I N D E X DECEMBER 2017 TITLE Page No G.S PAPER II 1. POLITY 4 1.1 Conflicts between Delhi Government and LG 4 1.2 Courts Gagging the Media 5 1.3 Disqualification of Rajya Sabha Members 5 1.4 Lack of Economic Oversight in the Parliament 6 1.5 RTI and Judiciary 7 1.6 Verdict in the 2G Spectrum Case 8 1.7 Analysing the 2G Case 9 2. GOVERNMENT BILLS, POLICIES, AND INTERVENTIONS 9 2.1 Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill 9 2.2 Draft Space Activities Bill, 2017 10 2.3 Redrafted Bill on Passive Euthanasia 11 2.4 Indian Institutes of Management (IIM) Bill, 2017 12 2.5 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 13 2.6 Timely Wages to MNREGA Workers 13 3. SOCIAL JUSTICE 14 3.1 National Crime Records Bureau Report 14 3.2 Disability Rights 15 3.3 Social Support for TB Patients 16 4. HEALTH 17 4.1 Concerns with public health 17 4.2 The Dilemma on HPV Vaccine 18 4.3 Deteriorating Private Health Care 19 4.4 Dual Nutrition Burden in India 20 4.5 Addressing Diphtheria 21 4.6 Research findings on Encephalitis 21 5. GOVERNANCE 22 5.1 Assessing NCALT 22 5.2 Addressing Conflict of Interest in Bureaucrats 23 6. INDIA AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD 24 6.1 Nepali Election Results 24 6.2 Gaining from UN Peacekeeping Operations - India and China 24 6.3 India China Border Talks 25 6.4 Ceasefire Violations in LoC 26 7. BILATERAL RELATIONS 27 7.1 RIC Trilateral Foreign Minister’s Meet – The stakes for India 27 7.2 India’s Entry into Wassenaar Arrangement 27 7.3 ‘India Japan Australia’ Trilateral & ASEAN 28 7.4 Indo-Russian Defence Ties 29 7.5 US Security Doctrine and its Impact on India 30 8. INTERNATIONAL ISSUES 30 8.1 Political tensions in Ireland 30 8.2 Jerusalem as Israel's Capital – US 31 8.3 UN Resolution on Jerusalem 32 8.4 Outcomes of the WTO Ministerial 33 G.S PAPER III 9 ECONOMY 36 9.1 Economic Rebound 36 9.2 Mid-Term Review of Foreign Trade Policy 37 9.3 Bi-Monthly Monetary Policy Review 38 9.4 Financial Stability Report 2017 39 9.5 Slippage in Fiscal Targets 39 9.6 The Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill – Part II 40 9.7 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Bill 2017 42 9.8 Future Trading of Crypto-Currencies 43 9.10 Initial Coin Offering 43 9.11 Mutual Funds and Portfolio Managers in Commodity Derivatives Segment 45 9.12 Concerns with FPI 46 9.13 Inclusion of Electricity in GST 47 9.14 Report on CBDT and Income tax 48 9.15 World Inequality Report 49 10 INFRASTRUCTURE 50 10.1 Infrastructure Status to Logistics Sector 50 10.2 World Bank’s Probe on Amaravati 50 10.3 Concerns of shipbreaking industry 52 10.4 GAIL Pipeline in Kerala 53 10.5 Nissan Dispute - Need for BIT revision 54 10.6 SC's Stay on NCLT order 55 10.7 Fire Accident in Mumbai 56 11. AGRICULTURE 57 11.1 Need for Reducing Urea 57 11.2 Agriculture Needs a Predictable Policy Framework 58 11.3 Market Assurance Scheme 58 12. ENVIRONMENT 59 12.1 Policy Challenges in Coal Mining 59 12.2 Hurdles in Realising Roof Top Solar Plants 61 12.3 Viable Solution for Stubble Burning 61 12.4 Government’s decision on Aarey forest lands 62 12.5 Robustness of the Indian Patenting Framework 63 12.6 Re-curving cyclones 64 12.7 Cyclone Ockhi - Disaster Management 65 13. SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 66 13.1 Scientific Research in India – The Challenges 66 13.2 Sky Gazing for Aliens 67 14. INTERNAL SECURITY 68 14.1 Shifting the Focus on Indian Navy 68 14.2 Indian Navy's Submarine Arm 69 14.3 Future of Autonomous Weapons 70 PRELIM BITS 71 4 DECEMBER 2017 G.S PAPER II 1. POLITY 1.1 Conflicts between Delhi Government and LG What is the issue? SC is looking into the problem of jurisdictional conflicts between Delhi‘s elected government and the lieutenant governor (LG). What is Article 239AA? Delhi, although a union territory, is not administered by the president acting through the LG under Article 239. It is administered under Article 239 AA. Article 239 AA was incorporated in the Constitution in 1992. It creates a ―special‖ constitutional set up for Delhi. It has provisions for popularly elected assembly, a council of ministers responsible to the assembly and a certain demarcation of responsibilities between the LG and the council of ministers. As per Article 239 AA (3) (a), the Delhi assembly can legislate on all those matters listed in the State List and Concurrent List as are applicable to union territories. The public order, police and land are reserved for the LG. What is the problem? This special set up worked well mainly because the same party held