who have occupied the office of a judge or Chief Justice of that particular High Court.
What is Supreme Court of India Collegium and How it Works?
Answer: The Collegium of the Supreme Court consists of 5 senior most Judges including the Chief Justice of India. They will consider the elevation of Chief Justices/Judges of High Court to Supreme Court, elevation of Judges of High Courts as Chief Justices and elevation of Judges. In case of difference of opinion, the majority view will prevail. Since Constitution mandates consultation with the Chief Justice of India is necessary for appointments to judiciary, the collegium model evolved.
What is the Collegium System?
Answer: It is a system under which appointments and transfers of judges are decided by a forum of the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. It has no place in the Indian Constitution.
What does the Constitution actually prescribe?
Answer: Article 124 deals with the appointment of Supreme Court judges. It says the appointment should be made by the President after consultation with such judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court as the President may deem necessary. The CJI is to be consulted in all appointments, except his or her own.
Article 217 deals with the appointment of High Court judges. It says a judge should be appointed by the President after consultation with the CJI and the Governor of the state. The Chief Justice of the High Court concerned too should be consulted.
How and when did the other system evolve?
Answer:The collegium system has its genesis in a series of three judgments that is now clubbed together as the Three Judges Case. The S P Gupta case (December 30, 1981) is called the First Judges Case. It declared that the primacy of the CJI recommendation to the President can be refused for cogent reasons. This brought a paradigm shift in favour of the executive having primacy over the judiciary in judicial appointments for the next 12 years.
How did the judiciary come to get primacy?
Answer: On October 6, 1993, came a nine-judge bench decision in the Supreme Court Advocates-on Record Association vs Union of India case the Second Judges Case. This was what ushered in the collegium system. The majority verdict written by Justice J S Verma said justiciability and primacy required that the CJI be given the primary role in such appointments. It overturned the S P Gupta judgment, saying the role of the CJI is primal in nature because this being a topic within the judicial family, the executive cannot have an equal say in the matter. Here the word consultation would shrink in a mini form. Should the executive have an equal role and be in divergence of many a proposal, germs of indiscipline would grow in the judiciary.
How final was this?
Justice Verma majority judgment saw dissent within the bench itself on the individual role of the CJI. In a total of five judgments delivered in the Second Judges case, Justice Verma spoke for only himself and four other judges. Justice Pandian and Justice Kuldip Singh went on to write individual judgments supporting the majority view. But Justice Ahmadi had dissented and Justice Punchhi took the view that the CJI need not restrict himself to just two judges (as mentioned in the ruling) and can consult any number of judges if he wants to, or none at all.
For the next five years, there was confusion on the roles of the CJI and the two judges in judicial appointments and transfers. In many cases, CJIs took unilateral decisions without consulting two colleagues. Besides, the President became only an approver.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- Transparency and opaqueness in Judiciary.
Steps taken for Transparency:
1. Live proceedings in the court.
2. Translation of SC Pronouncement in 4 languages other than English.
Steps for opaqueness:
1. Charge sheet filed against an accused is not a Public document, thus not come under the meaning of RTI 2005. This steps is against court verdict in Youth bar association vs UOI, IN WHICH COURT ASKED INVESTIGATING AGENCY TO PUT FIR on website.
However i think court is right because chargesheet had vital information such as list of prosecution witness and investigating officer conclusion.
But other point is also valid that in any case these details will come in public during trial.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- This article is of no use for you guys. Better to read this below
Answer of these two mcq is already given.
Читать полностью…
Which of the following is correct with respect to “Popular Sovereignty”:
1.Rousseau expressed the concept when he wrote that "In free governments, the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns."
2.The principle is one of the underlying ideas of the United States Constitution.
Choose the correct code:
What was the case all about?
Ans:-
Petitioner said Quran does not permit excommunication, and that it goes against the spirit of Islam. They submitted that the right to regulate religious communities does not include the right to excommunicate.
However another party said that the practice of excommunicate was essential to the Dawoodi Bohra faith. Actually the another party was of the view that power of excommunication was part of the management of community affairs in matters of religion, and depriving the Dai (leader) of the right and making its exercise a penal offence “struck at the very life of the denomination
SC in Sardar Syedna Saifuddin v. State of Bombay said: Dai’s (Leader) position is an essential part of the community and the power to excommunicate is to enforce discipline and preserve the denomination, not to punish.
How this matter resurfaced again?
Answer: The Maharashtra Protection of People from Social Boycott (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2016, was passed. The Act describes a social boycott as “inhuman”, and defines 16 types of social boycott — including preventing members of a community from having access to facilities including community halls, burial grounds, etc.
In October 2022, the court said that it would consider whether the practice of excommunication that was protected by the 1962 order can continue.
