-
This channel explains daily editorial covering indian express, Hindustan Times, Livemint and Hindu. You can reach to me for any query at @saurabhGSPaper2
#Polity GS Paper 2
Indian judiciary
Read below
Listing of species:- The same level of protection is available to tiger and jackals and king cobra and rat snakes. The original act is written with research being an exception under the hunting clause. Now it will be difficult to do research on jackals also as they have same protection as tiger's.
Second spotted dear is included in schedule 1 but that are invasive species for Andaman islands. But the issue is now they can't be hunted because of protection under schedule 1.
The same situation is with wild pig and nilgai which cannot be hunted now though they impacts farmer and their field.
Now researcher will also face problem in getting clearance for Research even fir common species like barn owls as they are highly protected now.
According to the Constitution of India, under article 341(1), and 342 (1) the President of India, after consultation with the Governor, may specify, “the castes, races, tribes or parts of groups within castes or races, which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes AND ST Respectively. Accordingly, the President has notified the Scheduled Castes in the order called ‘Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order-1950’ and the ‘Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes List (Modification) Order-1956. However, under article 341(2) and 342(1)the Parliament of India by law can include or exclude the above-mentioned groups from the list of the Scheduled Castes and schedule tribes
What does the Presidential Order of 1950 state?
The order was called as the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. The complete list of castes and tribes was made on order of 1950 which had certain norms and criteria for inclusion of other community later.
Government argument:
1. Marriage is traditionally seen as a bond between a man and a woman, reflecting long-standing religious, cultural and social norms.
2. Homosexuality is deemed contrary to Indian ideals and cultural norms.
3. The government expressed concern that redefining marriage could lead to a slippery slope effect, forcing the state to legally recognise other forms of relationships.
4. The issue of adoption by same-sex couples was brought into question, raising concerns about the child’s upbringing.
THE COURT:
The Supreme Court, in a unanimous verdict, rejected petitions seeking same-sex marriage in India, and refused to tweak provisions of the Special Marriage Act.
The matter was decided by a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by CJI D Y Chandrachud. All five judges agreed that there was no fundamental right for non-heterosexual couples to marry, with the majority view being that the legislature must decide on the issue of same-sex marriage.
#Governance GS Paper 2
Context: Palliative care is a branch of medicine that looks at improving the quality of life of those having life limiting illness like cancers, kidney disease, brain disorder and heart disease.
It is different from other medical specialist as it focuses on alleviating uncontrolled system.
Palliative care means we need to invest home based care, impatient visit , vocational rehabilitation and social integartion that reduces the cost of expenditure on health.
But the problem with palliative health care is low awareness, less investment and is not covered under insurance scheme in the country.
Secondlly, these services are not available in primary and secondary health centres.
Thirdly these services are not costly one so private parties are outside of this.
#Polity
Context: The court is looking into a question that why not unmarried women is allowed to go for surrogacy.
Actually women has challenged section 20 of the surrogacy regulation act which bars unmarried women to go for surrogacy.
Now understand Surrogacy
#Polity gs paper 2
Context:- RTI is not effective
According to Report card on the performance of Information commissions in India:- Approximately around 2 lakh Appeals before information commissioner are pending.
Appeal means you first go to Public information officer for information, if he fails to give you information within 30 days you can make first appeal before information commissioner.
Secondly No new information commissioner are appointed in jharkhand, Telangana, mizoram, and tripura after vacancy.
👉 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.
👉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.
👉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.
#Polity GS paper 2
Context:- Transfer of HC judge Mr Murlidharan from Madras HC to Manipur HC. Now the judge is telling that he should transfer to Madras or remain in Manipur but now no transfer to new HC ie Calcutta HC. SC said they don't find any merit in this request made by the judge.
Read the following
Analysis
Electoral bond was introduced by finance act 2017. The finance act was brought in 2017 at the end of budget process is after appropriation bill. That act has brought amendment in RPA1951 and introduced electoral bond. Now this finance bill of 2017 was actually a financiall bill but passed as money bill,(which is challenged before the court). Samajhna ye hai ki:- The finance bill is a money bill only when it has provision of article 110 but a financiall bill when it has other matter alongwith article 110. So in this case finance bill of 2017 should be passed as Financial bill but govt has passed it as a money bill ( Badmasi hai ye). But this should not impact our understanding.