office at the Centre as well as in Delhi for much of the time. Things changed when different government ruled the city and the centre. This was complicated when the Delhi High Court judgment declared that the LG is the only decision-making authority in the NCT. Presently, SC is looking into two main issues: 1. Whether the elected government is the final authority in respect of matters assigned to it by the constitution & 2. Whether the LG has primacy when a difference of opinion arises between him and his council of ministers on matters of governance. Why should Council of Ministers be given more power? Final Authority - Under Article 239 AA (4), the council of ministers has the executive power to execute all matters in respect of which the assembly has the power to make laws. Article 239 AB (a) says ―if the administration of the NCT cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of Article 239 AA,‖ the president can dismiss the council of ministers. Further, Article 239 AA (b) says that the council of ministers shall be collectively responsible to the assembly. So, the council of ministers is responsible for Delhi‘s administration and if it fails in its functions, it will be removed by the president. But the council of ministers cannot be removed for the breakdown of the constitutional machinery unless they are vested with the power to take final decisions on matters of administration. It is also absurd to think that the council of ministers will be removed for the failure of the LG. So vesting of all powers in the LG in respect of matters which come within the jurisdiction of the assembly is not in conformity with the scheme of Article 239 AA. Primacy - A LG, motivated by political considerations, could disagree with many decisions of elected government and refer them to the president. So such a provision in the proviso to Clause (4) of Article 239 AA virtually nullifies the executive power vested in the council of ministers. After all, the purpose of the constitutional amendment was to provide a democratic government for Delhi and not to enhance the powers of the LG. http://www.shankariasacademy.com | www.iasparliament.com 5 So in regard to matters of governance other than that in the discretionary list, the council of ministers should be left free to exercise the executive power. 1.2 Courts Gagging the Media Why in news? A special CBI Court recently issued a gag order prohibiting the press from reporting on the court proceedings of a fake encounter case. In another case, Allahabad High Court gagged the media from reporting on an ongoing case concerning hate speech by the CM of Uttar Pradesh. What is the justification? The orders were enabled by the Supreme Court itself. In 2012, the Supreme Court held that in certain circumstances, courts could pass ―postponement orders‖ barring coverage of specific judicial proceedings. The court framed the issue as requiring a balancing of two competing rights: the right to free speech, and the right to a fair trial. Observing that sometimes excessive publicity could jeopardise a fair trial, the court held that to the extent it was reasonable and proportionate, ―prior restraints‖ on court reporting could be imposed. Allahabad High Court cited that the media reports court proceedings inaccurately to justify the gag order. Is the justification fair? In a Jury system, guilt or innocence is decided by a jury of twelve who do not possess specialised legal training The idea that ―media trials‖ might distort the outcomes of cases makes sense only in such a system. In India we abolished jury trials more than 40 years ago, and it is judges now who decide cases. Judges, by definition, are not only supposed to apply the law but also have to have the relevant training and temperament to be regardless of the public. The 2012 SC order also failed to adequately limit the kinds of cases in which these exceptional ―postponement orders‖ could be passed. It also failed to limit the duration for which they could be passed. This has given ample space for abuse as happened in the recent orders. What should be done? Media misreporting of court proceeding can be rectified by making the written transcripts and recordings of court proceedings available to the public. In some situations, a temporary halt on reporting could be justifiable. But the bar should be limited to a single hearing, and only in the most exceptional of situations. 1.3 Disqualification of Rajya Sabha Members Why in news? Two members of the Rajya Sabha belonging to JD(U) party were recently disqualified.