So, now the court will see the issue mainly on two grounds:
1. Balancing the rights under Article 26(b) — right of religious denominations to manage their own affairs in matters of religion
2. Whether the practice can be protected under Article 26(b) when tested on the touchstone of constitutional morality.
1Consider the following statements on equality:
1.The quest for equality does not imply de facto equality.
2.Men and women may not be born alike. But equality demands that they ought to be treated equally.
3.We seek equality because we think it is just.
4.Egalitarian principles have been drawn on the principle that men and women are identical.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
#Governance GS Paper 2
Context:- Concept of Open Prison
What is this?
Open Prisons have emerged as a correctional system for reformation of prisoners by providing them with recreational facilities, family-visits, remissions, wage-labour which instils them with self-confidence and helps them to re-socialise with community after their release.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context: Euthanasia and concept of Living will
Active euthanasia: involves an active intervention to end a person’s life with substances or external force, such as administering a lethal injection.
Passive or negative or non-aggressive euthanasia is the denial of medical care necessary for maintaining life, such as the denial of antibiotics when the patient is likely to die without them.
1. Aruna Shanbaug case (2011): The SC allowed passive euthanasia.
2. Common Cause case (2018): The SC decided that passive euthanasia will be legally allowed henceforth in India and also laid down guidelines for living wills
LIVING WILL:It is a legal document which allows you to express your wishes to doctors in case you become incapacitated. In a living will, you can outline whether or not you want your life to be artificially prolonged in the event of a devastating illness or injury.
Contesting from Two Seats
ECI recommended amending Section 33(7) so as to allow one candidate to contest from only one seat.
Right now, A candidate can contest election from Two seats as written in section 33 of RPA 1951.
This provision of RPA has been challenged on the ground citing that it is unreasonable for creating extra burden on the public exchequer as by-elections will invariably follow because candidates have to give up one seat in case, they win on both the seats.
SC on Section 33 (7)
👉Rejected a petition to bar candidates from contesting from more than one constituency in the general or assembly elections, calling it a matter of “parliamentary sovereignty” and “political democracy”.
👉It is parliament’s will that determines whether political democracy is furthered by granting such a choice.
👉It highlighted that parliament did amend the law in 1996 to restrict the number of constituencies to two whereas earlier, a candidate could contest from any number of seats. The parliament has already intervened in the past. The parliament can certainly step in again
Deliberative democracy or deliberative engagement is all about placing people (citizens, residents, affected individuals) closer to the affairs of government and decision makers.
Deliberative democracy emphasises information processing (meaning/sense-making) as much as information exchange (communication of information), and encourages people to critically test, weigh up and grapple with a a range of perspectives, inputs and evidence.
It’s an alternative approach to 'asking people what they think when they're not thinking', which elicits uninformed responses. Instead, deliberative approaches seek to elicit informed, quality, meaningful outputs.
PRINCIPLES OF DELIBERATIVE ENGAGEMENT
1. Deliberative processes are built around a number of key principles including:
2. The group responds to a clear remit - a plain English question that goes to the heart of the dilemma being shared.
3. Participants will have access to the information they need to have an in-depth conversation and information will be neutral, balanced and from a range of different sources.
4. The process is representative. Participants are selected randomly via a random, stratified selection process.
5. Participants are given the time they need to deliberate, which allows them to consider complex information, grapple with trade-offs and impacts and weigh up options and ideas
6. The deliberative group is given a high level of influence over outcomes or decisions.
7. The group starts with a ‘blank page’ report - detailing their own thinking and developing their recommendations ‘from scratch’.
HOW IT DIFFERS FROM REPRESENTATIVE OR PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY
Deliberative democracy is different from representative democracy because it puts conversations, diverse perspectives and understanding at the centre of the decision rather than relying on polling and voting.
It also differs from participatory democracy, which is usually about breadth - involving lots of people in a wider variety of ways. Deliberative democracy involves a smaller, descriptively representative group of people considering an issue in depth.
Consider the following statements:
1.Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana is a one-year accidental insurance scheme renewable from year to year offering coverage for death or disability due to accident.
2.Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana Provides Life cover of Rs 2 lakh in case of death due to any reason against a premium of Rs 330 per annum.
3.Atal Pension Yojna is administered by Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority under the overall administrative and institutional architecture of the National Pension System.
What is 5+1 collegium system?
Answer:
1. Generally, one or more of the four senior judges in the collegium would be a potential CJI candidate.
The next in line is considered important to ensure continuity of decision-making
2. But if the situation is such that the successor Chief Justice is not one of the four senior most puisne Judges,then he must invariably be made part of the collegium.
3. Since,the Judges to be appointed will function during his term and it is his right that he should have a hand in their selection.
4. However, in the two-year tenure of Justice Chandrachud as CJI, a potential CJI candidate is unlikely to be in the collegium until May 2023.
5. Hence, Justice Khanna will be the sixth member of the collegium from November9,2022 itself.
6. The similar situation happened in 2007 when then CJI KG Balakrishnan took the top office,thecollegium he headed did not have the potential CJI candidate.