Another problem discussed below. Actually SC has upheld the electoral bond earlier but now again it was challenged before the court who will see the matter on 31 oct.
Let's see what has happened earlier
Tribal population consist of 705 different groups making of 8.6% of total population. That are being administered as per article 244(1). Today this is applicable in only 10 states but not the entire state, only the area which is declared by President as scheduled area. Ex Kerala has recommended to include 2133 habitations under schedule area but president has not taken any decision yet.
It means not all schedule tribes will automatically comes under fifth schedule, that's why 59% tribals are outside schedule area definition and thus excluded from the rights of Biological diversity act 2002 and land rehabilitation act 2013.
Who decides schedule areas?
Ans:- President and as per jharkhand HC, this is a executive function of president. Because here what has happened that president has declared a area as scheduled area where tribal population was less than 50%.this was challenged and Court has said this is exclusive to the president. This is not the courts area.
How are these area identified?
Ans:: Nothing is written in this regard in constitution or in law, but based on Dhebar commission following guidelines is used by president before deciding area as scheduled area:-
1. Preponderance of tribal population
2. Compactness and reasonable size of area.
3. Viable administrative entity such as district, block or taluk.
4. Economic backwardness.
There is nothing like minimum percentage required before deciding the area as scheduled area. However SC and ST commission in 2002 has suggested all revenues village with 40 % and more tribal population according to 1951censuscan be considered as scheduled area by the president.
Now schedule areas is declared on the basis of group of villages and group of habitations considering this as a unit as per PESA ACT. ( Extension of panchayat provision to schedule areas).
https://www.youtube.com/live/YjCLhyFs0Uk?si=XCOIzC7iil19Km7z
Читать полностью…
# Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- Appointment of Judges has been delayed by the government.
Understand:- When collegium sends name of judges to be appointed, it goes to Law Ministry and then discusses with PM and then the name is sent to President for appointment.
Why there is delay?
1. Government's Apprehension with some name.
2.Represents Implicit tussle between govt and judiciary.
3. A kind of attack on collegium system.
Implications:-
1. Delayed justice
2. Pilling of cases
#GOVERNANCE GS Paper 2
Context: Social audit and MGNREGA
According to section 17 of MGNREGA Act, Social audit is a process of reviewing official records and determining whether state reported expenditures reflect the actual monies spent on the ground.
Social audit units (structure for doing social auditing) has highlighted the misappropriation of 27cr in this financial year, but very little action has been taken.
Why social audit is failing in India?
Answer:
1. Fund starved social audit units
2. Nepotism in appointment.
3. Bureaucratic apathy.
4. Capacity Gaps: Lacks specific skills and expertise in data analysis, documentation, and legal frameworks.
6. Resistance to Change: Resistance from entrenched interests, including local power structures and beneficiaries of corruption or mismanagement.
Suggestion
1. Fixed frequency of conducting social audit.
2. Information dissemination after auditing at Panchayat Board.
3. Citizen engagement and awareness
4. Technology intervention
#Politt gs paper 2
Context:- news is about the arrest of founder of newsclick media house. This is not important for us but we can use one quote in answer:-
Democracy is not just the principle of majority decision making but decisions should also be made under democratic conditions whose structure and practises treat people with equal respect. This is the constitutional part of constitutional democracy.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- Poor drafting of the law exemplified in Wildlife protection amendment act.
Brief of the act:-
The act of 1972 contains 66 section divided into seven chapters and six schedule.
Schedule 1 covers endangered species and need absolute protection.
Schedule 2 :- Animals under this cannot be hunted except under threat to human life.
Schedule 3 and 4:- Not endangered species are included.
Schedule 5:- Animal here can be hunted.
Schedule 6:- plants that are forbidden from cultivation.
Now amendment done is poor drafted law:- HOW??
Read below 👇
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- The inclusion of Meities under ST has been denied twice.
How ST are recognised?
Ans:-
According to Lokur committee there are 5 criteria to identify a community as ST:-
1. Primitive Traits
2. Distinct culture
3. Geographical isolation
4. Syness of contact
5. Backwardness
The process to include tribes in the ST list begins with the recommendation from the respective State government which is then sent to Tribal affairs ministry and then to Registrar general of India for approval.