7. Justice SH Kapadia, who was next in line to be CJI, was invited to the collegium as the sixth member.
What was done to deal with the Confusion?
In 1998, President K.R. Narayanan issued a presidential reference to the Supreme Court as to what the term consultation really means in Articles 124, 217 and 222 (transfer of HC judges) of the Constitution. The question was if the term consultation requires consultation with a number of judges in forming the CJI opinion, or whether the sole opinion of the CJI constituted the meaning of the articles. In reply, the Supreme Court laid down nine guidelines for the functioning of the coram for appointments/transfers; this came to be the present form of the collegium.
Besides, a judgment dated October 28, 1998, written by Justice S P Bharucha at the head of the nine-judge bench, used the opportunity to strongly reinforce the concept of primacy of the highest judiciary over the executive. This was the Third Judges Case.
What are the arguments against the collegium system?
Experts point to systemic errors such as:
1. The administrative burden of appointing and transferring judges without a separate secretariat or intelligence-gathering mechanism dedicated to collection of and checking personal and professional backgrounds of prospective appointees;
2. A closed-door affair without a formal and transparent system.
3. The limitation of the collegium field of choice to the senior-most judges from the High Court for appointments to the Supreme Court, overlooking several talented junior judges and advocates.
What moves were taken to correct these?
The Law Commission in its 214th Report on Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges cases I, II and Iii recommended two solutions:
1. To seek a reconsideration of the three judgments before the Supreme Court.
2. A law to restore the primacy of the Chief Justice of India and the power of the executive to make appointments.
What is the suggested alternative to the collegium?
A National Judicial Commission remains a proposal. The Constitution (98th Amendment) Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha by the NDA government in 2003. It provided for the constitution of an NJC to be chaired by the CJI and with two of the senior-most judges of the Supreme Court as its members. The Union Law Minister would be a member along with an eminent citizen to be nominated by the President in consultation with the Prime Minister. The Commission would decide the appointment and transfer of judges and probe cases of misconduct by judges, including those from the highest judiciary.
SC guidelines on Appointments
1. The term consultation with the Chief Justice of India in Articles 124 (2), 217(1) and 222 (1) requires consultation with a plurality of judges in the formation of the opinion of the CJI. The sole, individual opinion of the CJI does not constitute consultation.
2. The CJI can only make a recommendation to appoint a judge of the Supreme Court and to transfer a Chief Justice or puisne judge of a High Court in consultation with the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. As far as the High Courts are concerned, the recommendation must be made in consultation with the two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
3. Strong cogent reasons do not have to be recorded as justification for a departure from the order of seniority in respect of each senior judge who has been passed over. What has to be recorded is the positive reason for the recommendation.
4. The views of the judges consulted should be in writing and should be conveyed to the Government of India by the CJI along with his views to the extent set out in the body of this opinion.
5. The CJI is obliged to comply with the norms and the requirement of the consultation process in making his recommendations.
6. Recommendations by the CJI without [such compliance] are not binding upon the government.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context: Collegium system
READ BELOW
There is a matter before the bench wrt to superiority of bench strenght. It is clear that 5 judge bench ruling is superior than 2 judge bench. It is because :-
The larger Benches examine the question or correctness of the decision and the majority opinion expressed by them becomes the verdict, which is binding on the lower Benches.
But the problem is for example if 5 judge bench gives decision with 4:1 then what will be difference with the 3 judge bench verdict with the split of 2:1.
The same thing applies on 5 judge bench verdict,if it is being be overriden by 7 judge bench with 4:3 verdict, then it does not make any sense.
Problem is majority decision is treated as the ruling of the entire Bench, including the dissenting judges.
And all this thing is happening because we follow " Doctrine of Precedents".
The doctrine of precedent is a principle of following previous decisions of the Court within its well-defined limits.
So, What should be done:-
term ‘larger Bench’ be understood not in the strict sense of being merely greater in strength than the lower Bench. Instead, there should be an endeavour to have a quorum with a break-even or a greater majority than the lower Bench. Thus, if a five-judge unanimous decision is referred to a larger Bench, it should be considered by a nine-judge Bench rather than seven, so that it would in any case be decided by a majority of at least five judges
Consider the following statements:
1. 'Due process of Law' provides for judicial scrutiny against arbitrary action of executive only.
2. The procedure established by law provides judicial scrutiny against arbitrary actions of both legislative and executive.
3. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution explicitly mentions the 'procedure established by law’.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Which one among the following statement(s) is not correct? The word ‘socialist’ in the Preamble of the Constitution of India read with:
a)Article 39 (d) would enable the court to uphold the constitutionality of nationalization laws.
b)Article 14 would enable the court to strike down a-statute which failed to fully achieve the socialist goal.
c)Article 25, would enable the court to ensure freedom guaranteed under that Article.
d)Article 23 would enable the court to reduce inequality of income and status.