It is then sent to NCST and then to cabinet for a final decision.
But it is important to understand article 342(1) here which says list is prepared by President after the consultation with the governor. It means govt prepares list and then sent to governor. Governor ask the president that this proposal comes from state government. Kindly consider this then president in consultation with the governor does so.
#Polity gs paper 2
Context:- court can just ask the state to recognise and grant the legal status to same sex marriage.
Details:-👇
Features of Act:-
✅Regulation of surrogacy: The Act prohibits commercial surrogacy, but allows altruistic surrogacy. Altruistic surrogacy involves no monetary compensation to the surrogate mother other than the medical expenses and insurance coverage during the pregnancy.
✅Purposes for which surrogacy is permitted:
(i) for intending couples who suffer from proven infertility
(ii) altruistic
(iii) not for commercial purposes; (iv) not for producing children for sale, prostitution or other forms of exploitation; and
(v) for any condition or disease specified through regulations.
✅Eligibility criteria for intending couple: The intending couple should have a ‘certificate of essentiality’ and a ‘certificate of eligibility’ issued by the appropriate authority.
▶️A certificate of essentiality will be issued upon fulfilment of the following conditions: (i) a certificate of proven infertility of one or both members of the intending couple from a District Medical Board; (ii) an order of parentage and custody of the surrogate child passed by a Magistrate’s court; and (iii) insurance coverage for a period of 16 months covering postpartum delivery complications for the surrogate.
✅Eligibility criteria for surrogate mother: To obtain a certificate of eligibility from the appropriate authority, the surrogate mother has to be: (i) a close relative of the intending couple; (ii) a married woman having a child of her own; (iii) 25 to 35 years old; (iv) a surrogate only once in her lifetime; and (v)
✅Appropriate authority: The central and state governments shall appoint one or more appropriate authorities within 90 days of the Bill becoming an Act. Registration of surrogacy clinics: Surrogacy clinics cannot undertake surrogacy related procedures unless they are registered by the appropriate authority.
ISSUES:-
➡️The whole surrogacy service could go underground and it would lead to increased exploitation with no mechanism for protection of any of the parties involved in the surrogacy arrangement.
➡️It could result in trafficking of surrogate mothers to foreign nations or safe surrogacy havens around the globe for monetary returns.
➡️The provision of no monetary incentive in the proposed Bill except medical expenses can make surrogacy similar to “forced labour” which is prohibited under Article-23 of the Constitution.
➡️It does not allow single women or men, or gay couples to go in for surrogacy against Article 21.
➡️The eligibility condition under the Bill amounts to unreasonable restriction on the reproductive rights of a married Indian couple, violative of Article 21 of the constitution.
#Polity
Context: Allegation by MP on Mahua Mitra for taking Cash in order to raise question in the house.
The same question has been raised during Somnath chaterjee tenure when he was Speaker. Speaker has suspended all the memebers involved at that time and has send message to the Court that it is a internal matter of the house and court shoudl not intervene.
https://www.youtube.com/live/YjCLhyFs0Uk?si=h5m0AeZO0ThS68ji
Читать полностью…
#Governance gs paper 2
Context:- SC bench divided on the issue of interpretation of Medical termination of pregnancy act 2021. Actually this law has been amended inn2021 giving right to abortion till 24 weeks of pregnancy of there is any danger to women's health and in case of fatal deformity detected in foetus.
In the recent case, women has petitioned that she cannot have third baby as she is going through mental agony and getting pills for mental health.
Government additional solicitor general said that women cannot ask for this as it does not come under the meaning of bodily autonomy and also child in womb does not have any abnormal deformity.
Union of India vs. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth:- The Supreme Court rejected the idea that High Court judges can be transferred only with their consent.
It reasoned that the transfer of power can be exercised only in public interest.
What makes transfers controversial?
Transfer orders become controversial
1. When sections of the public feel that there is a punitive element behind the decision to move a judge from one High Court to another.
2.As a matter of practice, the Supreme Court and the government do not disclose the reason for a transfer. For, if the reason is because of some adverse opinion on a judge’s functioning, disclosure would impinge on the judge’s performance and independence in the court to which he is transferred.
3. On the other hand, the absence of a reason sometimes gives rise to speculation whether it was effected because of complaints against the judge, or if it was a sort of punishment for certain judgments that inconvenienced the executive.
Firstly, We will understand What has been the SC verdict on such petition by Association of Democratic Reforms?
Ans:- The court declined to put a hold on electoral bond.
The points in the Bold highlighted by answer of the SC on the question of petitioner in the court
1.Scheme is intended to ensure that everything happens through banking channels:- While the identity of the purchaser of the bond is withheld, it is ensured that unidentified/ unidentifiable persons cannot purchase the bonds and give it to the political parties. Under clause 7 of the Scheme, buyers have to apply in the prescribed form, either physically or online disclosing the particulars specified therein. Though the information furnished by the buyer shall be treated confidential by the authorised bank and shall not be disclosed to any authority for any purposes, it is subject to one exception namely when demanded by a competent court or upon registration of criminal case by any law enforcement agency.
2.Bonds are not tradable:- The petitioner said though the first purchase may be through banking channels who paid in white money, someone may repurchase the bonds from the first buyer by using black money and hand it over to a political party. SC said "This contention arises out of ignorance of the Scheme. Under Clause 14 of the Scheme, the bonds are not tradable. Moreover, the first buyer will not stand to gain anything out of such sale except losing white money for the black."
3.Apprehension that foreign corporate houses may buy the bonds and attempt to influence the electoral process in the country, is misconceived:- It is because as per Clause 3 of the Scheme, the Bonds may be purchased only by a person, who is a citizen of India or incorporated or established in India.
Why the SC Verdict is being criticised?
Ans:-
1.It is very difficult to know the magnitude of donation by the registered entities. It is because registered entities don’t disclose political donations in their financial statement.
2.Firms unlike companies have no regulatory mandate to submit annual reports except annual income tax.
3.The Finance bill of 2017 has deleted the mandatory requirement of declaring donations to political parties.
4.Recipient wise information is not available even in RTI.
Conclusion:- The idea of free and fair election can be achieved only by reform in political funding. In this particular case of electoral bonds, SC has made a remark that what is required is a little more effort to bring out information from both sides (purchaser of bond and political party), else every information is available because:-
•Financial statements can be obtained in physical form from the Registrar of Companies upon payment of prescribed fee.
•Since the Scheme mandates political parties to file audited statement of accounts and also since the Companies Act requires financial statements of registered companies to be filed with the Registrar of Companies, the purchase as well as encashment of the bonds, happening only through banking channels, is always reflected in documents that eventually come to the public domain.
#Polity gs paper 2
Context:- Electoral bond scheme
This issue has many issues
1. Electoral bond bill was passed as money bill. It should be passed as Financial bill.
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context: Scheduled areas under Article 244
#Polity GS Paper 2
Context:- Freedom of Press
In ADM Jabalpur case, court said individual could not challenge illegal detentions. However in Puttaswamy case, court has reversed the position and recognise right to privacy.
But even after this, search and seizure is going on against news founder like News click and finally arresting the staff and owner on the pretext of terrorist activities.
Actually what is happening is digital authoritarianism as we have the law to check physical search and seizure and related procedures in crpc but nothing like this in digital space.
Just understand the police can coerce you to open what's app messages( against privacy) and can confiscate ur phone and can retrieve backups.
So the author is raising questions that we should have law on such matter where search and seizure is related to digital media too.
https://youtu.be/7Pb_nqs0MZA?si=MXSwdubxqif8NPhb
One of the toughest question is discussed here
Indian Secularism
1. In USA, there is a mutual exclusion, in France there is a one sided exclusion. But in India, exclusion of religion is not possible. Thus we follow Principled Distance.
2. Religion in India can’t be in Private space. Insulating official public space from religion should have sufficed for secularist.
3. Indian tradition has many religio-philosophical practices and experiences, multiple margas, pathways. But Pluralism is new in the west.
4. European secularism was for defending individuals from oppressive social communities and the State from a meddlesome Church. Caste is an Indian equivalent of the church. In India, the focus is on both inter religious and intra religious domination.